Zachary Amaranth:

Baresark:

The problem is that those are more linked to social issues more than anything. Poor people, drug and sex trade, things like that.

That's been debunked time and again.

To sound cliche, guns don't kill people, people kill people.

But they are made a whole lot easier by guns, which is where that specious statement starts to break down.

Seriously, when is the last time someone used a hammer to directly kill dozens of people? Or, since cars almost inevitably come up, when's the last time someone drove a car into a school or movie theater and used it to kill people? Hell, contrast it to the 22 stabbings at a school in China. Most were not seriously injured, none died.

Besides, why facilitate murderers? The logic of "they're just going to do it anyway" is ridiculous. shouldn't murder be harder? Should we make it easy for someone to kill 27 people?

Do we oppose seatbelts because people are going to die anyway? We even say "seatbelts save lives," even though steabelts don't save people, people save people.

Are we against food safety because some people will invariably get sick?

When a natural disaster happens, do we just shrug and say "what are you going to do?"

It's pretty damn hard to massacre with a hammer. Or a bowling ball. Or even a knife.

As far as guns - We have gun laws, we have permits, we have back-ground checks. There are laws. This guy broke every single one of them by stealing a gun, carrying a concealed weapon without a permit, etc. It wasn't his gun. He stole it from his mother. Having more laws or control would not have deterred him. If anything, he likely would have used explosives or found a much more deadly fire-arm though illegal means.

Saying that "They will find away" is not facilitating. It's speaking an obvious truth.

We have food safety. Will some people get sick? Yes. That doesn't mean we abolish food safety laws cause there are unavoidable eventualities but it also doesn't mean we ban all food cause someone might get sick from it.

Natural disasters happen. You can't stop them. You can work to minimize the damage they cause and plan ahead but they are going to happen. But, we don't all live in reinforced steel bunkers 500ft under-ground away from all fault-lines cause a natural disaster may happen some-day.

Where's the ban things that people do bad things with logic lead? Okay banned guns but I still wanna kill people. I could make a bomb from house-hold supplies. Oh, they banned gasoline, fertilizer, copper wire, clocks, etc, etc. Hm, well, I could just drive my car in to the building. Let's ban cars. Darn. Okay, no guns, no bombs, no cars hmm. Oh crap, someone's breaking in to my house with a an illegally acquired gun to kill me, darn him, he's not following the rules cause he's a criminal and he is by his very actions doing something there are already laws against. Maybe we need some more laws against breaking laws.

On topic. I don't like this gesture. This makes it look like gaming, especially fire-arm based games, are some- ow at fault for this and I'm sure there's people at Fox and other right-wing-fanatical media outlets drawing the same connection. Wonder how long till someone starts saying that WWII wouldn't have happened if Hitler didn't play Risk as a kid.

I refuse to change my lifestyle just to appease idiots.

Baresark:
Things were exacerbated by the fact that the shooter was psychotic. I'm not saying his wants and desires did not more easily come to fruition because he had a gun.

No, "things" were initiated by the assailant's mental condition. Your insistence that this entire atrocity can be blamed solely on "psychopathy" is absurd; the guns allowed him to kill more people more efficiently. Far fewer deaths would have occurred had he not been armed, so it is simply delusional to not at least acknowledge the contribution firearms made.

Baresark:
But the vast majority of people who own guns do not commit murder with them. Some hunt, some compete in competitions with them, some own them because they have small penises. But most people who own guns do not run around shooting people. The analogy is about tools, so it's very appropriate. If I like to target shoot with a gun for fun, then I should not be restricted from it by people killing other people with guns. Every gun shoots different, so the experience had is very different from gun to gun.

I described guns as instruments for killing, not "murder". A very important distinction that apparently went over your head.

You can use a gun to scratch your back, dig a hole, or as a paper weight, and it still won't change the fact that its primary purpose -- what it was designed for and what it is most effective at -- is killing. Your analogy falls apart because it tries to lump everyday household items like hammers, which are designed to pound nails, with machines that are specifically engineered to kill. It also facetiously implies that hammers and guns are on equal standing in terms of killing potential.

Baresark:
You want to blame guns, but user reason and accept that guns aren't to blame for this, that there was other underlying issues and the person is to blame.

Incorrect. The difference between you and I is that I acknowledge both mental illness and guns as significant factors in this shooting, whereas you try to place all the blame on the former, out of some vested interest for the latter.

Baresark:
If he had run up in the classroom with a hammer and killed his mother and one six year old, it's still not acceptable to me that it happened.

Your reaction is irrelevant. Two deaths are still preferable to twenty-eight deaths.

Baresark:
And it shouldn't be OK with anyone if that was all that happened. And, to take it one step further, imagine if one of the adults in the room was allowed to be armed, then it still would have turned out very different and a gun could have saved the day. But no, only murderers own guns right? They are only meant to kill children and innocent people, correct?

I never even remotely suggested those things and your hypothetical school shootout is a fantasy. In the real world, twenty-eight people were shot -- not hammered -- to death.

No thanks, I didn't stop playing on some arbitrary day when the other school shootings happened, This one is no different.

itchcrotch:
I was gonna play Amnesia, but now I think I'll play some Crysis 2 instead.

I just might dust off my old COD just for that

DataSnake:

Cpu46:
The 21st will not be the day I skip attempting to beat Metro 2033 on ranger hardcore. I don't mean to be disrespectful of this event, it's just that I'll pay my respects in my own way.

Sounds like you're already doing some serious self-flagellation there, that skill level is BRUTAL.

Well thats why I said trying. To be honest Metro 2033 RH will probably take me a few months to beat at this rate.

poiumty:

Baresark:

First: One article about a guy with a knife doesn't prove anything. Also, he clearly meant to maim and not kill. No one would sever a finger or an ear for any other reason. You have not provide proof at all of what you say.

I've provided my evidence, which is still plenty more than yours. There's also empirical evidence (the actual shooting) and common sense evidence (it's easier to kill with a gun than with a knife - if you want to dispute this, let's imagine a scenario in which I have a gun and you have a knife, see who wins 10 out of 10 times).
You have done nothing but rejected all of it with such amazing arguments as "It'd be just as easy if he had a knife".

Ok, so aside from having to get closer to people who would fight back (I assume people would fight back if you have a gun too, but less effectively of course, you have range) do you know how easy it is for someone to die from a knife wound? One that actually is meant to kill?

In fact, here, read the answer chosen by the asker. This about sums up what I was told about some of the multitude of things that can happen from a knife wound, just to the chest. Go on, read.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20080329100231AAftA28

Note: I am not arguing for or against the gun laws, I just think its silly that anyone would believe knives are not horribly dangerous. An untrained guy stabbing someone with a knife is actually more likely to kill than a guy with a gun, simply due to all of the other factors involved (knife being more accurate, damages a larger area, moving targets harder to hit at range) (Also, my source on this is a police officer, not official, sorry about that). The only problem is of course, getting to the guy you would want to kill.

I get the idea, but it would still send the message that "Games are to blame".

"Not sit back and ignore the lives lost"? Eat a bag of shit. What a pompous thing to insinuate, that gamers have ignored what happened, or that they don't care and that a day where no one plays an FPS will show the world that we care. We obviously care about what has happened, and you're a terrible human for saying that we've taken a back seat to this subject.

Aside from the beyond retarded comment, it's kind of a cool idea, but I doubt even 20% of players will do it.

Grape_Bullion:
"Not sit back and ignore the lives lost"? Eat a bag of shit. What a pompous thing to insinuate, that gamers have ignored what happened, or that they don't care and that a day where no one plays an FPS will show the world that we care. We obviously care about what has happened, and you're a terrible human for saying that we've taken a back seat to this subject.

Aside from the beyond retarded comment, it's kind of a cool idea, but I doubt even 20% of players will do it.

And another 20% will boot up FPS games just to spite everyone else.

The whole abstinance idea would have been a smart one, if there was any link between games and the shooting. Otherwise it just looks like gamers are feeling guilty over something we or our hobby had nothing to do with.

(That and the haters aare going to jump on this like they do with anything that smacks of guilt or wrongdoing).

Captcha: zombie attack

eh, i dunno. do single player games count? is shooting demons ok? i don't think i can beat doom 3 by then. i'm only like 1/2 way through currently.

It doesn't matter if the media's going to use this against games, at least in America, because we already won the fight. Games are protected under the first amendment just like books, TV, and movies, so quit being scared. Personally I don't see where not playing games is going to do anything except make those who want to feel good, feel good, but if you want to then fine, but stop worrying about the media, the worst they can do is bitch to the wind.

This is a stupid idea. If you want to call for a day of reflection, then fine whatever. It's still a bad idea, we should always do business as usual after one of these idiots thinks they can change the world. But at least I can understand why people would call for it. However there's no reason to pick a specific genre of video game that has nothing to do with anything and have everyone not play those games as some sort of show of support? How the hell is that a show of support? Doing nothing to help whatsoever is now supportive? How about asking videogamers to contribute money to help the aggrieved families.

NightHawk21:

Its a lot easier to take peoples lives with a gun, than with a knife or a bomb.

I'll call bullshit on that.

wikipedia:
The Oklahoma blast claimed 168 lives, including 19 children under the age of 6,[1] and injured more than 680 people.[2] The blast destroyed or damaged 324 buildings within a sixteen-block radius, destroyed or burned 86 cars, and shattered glass in 258 nearby buildings.[3][4] The bomb was estimated to have caused at least $652 million worth of damage.

You set something off something even 1/10th that size in a mall, a sporting event, a theme park, anywhere people gather and you will have far more casualties than any idiot with a gun.

You don't have to do a background check. You don't have to go through a waiting period. You don't even have to be particularly smart. You just have to have access to google, the ability to follow directions on a piece of paper, and have money to purchase things.

Mycroft Holmes:
snip

Right the thing is though the thing you posted was done in a different time (pre-911), and was done by multiple people, at least 2 of them soldiers from a quick glance. Also as much as the people writing the Anarchist's Cookbook would have you believe, the majority of the stuff in that book has been either proven to be false, been proven to be extremely dangerous to the maker, or been proven to be ineffective.

NightHawk21:

Right the thing is though the thing you posted was done in a different time (pre-911)

Sorry to break it to you, but we really aren't any better at catching people.

NightHawk21:
and was done by multiple people at least 2 of them soldiers from a quick glance.

What does this have to do with the effectiveness of bombs? You made a pretty clear statement that bombs weren't as effective as guns. A statement that was patently incorrect.

NightHawk21:
Also as much as the people writing the Anarchist's Cookbook would have you believe, the majority of the stuff in that book has been either proven to be false, been proven to be extremely dangerous to the maker, or been proven to be ineffective.

I've never heard that, before.

Googling for it yields random idiots on yahoo answers, and an article with no real source information claiming that the Anarchist Cookbook is a secret CIA project to trick people. Which apparently no one told the UK government; who I guess they have no idea how to make bombs and the CIA just hoodwinked them too because They apparently found the Anarchist Cookbooks contents more than real enough to convict the publisher. http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/mar/09/terrorists-handbook-businessman-found-guilty

I wouldn't use The Anarchist Cookbook anyways were I so inclined. The Ragnar Benson guides are definitely not faked, much more detailed, and cover a much wider breadth of information. I simply didn't have a way to simply post them without referring people to illegal torrents or to amazon pages that give no preview of the contents inside.

I'm sure everyone would like to do something to help show sympathy for this cause... though this way might be the wrong way.

It's just drawing attention to yourself. How about a call for gamers to send a picture of themselves to someone who will make them all into a collage of a piece sign when you look at it from a distance?

Still, it's good to see at least some initiative. Gamers a good/genuine people.

No shooters? Sure, I'll bite.

Would it be a bad thing if I was actually going real shooting that day? It's my birthday that day and my Dad just got a new rifle. And a Red Dot Scope where you can actually change what you want the red dot retical to look like.

This might be hard, considering that I have very few games that aren't shooters. However, this is something that I'd like to take part in. Hey, I do actually have a few books I need to read, so this might be a good opportunity.
I don't want to do it because I see shooters as "responsible", but because I have few other ways to express my sentiment besides my words.

tangoprime:
Better idea- Spec Ops: The Line free to play day, and see how many people you can get to play that. THEN an online shooter cease fire might just happen organically for a few days. ...or at least only the sociopaths will be the ones playing.

A Spec Ops: The Line FTP day actually sounds like a good idea, not nessecarily because of the shooting in Newtown. I wonder how many people would try it because "Hey, free shooter!" , and then incidentally get sucked down the ultimate grief-trip of the year. That is, of course, assuming they get past the first few chapters to where things start getting really messed up.

spartan231490:
I frankly will continue to play on that day as any other day. Frankly, this just makes me want to play even more. Blaming games, or guns won't change what happened, nor will it stop it from happening again. If you really want to honor the family, then start trying to bring about meaningful change in the mental health care system of the US. Push for meaningful reform of the US prison system that turns people into worse criminals instead of reforming them. Push for a meaningful reform to the drug policy of this nation, de-criminalize drug use and treat addiction as a mental health issue. These 3 steps would help stop not only these tragic mass shootings, but also the thousands of tragedies every year in the US when someone is murdered.

THIS. DEAR GOD THIS.

I have been piping on about these same reforms for YEARS. Yet no one listens. The only ones that did were in the R&P board, and they loved this post.

Fix the prisons. They just turn out worse criminals, and act as spawning pits for nasty prison gangs that can extend their influence.

Fix education, upward mobility. Once people leave poverty, they are less inclined for crime. Cuts off the "infinite bodies" thing gangs have going.

Fix the drugs. Once the drug problems are fixed, gangs would have less money to bypass existing laws.

Dismantle and or weaken the cartels and their influence.

Root out gangs in the military. Guns cant be easily stolen from armories if they don't have someone on the inside.

Gun problems exist because we allow them to exist through ignoring the source. Once we fix the source, gun problems become a non issue.

If we stop empowering crime through all these barriers, everything will fall into place.

Of course America is lazy and this is a lot of work. Not sure why anyone would treat their political party like a fanatical religion but we can all be rational can we?

So does this mean we should also hold a "Keep your hands off your dicks day", a day where we all put our pornography aside for one single day in order to send a message. The next time news bubbles up about a rape squad operating in some fetid third world hellhole, or some other completely irrelevant but still quite vile criminal action takes place somewhere in the world.

I'm more than willing to help!

You see, it has always been my dream to participate in a stupid, utterly pointless publicity stunt, which will ultimately change absolutely nothing of importance, except to feature in a list on the internet featuring brain-dead stunts that ultimately changed absolutely nothing that were held by well-meaning activists.

Captcha: hard and fast

Damnit Captcha! Not now! I've got philanthropy to preform. Dirty, dirty philanthropy.

GoddyofAus:
Chyeah, good luck with this. Since when have the majority of gamers been compassionate enough to take up any cause except playing Half Life 2 to try and get Valves attention. As others have stated, this is perfect bait for fuckwits like Fox News to latch onto.

What does compassion even have to do with it? It does absolutely nothing for anyone involved.

Blaming games; It didn't work then, it doesn't work now.

thats fucking stupid...no no i will not stop playing video games on that day why? because it will do absolutely fucking nothing to help the victims

Fuck the media's impression of it, I think I'll participate because its a nice, clever sentiment. I was just thinking about playing Dishonered and Arkham City again soon, anyway.

Its like what George Carlin said:
"Now they're talking about banning toy guns...and they're going to keep the fucking real ones!"

I don't think there is any need for better gun control or making guns illegal. The fact that this news is shocking is proof enough that it is enough of an isolated case.

Don't play much shooters these days though, so I'll probably join in without wanting to... Holding my thumbs Mass Effect 2 will finally show up within the next two days.

GonzoGamer:
Its like what George Carlin said:
"Now they're talking about banning toy guns...and they're going to keep the fucking real ones!"

It's a strange way to fix the problem isn't it.

Go after the things that make guns look bad instead of the guns.

edit: I'm going to play New Vegas that day and if any of the shooters on my steam wish list are on sale that day I'll buy them and play those too.

gigastar:
Ok so on the 21st i shall resort to shooting things in UMvC3 with my team of Deadpool, Chris and Dante.

Or i could spend the day playing Serious Sam 3 out of spite.

Tough choice.

Pick Serious Sam 3. It's centrally-focused on shooting things.

Yeah, what does this help? The event had no connection whatsoever to videogames, so why should we do this? It's just admitting to something that isn't true. In which case, I think I'll get back into my Ultimate Doom campaign on the Nightmare skill level.

tangoprime:
Better idea- Spec Ops: The Line free to play day, and see how many people you can get to play that. THEN an online shooter cease fire might just happen organically for a few days. ...or at least only the sociopaths will be the ones playing.

I really like that idea. That would be a lot more reasonable and specific.