Feeds

back to article 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 …

COMMENTS

This topic is closed for new posts.

Page:

Silver badge
Trollface

Re: For that authentic NRA experience...

Do you get to name your gun?

This is my rifle..this is my gun..

This is for random slaughter of schoolkids...this is for fun..

Doesn't really work does it?

3
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: For that authentic NRA experience...

Sjeez, *that* is dark. Respect..

The rhyme works if you change it to

This is my rifle..this is my gun..

This is for slaughter...this is for fun..

0
0
Mushroom

Blaming society's problems on other things, videos games have nothing to with this.

2
0
FAIL

Safety tip

"Always keep your gun pointed in a safe direction" isn't all that clear a message as safety tips go.

As long as it's pointing away from ME, that's OK, right?

2
1
Silver badge

Re: Safety tip

I thought that when I saw the picture too.

I always thought it was..

"Don't point your gun at anything you don't want to shoot"

..but I guess this wouldn't send the message they were after.

2
0
Silver badge
Childcatcher

Video games, the media and Obama’s budget kill people

Actually did a project on the first 2 parts at uni. Video games don't kill people, the majority of studies into video games and desalinization to violence were flawed studies monitoring blood pressure / heart rate and other triggers when calm, and then within minutes of playing games while the heart rate etc were still going to be elevated. What they then measured was the differences. From a standard heart rate etc figures rose to elevated levels, meanwhile after playing games the levels renamed the same as they were already elevated.

The same applies to media and in some cases even gripping books can have the same effect, but it's only short term.

This isn't to say that there aren't those who are susceptible to suggestion, but these people have underlying conditions such as schizoid personality disorder which is more to blame than the games themselves, games / other media just make the underlying condition worse.

Not to mention the very small numbers of people used to conduct the studies, normally fewer than 10. Although it's hard to conduct an unbiasd study since if you study something you'll go in with one view, it's very easy to pick them apart afterwards.

Furthermore studies have actually shown that in numerous individuals videogames especially violent ones provide a release for pent up rage and frustration, leaving the user calmed after playing which leads to fewer acts of violence by these individuals.

What I'm getting at is this. Videogames do not cause violence in and of themselves, in certain cases they can prevent violence, or lead to fewer violent incidences while in others they can exacerbate underlying conditions which could lead to heightened levels of violence It's a 50/50 split.

The only major point is that of that split (it's not really 50/50) everyone can be affected by the calming nature, and those who might have it exaggerate another condition, that condition should be diagnosed and treated anyway, if they are diagnosed and treated there would be no issues. Even in those who aren't diagnosed or treated problems may never occur. If anything I'd say it were a failing of the mental health assessment people go through when younger (when many of these symptoms might be prevalent but ignored)

Here's a good though on controlling violence, One day a month,have children speak to a counselor, all children not just those who seem troubled, do this from the moment they hit 10 until they leave. I could almost garuntee this would help lead to more people being correctly diagnosed early on when behavioral therapy would be more useful than medicinal.

1
0
Silver badge

Re: Video games, the media and Obama’s budget kill people

"desalinization to violence"

That's why gamers love Pringles.

9
0
Bronze badge
Pint

Re: Video games, the media and Obama’s budget kill people

The cathartic effect of playing video games is palpable, a few minutes of slaughter in Quake Arena put paid to those pent up spleen busting feelings about applying extreme violence to the vital parts of the boss. Similarly in days before gaming, Dirty Harry movies were great for this sort of release, other 'dirty' movies were for other sorts of release... obviously.

2
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: Video games, the media and Obama’s budget kill people

No, no, no. Our Friday afternoon game sessions were strictly network stress and latency tests..

2
0
Silver badge
Facepalm

Re: Video games, the media and Obama’s budget kill people

"desalinization to violence"

This is why I need to check what autocorrect does.

2
0
Silver badge
Devil

The NRA has nothing to do with amendments or rights, it is the lobbying engine for some "extremely" successfull enterprises. That gun law is the equivalant of a Captilistic Orgasm, it is a money printing machine.....

There's no need to "Think about the Children" all you have to do is "Think about the PROFIT"..

3
1

What if?

We manage to ban guns and remove them totally from society?

a would be killer will use an axe or a kitchen knife.

so we ban them.

then they use a screwdriver or a pen.

so we ban those too.

Banning things does not stop the root cause of these killings, someone has suffered a short circuit in their brain which has caused them to want to destroy.....

I'm in favor of better checks and more regular checks of licensed firearm owners and stricter penalties for illegal possession/use of firearms.

4
16
Silver badge

Re: What if?

Thing is, guns are distinct from those other things because you can kill from a distance without any real personal involvement.

Pointing a device and pulling your finger inwards a few mm and running away is not exactly as hard an experience as grabbing someone and repeatedly plunging a blade into them, feeling their hot blood spurt on you, their gurgles and screams and so on.

4
1

Re: What if?

Maybe, but a school murderer is unlikely to be able to kill as many innocent kids with a pen than with an assault rifle. It's all about balance, and the current US balance is simply crazy to anyone European.

12
1
Bronze badge
Boffin

Re: What if?

"Banning things does not stop the root cause of these killings, someone has suffered a short circuit in their brain which has caused them to want to destroy....."

That violence is a necessary tool for survival which has tensions with civilised living does not make it a "short circuit". The actions of sociopaths cannot be easily reduced to a simple cause an effect though so rarely gets talked about because arguments trolling about what particular piece of media technology, low art, economics or weapons technology is to blame is much easier.

4
1
Silver badge

Re: What if?

Does it need to be repeated AGAIN?

Okay. Knives and screwdrivers, just like cars, have uses other than killing things. Fuck.

5
1
Thumb Down

Re: What if?

Aria: "What if?

We manage to ban guns and remove them totally from society?

a would be killer will use an axe or a kitchen knife.

so we ban them.

then they use a screwdriver or a pen.

so we ban those too.

Banning things does not stop the root cause of these killings..."

We've had some experience with (more or less) this scenario here in the UK and while you're quite correct on the last point it would be quite hard for a crazed lunatic with an axe or kitchen knife to run the bodycount up anywhere near the Sandy Hook score of 26...

Lisa Potts (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lisa_Potts) was a very brave and determined young woman, she sustained serious injury as she faced down a nutter with a machete intent on butchering the children in her care but I doubt she'd have fared as well against the same nutter with an assault rifle...

8
1
Facepalm

Re: What if?

Your argument is nonsense.

The difference between a gun and a knife is that by the time you've managed to empty around of ammo into a boat load of children, the nutter with knife might, *might* have got one kill before before being overpowered. And an axe? Seriously? "Oh hello headmistress, you don't mind me walking into school with this nob-off axe, do you now? I'm hear to chop firewood. Honest."

The thing about better checks on ownership is a nonsense. The latest head case to run riot in a school took his dear ol' mom's weapon stash to wipe out the poor little mites.

I know the pen is mightier than the sword, but, well, it really fuckin' isn't.

The difference between a gun and screwdrivers, pens and knives is that a gun is made for the sole purpose of killing living things. There's absolutely no need for a normal person to carry one. You cling on to your precious second amendment like a religious fanatic who holds dear bizarre and outdated laws that maybe made sense hundreds and hundreds of years ago in [even more] misogynistic times. The weird thing about it is that the amendment has been taken out of context and become a twisted excuse to carry implements of death around with you.

10
1
Silver badge

Re: What if?

As someone recently remarked, if you've already got knives, screwdrivers, cars etc., why do you need guns as well?

5
0
Anonymous Coward

Re: What if?

You don't always need a gun to take a gunman down

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-20975608

1
1

This post has been deleted by its author

Flame

Re: What if?

"We manage to ban guns and remove them totally from society?

a would be killer will use an axe or a kitchen knife.

so we ban them."

You will take my axes from me over my cold, dead body.....

sorry what were you saying?

3
0
Silver badge
Unhappy

Re: Re: What if?

"You don't always need a gun to take a gunman down...." Unfortunately, it seems that in several such cases, such as Professors Kevin Granata and Wally Grant in the Virginia Tech massacre, teachers attempting to intervene and reason with other killers were simply gunned down. So, whilst the Sandy Hook Elementary School story is good news, it shouldn't be used to assume that every killer can be talked out of their actions.

0
2
Silver badge
Joke

Re: What if?

"Okay. Knives and screwdrivers, just like cars, have uses other than killing things. Fuck."

Agreed, but can you not also pistol-whip someone into submission without killing them?

On a more serious note, I tried to buy some plastic cutlery a few weeks back at one of the self-service tills and it flagged up an alert for someone to come over and authorise it.

PLASTIC KNIVES - they don't even cut sausages, how the fuck am I going to kill someone with it? I'd be better off letting my fingernails grow, sharpening them to a point and dipping them in poison....hmmmm...

4
0
Silver badge

Re: What if?

A screwdrivers primary purpose is to unscrew screws

A guns primary purpose is to do bodily damage. It is designed to maximise lethality.

An axe or a knife are difficult to use at range, cannot be thrown in bursts, and require retrieval rather than speedy reload. A gun howerver is a multiplier.

If you don't have a real need for a gun, you shouldn't have one. We do however need knives (to cook), pens (to write) and screwdrivers (to, err, screw) in regular life.

3
1
Holmes

Re: What if?

Compare & contrast...

Nutter goes berzerk at a school, with a gun, in the US, where guns are readily available:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_shooting

vs.

Nutter goes berzerk at a school, with a knife, in China where gun ownership is severely restricted:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chenpeng_Village_Primary_School_stabbing

US 26, PRC 0 (for the NRA members, just to be clear, a high score is a fail here)

Guns just make it that much quicker and easier...need I say more?

Actually I'm going to - guns are designed to kill, but some guns are designed *specifically* to kill people. You don't hunt with a Glock 17, or an AK47

7
1
Silver badge

Re: What if?

except the loons commiting mass slaughter by and large hold legal guns.

you could always check to see thay arent nutcases before selling them a gun - that would require background checks - thats tantermount to wiping ones arse on the bill of rights and selling the country to the russians.

also the kind of nutter that embarks on this scheme - inevetably ends up killing themselves - hard to imprison a corpse.

the problem is much deeper rooted in american society - look at 'the merkin dream' or 'merkin exceptionalism' then think about the corruption that has been endemic in american society since the mayflower. hardly a surprise when you spend 20 years telling someone they can achieve anything and they are gods chosen people, then sentence them to flippin burgers for 30 years it's hardly a surprise that they get a bit pissed off about it. and given their status as 'special' why shouldnt they murder 20 innocent 6 year olds... fuck em.

now find a way to fix _that_, and they can have all the guns they want, no problem.

2
0
Silver badge

Re: What if?

@Aria - upvote for this "I'm in favor of better checks and more regular checks of licensed firearm owners and stricter penalties for illegal possession/use of firearms.", but the rest of your argument re kitchen knives makes no sense

0
0
Silver badge
Unhappy

Re: What if?

Ahem!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_Chinese_school_attacks

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Kehoe

Not school-related, but showing that killing people in large numbers does require a gun:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sadamichi_Hirasawa

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Jones

0
1
Silver badge
Unhappy

Re: What if?

".....now find a way to fix _that_, and they can have all the guns they want, no problem." The example of Switzerland (every male of conscriptable age having a loaded, fully-auto assaut rifle at home, yet no-one ever murdered with one) seems to bear that idea out. But the US politicians seem more intent on avoiding that and going for the easier "ban guns" idea.

0
1

Re: What if?

" I wanna buy a gun!"

official: "why sir?"

"to, uh hunt stuff"

offical: " ok sir so why do you need a semi auto rifle and armour piercing rounds?"

"uhhhhh in case the deer is wearing body armour?"

offical: "do you do a lot of hunting in the city sir?"

Simples.

1
0
Joke

Hang on, Hang on

Guns do have other uses than shooting people! You could club someone do death with one for example, HA got you there you filthy lefties.

5
0
Silver badge

Re: Hang on, Hang on

Don't forget herding cattle and erm... OH Alarm clock, guns could make excellent alarm clocks.

1
0

The real tragedy here

is that they are threatening to send Piers Morgan back.

5
0
Paris Hilton

Re: The real tragedy here

The guy who created the petition - Alex Jones - was recently interviewed with Piers Morgan on his show. Jones started going berserk and yelling about 1776. At one point I thought he was going to whip out a pistol right there and shoot Piers or just pistol-whip him to death.

Then I felt conflicted, I mean, if that had happened, would I have cheered, or would I have been saddened? I just don't know the answer...

0
1
Silver badge

Re: The real tragedy here

"At one point I thought he was going to whip out a pistol right there and shoot Piers or just pistol-whip him to death. Then I felt conflicted, I mean, if that had happened, would I have cheered, or would I have been saddened? I just don't know the answer..."

It's like when Jeremy Clarkson punch Piers in the face all over again...

0
0

This post has been deleted by its author

Anonymous Coward

Odd topic

The problem with discussing guns is the dependence on the crowd. Unfortunately the topic is so badly polarised that the processing part of the brain is shut off. For the 'anti-gun' nutters plenty is said about innocents killed by guns but there is a huge hole where reasoning should be concerning lives saved by guns. The idea of discussing the good seems to be completely alien and impossible to understand. For these people a gun is for killing people and nothing else. Which truly shows that these people are the nutters who should be watched carefully for their homicidal impulses they obviously cant contain. The ignorance of sport (which doesnt even call for the killing of anything on a shooting range) show their lack of knowledge or complete lack of braincells. I see this especially here in the UK.

The massively paranoid 'give us the huge guns' nutters are the small segment of gun owners/users which the anti-gun nutters focus on. The idea that black helicopters will drop their own troops against them is a fear from old experience but ignores how their freedom is eroded in different ways which calls for no violence. These people seem to think they are protecting themselves from an army instead of an assailant. Demanding the equipment of the army in case that day every comes.

So when there is a solid line that any acceptance at all for the gun means you must be a nutter which leaves only those strictly against guns on the other side makes the NRA's job pretty difficult. The simple truth being that laws against violent criminals and the mentally ill could be tightened up while self defence and sport should not be oppressed by paranoid anti-gun nutters.

At least this game offers safety tips for shooting. Compare that with games and films where ammo is unlimited and spraying bullets is the way to do it.

3
7
Silver badge
Thumb Down

Re: Odd topic

The laws being passed by Obama are explicitly targeting the "give us the big guns" group (and they' not a minority, they've got massive political and financial backing).

Sport shooting is a great idea IMO, I see it as being like any other sport, probably on the same level as motorsport.

But just like motorsport, it's something that should be restricted to a closed, monitored setting. In any case, the issues being discussed in the article aren't talking about banning sports shooting, they're about getting assault rifles out of people's homes. The fact that legislation even has to be passed in order to do such a thing is pretty sad.

0
0
Anonymous Coward

@Esskay

Actually the topic is about computer games and gun incidents which is why I accurately described the split, at least in the UK. There are those who absolutely, unbending and unthinking who rabidly hate anyone who considers the existence of the gun. You can see these peoples comments all over this topic. It doesnt matter how clear thinking you are or middle ground, you are an evil SOB because you want all children to die and go to hell because your gun must be making up for a shortage down below (etc etc etc).

I am glad you seem one of the more middle ground people in your suggestion and it is very sad that people with screws loose can buy and own guns. I do dislike the gun discussion applied to the US because the US is a collection of states with different rules. The states allowing guns for self defence seem to do better than those tightly regulated, but there are other states that are way too lax. With proper checks on who is buying the gun I think a lot of trouble will be avoided. Also the idea of allowing some guns for self defence.

I used to think assault rifles were excessive in the US. Then I saw a programme on gun violence in one of the more restrictive states. (it was ross kemp) talking to a gang who showed a variety of illegal assault rifles and explained how they drive to someones house and shoot the place up. From the perspective of a victim I think I too would prefer an assault rifle.

A neighbouring state allowing concealed carry had a drastically less gun crime. Explained simply by (from memory) "you wouldnt draw because anybody and everybody around you could be armed". In an assault being bigger, stronger, numerous, etc is an advantage. But the gun is a great equalizer. Tall, short, big, small the gun will stop you in your tracks. And just the presence of one can (does) save lives

1
0

Re: Odd topic

You miss your hand gun don't you?

0
0
Anonymous Coward

@Mooseman

Yeah, well spotted. I would love to take a hand gun the the range. A hand gun is a totally different experience to a rifle. I also know many more law abiding and perfectly normal people who miss them too. But they got banned from the law abiding. Shame we all take the punishment for the few criminals. If the law applied laws like that as standard we wouldnt go out because then nobody could commit a crime!

1
0
Silver badge

But there weren't any guns in Mortal Kombat, were there? Or did I fail to unlock a secret character who behaves like Indiana Jones when he brings a gun to swordfight?

2
0
Anonymous Coward

@dave

Striker MK3/ultimate MK3. He also used grenades. Not as good as throwing a ball of ice though or a harpoon.

0
0
Silver badge
Stop

NRAspeak

And "always keep the gun pointed in a safe direction" is NRAspeak for point it at the next black person?

I wish I could laugh at the irony NRA showed here.

5
1
Anonymous Coward

Re: NRAspeak

I almost felt bad, because I laughed at this.

0
0
Silver badge
FAIL

Re: NRAspeak

"..... is NRAspeak for point it at the next black person?...."

Oh dear. That "right on", bigoted remark is simply sad. I suppose you would have been all for taking away guns from these NRA members and leaving them defenceless then?

http://www.keepandbeararms.com/information/XcIBPrintItem.asp?ID=2960

Please read and then post an apology.

0
2
Linux

Just curious

Why you say "Adam Lanza shot dead 20 children and 6 adults" rather than "some gun crazed loony shot" and then list the 26 names?

The more publicity his name gets the more chance there is that some like minded loon will try and better him.

8
1
Silver badge
Thumb Up

Re: Just curious

This is rather a valid point and unlikely to get much airtime sadly.

1
0
Unhappy

How incredibly insensitive of the NRA just after a bloody school shooting. Will they ever learn?

1
1

Page:

This topic is closed for new posts.