Upload
Login or register
Anonymous comments allowed.
#269 - mattandstuff
Reply +1
(01/26/2013) [-]
#268 - dillard1
Reply +4
(01/26/2013) [-]
Actual quote from Connecticut Senator about Sandy Hook "Maybe if he didn't play games he would never know how to use it?"

Yep... Someone that is 22 and never played video games doesn't know how to use a gun...
#314 to #268 - ninjastarthrow
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
I doubt he's either fired a gun or played a video game before in his life to believe that their both the same.
#300 to #268 - Keleth
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
.....do people really think playing video games teaches you how to fire a gun? I do both and they are VERY different
#270 to #268 - kreekydoorS [OP]
Reply +2
(01/26/2013) [-]
Another actual Quote from current Connecticut Senator about Sandy Hook Incident "I think there’s a question as to whether he would have driven in his mother’s car in the first place if he didn’t have access to a weapon that he saw in video games that gave him a false sense of courage about what he could do that day."
#263 - supamonkey
Reply +2
(01/26/2013) [-]
If you want to ban violent video games because they produce violence in gamers, you'll also have to ban violence in movies, tv shows, books, comics, music and stop people from joining the army, the police, gangs and contact sports teams....
#282 to #263 - awesomenessdefined
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
Who watches sports anymore?
#262 - bazda
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
Just so you guys know, he is only a state senator in California, so you don't have to worry too much about his ********, unless you live here, like me :(
#333 to #262 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
Next time the vote comes around vote for not him. If you have to vote for the pant ******** tard with his thumb up his ass just to get this guy the **** out.
#336 to #333 - bazda
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
If the opportunity comes up, I'll be sure and do that. California has a ******** more pressing issues, like complete bankruptcy, that need to be fixed instead of focusing on blaming video games for the actions of insane people.
#265 to #262 - kreekydoorS [OP]
Reply +1
(01/26/2013) [-]
Not going to stop the government from wasting potentially hundreds of thousands of dollars of tax payer money to study something which is blatantly obvious.
#267 to #265 - bazda
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
Of course not. Nothing short of a complete economic collapse (it's coming) will stop the gov from flushing billions down the *******.
#261 - anon
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
Stupid chinese. Why would people even elected this guy? I ******* hate chinese. they are racist, close-minded, old-fashioned, chauvinistic etc. Everywhere they stay, they need chinatown. Chinatown is everywhere, you named it. LA California, Orlando Florida, DC, Arizona, Arkansas, Chicago, Georgia, New York...almost every city in America. They have very extreme fanatical patriotism towards China, the motherland and race. They are not loyal, suspicious and looking down towards other races. Imagine if other people behaving like that. In NYC we might have Nigeriatown, SouthAfricatown, Lebanesetown, Iraqitown, Mexicantown. At least other people are not like Chinese. This is the reality, just ask people who ever dealt with them. ******* chinese.

Oh, there is an opinion here, lets thumb him down.
#321 to #261 - imrandybutternubs
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
Your rant is good and you should good. I agree, why do they need to name areas that ARE NOT china, china town?
#264 to #261 - onionsam
Reply +1
(01/26/2013) [-]
"I ******* hate chinese. they are racist" wut?
#279 to #264 - lapsushominum ONLINE
Reply +3
(01/26/2013) [-]
He hates them because they read minds, haven't you heard?
#255 - aerosol
Reply +3
(01/26/2013) [-]
I hate it how "the kinds of people" who enjoy video games are still stereotyped as "frustrated social misfits with secret longings for power over others in whatever twisted and demented forms they can get it"(Ben Crowshaw, 2013, Zero Punctuation, Escapist Magzine). Just because people are interested in something that has a moderate focus on violence, doesn't mean they immediately feel the need to immitate it.    
   
I apalogize if did that citation incorrectly.
I hate it how "the kinds of people" who enjoy video games are still stereotyped as "frustrated social misfits with secret longings for power over others in whatever twisted and demented forms they can get it"(Ben Crowshaw, 2013, Zero Punctuation, Escapist Magzine). Just because people are interested in something that has a moderate focus on violence, doesn't mean they immediately feel the need to immitate it.

I apalogize if did that citation incorrectly.
#260 to #255 - bazda
Reply +1
(01/26/2013) [-]
Yeah no kidding. Look at all the millions of people who play very violent games, and never kill anybody. I'd like to line up a bunch of people for that senator and have him guess which ones played 4+ hours of graphic FPS games a day.
#254 - cancerousiguana
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
Not trying to make an argument against violent videogames, but this is sort of related:
You ever play GTA for a few hours then go drive somewhere and get stuck in traffic?

I can't be the only one who gets the urge to drive through other cars, up on the sidewalks, through people, etc.

I mean, I would never do it, but sometimes I'm sitting in my car watching myself do it to pass the time.
#275 to #254 - HeartOfTheDL
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
There are two parts of the human though the impulse and then the moral reasoning that stops the impulse. Everyone gets that impulse to do something that isn't lawful such as smacking an annoying bitch on the train. However that maybe just the impulse part of your thought and the you stop to think about how terrible and how much trouble you'll get for doing so.
It is that reasoning that we all don't just go and kill everyone the pisses us off. And those that act on impulse disregards the reasoning part of their thought process. I can't remember where i read or watch the impulse thing about might have been vsause or some article.

This also can be applied to sane people owning guns. They aren't going to instantly shoot someone because they know the consequences of doing so. You'll have to have a conscious decision to actually carry out what unlawful/immoral impulse (pretty much you'll not be right in the head).
#258 to #254 - kreekydoorS [OP]
Reply +1
(01/26/2013) [-]
right there. you would never do it. why won't you do it? why won't you **** hookers then repeatedly run them over to get your money back? why don't you just blow up every car on the road? Simple answer, because you are sane. Which leads me to believe it's not the video games causing the issue. It's the people who are just not right in the head.
#253 - coolcalx
Reply -6
(01/26/2013) [-]
...except the statement in this post is correct.   
a gamer would NOT have any credibility in an argument about video games due to his or her own personal bias.    
   
kind of like an alcoholic should have no credibility about  whether or not alcohol is bad for you.    
or how a pot head should have no credibility about marijuana legalization. (because, of course he wants it legalized. he's going to be biased as ****)   
or how a pedophile should have no credibility about what constitutes child pornography.   
   
these decisions should be made by third party non-partisan and non-biased groups or individuals.
...except the statement in this post is correct.
a gamer would NOT have any credibility in an argument about video games due to his or her own personal bias.

kind of like an alcoholic should have no credibility about whether or not alcohol is bad for you.
or how a pot head should have no credibility about marijuana legalization. (because, of course he wants it legalized. he's going to be biased as ****)
or how a pedophile should have no credibility about what constitutes child pornography.

these decisions should be made by third party non-partisan and non-biased groups or individuals.
#310 to #253 - crocodactyl
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
Or like letting homosexuals vote on gay rights. Or letting women vote on the illegality of abortions. Or like letting people vote for politicians. (because, of course voters are going to choose their own party. they're going to be biased as ****)

No way we should let people have input on issues relevant to them. That would be a disaster.
#311 to #310 - coolcalx
Reply -2
(01/26/2013) [-]
gay rights is a legality issue. bias has nothing to do with constitutional rights, and the 14th amendment is pretty damn clear about it. (we just have to get rid of the DOA, which is going to take place soon)

electoral voting is laid out in the constitution, and believe it or not, if the electorates believe that the voters ****** up, they can vote for someone else. that's how they prevent idiots from deciding the elections.

try again.
#325 to #311 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
Also what this guy is talking about IS a legality issue and a constitutional one, bias is everywhere, it's a matter of if the facts support that bias. In this case? The facts are against him.
#323 to #311 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
Those "Idiots" are the american people. The electoral college completely negates the effect of a democracy in which everyone votes because if the people in power disagree with who you voted for they could just vote for somebody else and their votes matter more.
#284 to #253 - wanagoloco ONLINE
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
please realize that there is no unbiased party. If a person does not partake of pot for example they have already decided that it is not worth it for them to do so if not totally wrong. Much like a person who chooses not to drink, or of course play video games. you either drink or you don't, smoke pot or you don't, play games or you don't. There is no I somewhat do some of these things but not really so therefore I'm neutral.......someone saying that is likely so indecisive they would never choose one way or another anyway. at that point the only third party people of neutral placement would be those who had absolutely no idea what the object of debate was so that they couldn't form a biased to it. it would basically be a lottery for a decision. That is why the system requires a consensus from both sides of the bias in order to appear neutral.
#312 to #284 - coolcalx
Reply -2
(01/26/2013) [-]
I don't drink because I don't want to. I don't care if someone else drinks. I AM neutral when it comes to alcohol.

I don't smoke pot because I don't want to. I am neutral, and I support legalization because it would 1.) increase revenue (not by much) and 2.) it would be safer for the smokers

I do play video games though, so you're right, I'm not neutral about them, however I recognize that fact.

however you are completely wrong in your final statements: if you want to find out something, you conduct a blind study. science is not biased, it is based on facts and evidence.
#273 to #253 - xenophaigus
Reply -2
(01/26/2013) [-]
You can't compare games to drugs. That's like comparing apples to carrots
#276 to #273 - coolcalx
Reply -2
(01/26/2013) [-]
did you even read what I wrote?
I'm not comparing games to drugs, I'm talking about the bias fallacy.

try again.
#380 to #276 - anon
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
You sir, get the red thumb. Because you're kind of a dick.
#251 - thatguywhohasbacon
Reply +2
(01/26/2013) [-]
Asians at one point dominated the video game market, Asians have no credibility in this argument.
#249 - sissywoo
Reply +1
(01/26/2013) [-]
If you go into the houses of two people who may have commited shootings, Sure youll probably find and Xbox.

You'll also find Toothpaste, but nobody is blaming the toothpaste for some reason.
#247 - goingtopuke
Reply +2
(01/26/2013) [-]
most people blame things like violent games and music but i blame violent books
#256 to #247 - thedarkestrogue
Reply +2
(01/26/2013) [-]
Well this one time, I read a book called Mein Kampf.
I had a strange urge to murder jews afterwards.
#252 to #247 - kreekydoorS [OP]
Reply +2
(01/26/2013) [-]
Have you seen some books? They're big enough to kill people.
#241 - blackmanrollipolli
-7
has deleted their comment [-]
#257 to #241 - thedarkestrogue
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
and this is why he says we have no credibility.
#245 to #241 - wcar
Reply +3
(01/26/2013) [-]
You don't talk like you're any older than 12.
#250 to #245 - blackmanrollipolli
Reply -1
(01/26/2013) [-]
because im not. im 6
because im not. im 6
#239 - loomiss
Reply +7
(01/26/2013) [-]
Games actually keep people off the streets and inside on the games more rather than out doing drugs, stealing, joining gangs or any of that.
Dumb cunt
#234 - Yojimbo
Reply +15
(01/26/2013) [-]
Truly a stupid argument. People can draw violent inspiration from anywhere because violence is everywhere. Movies, TV, games, books, comics, the news, even nature. Trying to pin it on one thing is ridiculous. Surprised Mortal Kombat didn't get a shout out like it usually does when people blame video games for violence.
#233 - skinless
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
so there blaming video games now huh, greeaattt
#237 to #233 - kreekydoorS [OP]
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
they have been ever since the NRA tried using video games as a scapegoat.
#243 to #237 - batwill **User deleted account**
Reply +2
(01/26/2013) [-]
It's funny because literally every argument the NRA makes saying how guns are not the source of violence can be used to defend video games as well.
#230 - JediismUser
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
I thought Asians were supposed to be smart.
#229 - xozonex
Reply +12
(01/26/2013) [-]
I would think his thought process is like "Gamers are tainted. We can not listen to them because they are abnormal and beyond saving..."   
   
But, either way, he's still a retarded cunt.
I would think his thought process is like "Gamers are tainted. We can not listen to them because they are abnormal and beyond saving..."

But, either way, he's still a retarded cunt.
#225 - mrbuu
Reply 0
(01/26/2013) [-]
i would support him if. he used playing with brazilians on your team in league of legends.