NRA: Video games kill people, not guns. And here's our video game
Just weeks after the vice-president of the US National Rifle Association blamed video games for gun crime, the outspoken organisation has released an iPhone video game. NRA: Practice Range is a first-person shooter available from the iTunes Store as a free app for iPads as well as Apple smartmobes. It incorporates a live feed of …
This topic is closed for new posts.
Re: What irks me about their argument @Matt
I believe the Gaza comment was what's commonly known as a 'joke' *
A bit like the NRA.
* "something said or done to provoke laughter or cause amusement, as a witticism, a short and amusing anecdote, or a prankish act"
Re: What irks me about their argument
Comedic criticism of Israel doesn't equal anti-semitism, muppet
Re: What irks me about their argument
The anti-gun culture is impervious to logic? That's a good one.
Re: What irks me about their argument
how anti semitic?
AFAIK hamas do not posess any tanks.
if they did there would be peace in the middle east (no israel see)
Re: What irks me about their argument
"Israel. No mass shootings of children by raging teens for over 10 years!"
That's because raging teens have other targets for violence, along the lines of fully-grown men of <insert opposing faction here>
Plenty of teens in the area do get themselves involved in lethal violence. It's just that it has a bit more direction to it, because whereas a school shooting ostracises the shooter, having a go at opposing political targets enhances the perp's reputation.
Re: What irks me about their argument
"anti-Semitic prejudice?"
Seriously? You're trying to drag that one in somehow?
There aren't enough Fail icons in the word to reply in a just manner.
Re: What irks me about their argument @Matt
"I believe the Gaza comment was what's commonly known as a 'joke' ...." OK, so if black people were the subject - say something equally stupid and slanderous as "black kids don't stab white kids because they can't afford the busfare over to the white kids' neighbourhoods" (don't laugh, I actually heard that once in London) - you still wouldn't consider it as probably motivated by prejudice?
Re: Re: What irks me about their argument
"Comedic criticism of Israel doesn't equal anti-semitism, muppet" See my previous example of substituting black for Israeli, see how much you approve then.
Re: What irks me about their argument
".....AFAIK hamas do not posess any tanks. if they did there would be peace in the middle east (no israel see)" Whilst I agree that HAMAS don't have any tanks, and if they did they would probably use them in another vain and self-defeating attack on Israel, I would have to point out that when Israel was created it didn't have any tanks (the first ones were pinched from the Brits after the Arabs attacked) or proper military aircraft (again, not until after the conflict started), yet won against Jordan, Syria and Egypt which had plenty of tanks and aircraft. And that in the wars since, despite being numerically outnumbered, in tanks, aircraft and men, in 1956, 1967, and 1973, the Israelis won despite having to fight on two fronts. So, even if HAMAS was to get tanks, I don't think your fervent wish for genocide would come true.
Anyway, since you all seem to like a good joke, here's one that did the rounds based on a real event in 1967. An Israeli soldier returned alone to Israeli lines after an action in Gaza with thirty-seven PLO fighters as prisoners (actually happened). The joke that went round afterwards was that more PLO would have been captured but the Israeli soldier had her period!
Re: What irks me about their argument
"Only cos they're not allowed to drive tanks into Gaza at that age..." So you base your denial of a verifiable fact on anti-Semitic prejudice? Great example of why the conversation should be left to the adults.
1 - whoosh. It was a (fairly black) joke, nothing more. I note with interest you don't dweeb about the original comment that this was a reply to. Why? Didn't support your prejudices?
2 - "conversation" Your current argument style isn't a debate or conversation, I'd qualify it more as a rant.
3 - "the conversation should be left to adults" - agree, but it makes me wonder why you continue to post. That is the strongest argument against yourself you have brought so far. If you could bring yourself to actually join the debate instead of just spouting a pre-chewed bit of crud when you come across a trigger word I think you could create a meaningful discussion. As it stands, you seem to favour bringing in drilling equipment when you're already in a hole, and that tires quickly. As far as I can make out, you're either an NRA shill or someone who sells psychiatric treatments..
Re: What irks me about their argument
"was that more PLO would have been captured but the Israeli soldier had her period!"
Yay: All this and casual misogyny and racism, too.
You are the gift that keeps on giving!
Re: but the only place where regular mass shootings occur...
"When I've been in countries that have gun ownership (like the US, Canada, Switzerland) I always ask people why they have a gun. Normally the answer is because it's a legal requirement (Switzerland) or they use it for hunting or sometimes it's for protection.
But when I ask the same question to an American they nearly always go misty eyed and explain some scenario where they come across a shooting in progress (usually in a shopping mall or schoolyard) and they are able to save the day by whipping out their concealed weapon and gunning down the shooter.
I'm not really against gun ownership EXCEPT in the US."
From my experience with gun owners in oz, the only reasons I've ever heard for guns have been
A) I'm a farmer
Or
B) I'm a cop or similar public guard
Your statement is to true my friend, too true...
Re: What irks me about their argument
"....Yay: All this and casual misogyny and racism, too......" Hey, it wasn't my joke, but they veiled insult was meant for the PLO, whose fighters were so convinced of their manliness and superiority it really hurt their pride to be captured by part-time women soldiers. So maybe you should be pointing your PC cannon at those PLO bastions of misogyny and racism. And their supporters.
What a bunch of fatuous assclowns
Anyway, I've been playing too much Mario. Off to jump on some heads now while I look for gold coins on the High Street.
Re: What a bunch of fatuous assclowns
Hey, when did the NSS icon appear? Have I been in my cave that long?
Curious morals
I will never understand the various stances taken by groups in the US where violence of almost any form is considered legitimate media and has elevated ambulance chasing to an art-form but where normal human interaction which might result in 'naughty areas' of flesh being visible is abhorent.
If you make violence appear to be commonplace in society then the social mores which should deter it are irrevocably broken.
Re: Curious morals
Spot on.
The brief visibility of Janet Jackson's nipple was the most complained about event ever broadcast on US TV. God forbid that children (for whom, of course, nipples were designed in the first place) should see a nipple. Regular intense violence is fine though.
This is warped beyond reason.
Re: Curious morals
You have to understand how their culture has developed. The US originally began by people with non-standard religious beliefs trying to achieve religious freedom. Frankly, some of those beliefs were utterly barmy by European standards, typically extremely Puritan, but became effectively standard in a world where effectively, middle-of-the-road beliefs didn't exist. And the world they had moved to was by nature violent - it was frontier law all around. Thing is in Europe, much of this was also true, but quite a few hundreds of years earlier; in the US, the Wild West and civil war is still within cultural memory in a way that the dark ages aren't for us over here. Beliefs have been shaped very differently in the US by those shared experiences to the way our common European experiences have shared ours.
Simple..
In other words, guns don't kill people, t*ts do..
Re: Curious morals (@Nick Roberts)
"You have to understand how their culture has developed. The US originally began by people with non-standard religious beliefs trying to achieve religious freedom. Frankly, some of those beliefs were utterly barmy by European standards, typically extremely Puritan, but became effectively standard in a world where effectively, middle-of-the-road beliefs didn't exist. And the world they had moved to was by nature violent - it was frontier law all around. Thing is in Europe, much of this was also true, but quite a few hundreds of years earlier; in the US, the Wild West and civil war is still within cultural memory in a way that the dark ages aren't for us over here. Beliefs have been shaped very differently in the US by those shared experiences to the way our common European experiences have shared ours."
No excuse. Australia was settled by convicts, yet we have 17 murders per 1 million people, while the United States (settled by God fearing Puritans) has 48.
Re: Curious morals (@mutatedwombat)
That only proves that Puritans are more dangerous than hardened criminals.
Makes sense to me.
Re: Curious morals (@mutatedwombat)
That only proves that Puritans are more dangerous than hardened criminals.
Bwahahahaha. I need to buy a few extra keyboards so I can put them in rotation..
Guns don’t kill people.
I'm sure they make the job a lot easier though.
Re: Guns don’t kill people.
Yep, so does a shovel, with the added benefit of you can use it to help dispose of the body afterwards.
The NRA clearly need no lessons in shooting themselves in the foot
Next they will complain about restrictions on weapons like those on the left
Re: The NRA clearly need no lessons in shooting themselves in the foot
How is it shooting themsleves in the feet when half the posts here (and no doubt comments elsewhere) have deflected away from gun ownership to "do violent games cause violence"? The NRA is just playing the same game as the politicians.
@Matt
You seem to be implying that because most of us are questioning the details that we have lost sight of the larger picture.
I wouldn't hesitate to suggest that you are being artificially superior and a touch condescending.
Heaven knows what insightful posts you have made to reach silver badge level when I consider that most of the posts I see with your name on attract a large portion of downvotes.
Re: The NRA clearly need no lessons in shooting themselves in the foot
RTFA!
it's _about_ violent video games!
Re: @Matt
matt has a very supportive array of duplicate accounts
Re: @Matt
Fuck knows where he gets the time, just had a squiz at his profile...5090 posts since 2007!
Re: @Matt
"You seem to be implying that because most of us are questioning the details that we have lost sight of the larger picture....." Yes. You can also go Yahoogle it - the "ban violent video games" schpiel is already ramping up. Quick test on Bing, "violent video games should be banned" = 10.5m hits; "guns should be banned" = 3.1m hits. Like I said, deflection.
".....I wouldn't hesitate to suggest that you are being artificially superior and a touch condescending......" So if I unquestioningly agree with you I guess I get to be actually superior without being condescending at all? No thanks, I'd rather retain my ability to think for myself.
".....Heaven knows what insightful posts you have made to reach silver badge level ....." Oh dear, another topic where you haven't done your homework. All it takes is 2000 upvotes, so even if someone acrues a large number of downvotes from sheeple like you, it is still possible over the course of a long period (and I've been posting at El Reg for yonkeys) to get there. Believe it or not (and you probably don't), not all El Reg readers share your "ideals". Going on voting patterns in the US and UK, it would seem lots of Brits and Americans in general don't share them either.
Now, if El Reg instituted something along the lines of a badge where you had to maintain a positive ratio of up votes to down votes (effectively a brown badge for brown-nosers) then some might be more diplomatic and worry about the delicate sensibilities of you sheeple. But I'm not the type to stomach lowering myself to that level for a badge, I couldn't compromise my principles that much unless it was for serious money!
Re: Sir Runcible Spoon Re: @Matt
"Fuck knows where he gets the time...." It's all in the procedures. And the lash. I find that, after a few tastes of the lash, the minions become very good at following procedures.
I even have time for a quick bit of maths - say an average of five mins for each post, over five years, works out at less than three posts a day, or fifteen minutes, so less than the average worker spends having a fag or getting coffee. Apologies if you find that posting is so much more of a challenge that it eats up more of your time. Can't see how, going on the content of your posts, but I suppose we can take comfort in that we all have/had mothers that loved us regardless.
Re: Sir Runcible Spoon @Matt
The only reason I have for disliking you Matt is because you constantly use personal insults to reduce other people's points, even when they haven't made any (such as asking a question).
There has even been the odd occasion where I actually agree with you, I just don't like the way you do it - it's demeaning (to yourself). That you don't find it so only reveals your love for the sound of your own keyboard. No-one else seems to give a shit but you keep sending it out anyway.
Are you actually trying to convince people of your point of view?
Your constant use of straw-man arguments and diatribe just makes me wish for an ignore button. You could be spouting the wisdom of Buddha for all I know, but your never going to get any kind of message across other than 'I'm a self important tit".
You are the El Reg troll and you make less sense than amanfrommars, the original.
Re: Sir Runcible Spoon @Matt
Your constant use of straw-man arguments and diatribe just makes me wish for an ignore button
You really *have* been out of touch too long :). If you look at the handle next to a comment, you'll see a sort of silvery grey face (looks a bit like what you'd make during halloween, but silver). That *is* an ignore button (hover over it with a mouse and you'll see the associated tag).
However, my experience with idiots is that you need to keep an eye on them..
Re: Re: Sir Runcible Spoon @Matt
Whatever. Still waiting for you to post an actual argument. Not holding my breath.
Re: Sir Runcible Spoon @Matt
"Still waiting for you to post an actual argument"
Argument about what exactly? I have opinions, but they're generally poorly informed so I tend not to gob-off all over the place. I usually just make comments, just chit-chat on my favourite tech-site you know?
I wasn't aware I had signed up to the net's version of Plato's philosophical debate class on current affairs.
Thanks be to <$X> for AC - I had not spotted that.
Anyone Seen Thank You For Smoking ?
Superbly sums up the powerful vested interest groups, the NRA rep in it is spot on.
Oh how the septic tanks love their Guuurrrrrrrnnns.
PS NRA they didn't have video games in the first world war so explain that feck-wits. The gun was designed for one purpose only, killing.
Re: Anyone Seen Thank You For Smoking ?
+1 for reminding me of a great film
Re: Anyone Seen Thank You For Smoking ?
".....Oh how the septic tanks love their Guuurrrrrrrnnns....." Oh how the clueless love to hate those that shoot.
".....The gun was designed for one purpose only, killing." Your statement is disproven by the simple example that not every US policeman that carries a gun ends up shooting anyone during their whole career, not by a massive margin, and even when the average US policeman still has to draw his weapon in the line of duty, even in violent cities like New York in the Eighties, he was still only likely to pull the trigger one-in-four times. Which implies the other three times the gun was not required (unlikely as they had strict rules over when to draw) or the sight of the armed policeman ready to fire was sufficient to end the confrontation. It also implies that in the one-in-four confrontations that the New York policemen did use their weapons their own lives or those of inncoent citizens were protected as well as crimes prevented. And let's not even start on the number of soldiers that carry guns daily yet never fire them in action during their careers.
Try thinking rather than just blindly accepting what you have been spoonfed.
Re: Anyone Seen Thank You For Smoking ?
The gun was designed for one purpose only, killing..
of course it was, either that or it's a fucking messy and inefficient can opener
dolt
Re: Anyone Seen Thank You For Smoking ? @Matt Bryant
Matt, I was probably shooting guns before you were pissing in your nappy. My stepfather was national champion in the formal 20 yard pistol shoot at Bisley. I no longer use firearms or see any use for them in society as they are extremely dangerous and are only for killing.
Want to go target shooting then use a pellet gun and shout bang to give the same effect.
Re: Re: Anyone Seen Thank You For Smoking ?
I am at a loss. I have to upvote Naughtyhorse, for the love of <insert your fictional supernatural fairybeing of choice> what is going on?
Mind you, I suspect he still does not understand that a gun does not need to be fired to be used for a purpose. Think nuke missiles and MAD - we haven't had to use any of those missiles, have we?
Re: Anyone Seen Thank You For Smoking ? @Matt Bryant
"Matt, I was probably shooting guns before you were pissing in your nappy....." If you say so.
".....My stepfather was national champion in the formal 20 yard pistol shoot at Bisley....." If he is still alive, can I ask what his opinion was of his (and my preferred) shooting sport being banned by Blair? Also, did he or any of his fellow competitors that you know of take their sporting weapons and kill anyone? If not, then why do you grudge them or me the sport if it had no adverse affect on anyone else?
"......I no longer use firearms or see any use for them in society......" Again, your opinion.
".....as they are extremely dangerous and are only for killing......" Not with the proper procedures and controls, and did your stepfather use his sporting weapons to kill anyone?
"....use a pellet gun...." Just to give it a go, I did try air rifles for a bit, but it just wasn't the same as TR on the range. At Bisley, thanks. Besides, any air rifle that can kill a rabbit at 30m is potentially lethal to human beings, so surely you should be encouraging me to just use the NRA's game instead?
Re: Anyone Seen Thank You For Smoking ? @Matt Bryant
Asshole.
Now fuck off, there's a good chap.
Re: Anyone Seen Thank You For Smoking ?
You're right there was nothing like the threat of nuclear holocaust to make us all sleep in our beds easier.
I still fondly look back on being a child and watching when the wind blows and threads.
Re: Anyone Seen Thank You For Smoking ?
".....The gun was designed for one purpose only, killing." Your statement is disproven by the simple example that not every US policeman that carries a gun ends..."
No, it's not. How was the gun specifically designed for intimidation? If that was a key design requirement, police would be carrying IMI hand cannons with barbed bayonets and three laser sighting aids.
It is USED for intimidation, but no aspect of the design process for police handguns is based around making people who have one pointed at them more likely to comply with demands to put their hands up.
Video games kill people?
When was the last time the news reported a loner walk into a school campus and start throwing copies of GTA at pupils causing multiple deaths?
Re: Video games kill people?
Dunno, but I have to wait forever for Hari Krishna's to line up properly for a big multiplier.
For that authentic NRA experience...
...are there sections in the game where you can kiss and caress your gun, and make sweet, sweet love to it...?
Re: For that authentic NRA experience...
Gimme a break. You'd have to clean and oil it again..
This topic is closed for new posts.
