Video Games are dangerous
-
David Kentley wrote:
I've always believed that if we want to live in a free society, there are some risks that go with it.
I'm actually pretty sure most of us believe that. However, that still doesn't mean that you completely disregard potential threats. Just as a simple practical matter people in positions of authority must evaluate potentially threatening information. The expectation that all decisions made based upon that information is going to be identical every where all the time is just silly. Was what the school did an over reaction? I suppose. But, then, it is also an over reaction to try to make it appear as some sort of looming threat to our general freedoms. It isn't. I'm sure the good people of that community will work their problems out precisely as Jefferson, et al, intended.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
Tell me Stan, did you ever play cowboys and Indians as a kid, or pretend to shoot someone with a toy gun or your finger, or force one little green army man to shoot another, or build a tower out of blocks and then knock it over? Do you think it would be reasonable if after doing these actions you were arrested for terrorism and expelled from your school? Do you think it an overreaction to say that such actions would be infringing on your rights, or that arresting all children for these actions would represent a looming threat to our general freedoms?
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
I agree however that it would've been prudent NOT to have made that CS map.
Only because of the general level of paranoia. Back in the day, we made Doom / C&C maps of everything. Because, seriously, who hasn't wanted to run through their local mall, etc., with a chainsaw... ...point is, he made a frickin' map. For a computer game. What's next, rape charges for sketching nude pictures of classmates? :rolleyes:
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
AndyKEnZ wrote:
Where do you get this "self-defense" crap? They were invented to kill; either other men in battle or animals for food.
Sometimes you need to kill in order to defend yourself. The Bill of Rights in the United States is designed to ensure that the people are vested with certain rights that are necessary for the maintenance of democracy. For example, freedom of speech is intended to ensure that the majority doesn't restrain the minority from political involvement. The second amendment ensures that the people can protect themselves from an uninvolved or overinvolved government. The fact that Europe has extensive restrictions on guns and legislation designed to imprison people over certain political speech is probably not a coincidence.
AndyKEnZ wrote:
You should definitely take away the handgun/pistol, it's like TV - life does in fact go on without it. Strange how guns are legal but certain plants aren't
But why? Guns were never a problem until atheism's influence expanded in the 1960's. Are you saying that we should address problems by ignoring the cause and removing the means? That is what Europe is doing with its holocause speech laws. Rather than address the rampant anti-semitism in Europe, they're removing the means to express it. That's the path towards totalitarianism and cultural decline...Not a solution.
Red Stateler wrote:
Sometimes you need to kill in order to defend yourself.
The BoR may need some update. You are not in the far west anymore. Having guns only helps you defend yourself against other gun nuts.
----- Formerly MP(2) If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown
-
Stan Shannon wrote:
Unfortunantly, the issue isn't about you. It is about tens of thousands of people in positions of authority making thousands of decisions effecting the security of thousands of other people. What do you think the probability might be that some of those decisions are going to appear to be 'over reactions'? And among those that appear to be over reactions, what is the probability that some of them might not be over reactions? But actually result in lives saved?
Unfortunately, the issue isn't about any sort of sane measures that may have been taken slightly overboard. It's about a school going completely overboard and having a student arrested on charges of terrorism because he made a map for a game and he owned a hammer. When that wouldn't stick they instead expelled him. Heaven help him if somewhere in his house he had a box of nails; he'd be on death row.
Read the article. the student was neither arrested nor expelled, he was transferred to a different school.
-
Tell me Stan, did you ever play cowboys and Indians as a kid, or pretend to shoot someone with a toy gun or your finger, or force one little green army man to shoot another, or build a tower out of blocks and then knock it over? Do you think it would be reasonable if after doing these actions you were arrested for terrorism and expelled from your school? Do you think it an overreaction to say that such actions would be infringing on your rights, or that arresting all children for these actions would represent a looming threat to our general freedoms?
James L. Thomson wrote:
Do you think it an overreaction to say that such actions would be infringing on your rights, or that arresting all children for these actions would represent a looming threat to our general freedoms?
No,as a matter of fact, I don't. In fact, I think allowing local communities to deal with such issues as they best see fit is the very definition of our general freedoms. I think trying to reengineer our society so that only the all powerful megastate can make decisions of this sort for everybody, everywhere all the time (which is what all of you are actually argueing for) would be the grossest sort of over-reaction and would mean the complete destruction of our general freedoms as Americans.
Modern liberalism has never achieved anything other than giving Secularists something to feel morally superior about
-
Red Stateler wrote:
Sometimes you need to kill in order to defend yourself.
The BoR may need some update. You are not in the far west anymore. Having guns only helps you defend yourself against other gun nuts.
----- Formerly MP(2) If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown
Le Centriste wrote:
The BoR may need some update. You are not in the far west anymore. Having guns only helps you defend yourself against other gun nuts.
Recently here in Atlanta, the police got a warrant to rush into an elderly woman's house on a drug bust (there were no drugs in the house and there was no evidence there was). They busted in wearing masks and wielding guns. Thinking they were robbers out to kill her, she shot at them and was immediately killed...Being shot several dozen times (keep in mind this was a woman in her 80s). As a result of her self defense, the city is being forced to revise the methods they use to acquire warrants and you had better believe that the police are going to review their evidence before breaking in on innocent little old ladies. A month earlier, the same thing happened to another little old lady, but she failed to get to her gun in time and was arrested (and released since it was bogus). No action was taken at that point because the police were not threatened and held responsible by the private citizen. "Gun nuts" are not the only ones you need to worry about.
-
There's a greater correlation to the rise of secular humanism in our school system than to possession of guns. But let's ignore that detail.
-
Le Centriste wrote:
The BoR may need some update. You are not in the far west anymore. Having guns only helps you defend yourself against other gun nuts.
Recently here in Atlanta, the police got a warrant to rush into an elderly woman's house on a drug bust (there were no drugs in the house and there was no evidence there was). They busted in wearing masks and wielding guns. Thinking they were robbers out to kill her, she shot at them and was immediately killed...Being shot several dozen times (keep in mind this was a woman in her 80s). As a result of her self defense, the city is being forced to revise the methods they use to acquire warrants and you had better believe that the police are going to review their evidence before breaking in on innocent little old ladies. A month earlier, the same thing happened to another little old lady, but she failed to get to her gun in time and was arrested (and released since it was bogus). No action was taken at that point because the police were not threatened and held responsible by the private citizen. "Gun nuts" are not the only ones you need to worry about.
Is this a common thing? Btw, did you know that in the UK 90% the police officers are not carrying weapons? I don't know the statistics, but I heard there is less casualties. -- modified at 10:54 Friday 4th May, 2007
----- Formerly MP(2) If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown
-
Red Stateler wrote:
There's a greater correlation to
the idealized lying murderous leadership we have endorsed for decades. But let's ignore that detail.
led mike
led mike wrote:
the idealized lying murderous leadership we have endorsed for decades. But let's ignore that detail.
We don't have to ignore that. In fact let's address your the influence of your conspiracy theories on Cho, the Columbine boys and others. Did they reference JFK's 40-year-old assassination as a motive? Or did they speak about at length about their perceived insignificance and general disdain for others?
-
So then these are the steps? 1. Mankind makes guns and uses them responsibly for self defense for hundreds of years. 2. Secular humanism enters the scene and destroys purpose by instilling nihilism into children. 3. These children express that nihilism through violence. 4. Take away the guns. So we know the source of the violence, but your solution is to remove the means and keep firmly in place the secular humanistic nihilism that drives these kids to this? It seems to me that you solve problems by addressing them directly, not by simply removing the means.
Red Stateler wrote:
So then these are the steps?
1. Mankind makes guns and uses them responsibly for self defense for hundreds of years. 2. Lies, murder, intolerance and complete absence of honor and integrity becomes the accepted standard for attaining success and power, and the history/example for children 3. These children reproduce that history and follow that example through violence. 4. Remove the liars and assholes from any position of power.
led mike
-
Joergen Sigvardsson wrote:
I agree however that it would've been prudent NOT to have made that CS map.
Only because of the general level of paranoia. Back in the day, we made Doom / C&C maps of everything. Because, seriously, who hasn't wanted to run through their local mall, etc., with a chainsaw... ...point is, he made a frickin' map. For a computer game. What's next, rape charges for sketching nude pictures of classmates? :rolleyes:
----
It appears that everybody is under the impression that I approve of the documentation. You probably also blame Ken Burns for supporting slavery.
--Raymond Chen on MSDN
-
Is this a common thing? Btw, did you know that in the UK 90% the police officers are not carrying weapons? I don't know the statistics, but I heard there is less casualties. -- modified at 10:54 Friday 4th May, 2007
----- Formerly MP(2) If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby. -- Unknown
Le Centriste wrote:
Is this a common thing?
I'm not sure how widespread that is. But two incidents in a month in which innocent elderly women were stormed by the police is too many. Nobody heard about the first. Everybody heard about the second because the woman was able to attempt to defend herself from tyrannical acts by our local government. If the government (at any level) believes that it is immune from citizens' willingness to protect their rights, then they will trample them. Weapons are the last line of defense from tyranny as an armed populace ensures the government that the people have the means to resist it if necessary. A couple more details: The warrant was acquired because an "informant" (i.e. some druggy trying to get his charges thrown out) claimed there were drugs in the house. A couple of those officers have been indicted.
Le Centriste wrote:
Btw, did you know that in the UK 90% the police officers are not carrying weapons? I don't know the statistics, but I heard there was less casualties.
Did you know that gun violence in Britain went up after guns were banned?
-
Red Stateler wrote:
So then these are the steps?
1. Mankind makes guns and uses them responsibly for self defense for hundreds of years. 2. Lies, murder, intolerance and complete absence of honor and integrity becomes the accepted standard for attaining success and power, and the history/example for children 3. These children reproduce that history and follow that example through violence. 4. Remove the liars and assholes from any position of power.
led mike
led mike wrote:
Remove the liars and assholes from any position of power.
We tried to remove Clinton, but the Democrats refused.
-
led mike wrote:
the idealized lying murderous leadership we have endorsed for decades. But let's ignore that detail.
We don't have to ignore that. In fact let's address your the influence of your conspiracy theories on Cho, the Columbine boys and others. Did they reference JFK's 40-year-old assassination as a motive? Or did they speak about at length about their perceived insignificance and general disdain for others?
-
Read the article. the student was neither arrested nor expelled, he was transferred to a different school.
Going to an alternative school means he was expelled from his prior school...
-
led mike wrote:
Remove the liars and assholes from any position of power.
We tried to remove Clinton, but the Democrats refused.
-
Honey there a gawd danged European on this forum haranguing me about our guns laws. What'll I dooo? Blame it on the 60s hon, just like you always do.
Hey, when you can't come up with any better argument, just ridicule the other guy. Ad hominem always works.
-
Does a mouse know he is being programmed while running through the maze? So you believe the Warren Commission told the truth when they provided the magic bullet theory as an explanation of how Oswald acted alone?
led mike
Yes. Oswald acted alone. There was no conspiracy. Learn to live with it.
-
Does a mouse know he is being programmed while running through the maze? So you believe the Warren Commission told the truth when they provided the magic bullet theory as an explanation of how Oswald acted alone?
led mike
led mike wrote:
Does a mouse know he is being programmed while running through the maze?
Are you suggesting tin foil for all high school students?
led mike wrote:
So you believe the Warren Commission told the truth when they provided the magic bullet theory as an explanation of how Oswald acted alone?
Having visited the book repository in Dallas, I think it's perfectly within reason that one person who was skilled with a gun could pull it off. However, I have my own theories. There was one person who was very obssessed with both Jackie O and Marilyn Monroe and it stands to reason that, being in love with both, that person was both jealous and enraged by JFK's supposed affair...Andy Warhol did it.
-
As opposed to Bush who has done a better job of covering up the fact that he lied about WMDs in Iraq because that lie didn't leave a stain on anyone's dress.
led mike
led mike wrote:
As opposed to Bush who has done a better job of covering up the fact that he lied about WMDs in Iraq because that lie didn't leave a stain on anyone's dress.
According to George Tenet himself (who is trying to undermine the president since he was fired), all the intelligence he provided to the president said there was plenty of WMD. Also "lying" and committing perjury are two very different things,