back to article Pokémon GO caused hundreds of deaths, increased crashes

Pokémon GO killed at least two people and spiked rates of car accidents and injuries, according to a study of the game's impact on just one United States city. “Death by Pokémon GO” (PDF), by a pair of researchers from Purdue University's Krannert School of Management, says the game caused “a disproportionate increase in …

Page:

  1. Danny 14 Silver badge

    pokemon go killed noone. idiots killed themselves surely?

    1. Martin 47

      But it’s Merkins, gotta have someone to sue.

      ...........and that Darwin stuff is ‘just a theory’

    2. jake Silver badge

      Presumably, Danny 14 ...

      ... you also agree that guns don't kill people, people kill people.

      1. Big John Silver badge

        Re: Presumably, Jake ...

        I infer from your question that you believe guns do fire themselves at people?

        1. Anne-Lise Pasch

          Re: Presumably, Jake ...

          > I infer from your question that you believe guns do fire themselves at people?

          Mine do. Drone army ftw!

        2. jake Silver badge

          Re: Presumably, Jake ...

          No.

        3. Lysenko Silver badge

          Re: Presumably, Jake ...

          I infer from your question that you believe guns do fire themselves at people?

          The expression "shot by a gun" is analogous to "hit by a car". If you said someone was "hit by a driver" then many (most? all?) people would conclude that a driver stopped, got out of his car and then punched someone.

          Of course, both a car and its driver are capable of hitting you so there is an ambiguity, whereas only a gun (or crossbow, catapult or another projectile weapon) is capable of shooting you.

        4. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Presumably, Jake ...

          Only left handed guns do fire themselves at people eh big john?

        5. Richard Jones 1
          WTF?

          Re: Presumably, Jake ...

          Yes they nearly do, since the nominal holders of many 'self defence' weapons end up being killed by their own weapons I guess the guns must fire themselves. The other theory is that you have to be brainless to think a gun makes you safer and not a target, so the gun must have all the brain and thus be capable of self firing.

          The US habit of downgrading mental health services and then allowing any choice of mentally unstable condition to have access to guns is another issue altogether.

          1. Timmy B Silver badge

            Re: Presumably, Jake ...

            @Richard Jones 1

            "Yes they nearly do, since the nominal holders of many 'self defence' weapons end up being killed by their own weapons I guess the guns must fire themselves"

            They are not killed by their own weapons they are killed by themselves using their own weapons. the weapons don't up and fire themselves. They are either fired deliberately or accidentally by a person. I suppose it is possible that a weapon could fail due to corrosion or defect and fire if kept in a cocked position but very highly unlikely and the person who left the gun cocked would be the one at fault.

            1. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

              Re: Presumably, Jake ...

              They are not killed by their own weapons they are killed by themselves using their own weapons. the weapons don't up and fire themselves. They are either fired deliberately or accidentally by a person. I suppose it is possible that a weapon could fail due to corrosion or defect and fire if kept in a cocked position but very highly unlikely and the person who left the gun cocked would be the one at fault.

              I always assumed that the "killed by own weapon" stats were mostly due to the owners waving them around in front of burglars or muggers who have then relieved them of the weapon and shot them with it.

              1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

                Re: Presumably, Jake ...

                I always assumed that the "killed by own weapon" stats were mostly due to the owners waving them around in front of burglars or muggers who have then relieved them of the weapon and shot them with it.

                It is very difficult to relieve somebody of a weapon unless the owner is extra careless or crackhead levels of aggressive and you are Jackie Chan.

                And never "wave the weapon". Basics 101.

                1. Prst. V.Jeltz Silver badge

                  Re: Presumably, Jake ...

                  "And never "wave the weapon". Basics 101."

                  Thats what I mean. People who would never ordinarily own a weapon , but get one because someone close got mugged on the tube , or the latest Terror incident , have zero experience, didnt bother with "basics" and will probably pull it out in a panic , wave it around like Bruce Willis , not have the resolve to actually kill , which will result in a standoff with more waving shouting and panicking till eventually the aggressor grabs the gun.

              2. FIA

                Re: Presumably, Jake ...

                I always assumed that the "killed by own weapon" stats were mostly due to the owners waving them around in front of burglars or muggers who have then relieved them of the weapon and shot them with it.

                It's mainly suicide in the US. There's something like twice as many suicides by gunshot than there is murder by gunshot.

                It's also directly linked to gun ownership too. (as in states with more guns have more suicides).

                See here.

                1. John Brown (no body) Silver badge

                  Re: Presumably, Jake ...

                  "It's also directly linked to gun ownership too. (as in states with more guns have more suicides)."

                  Yes, IIRC, it's been said that statistically., many suicide attempts are "cries for help", ie they do it in such a way that they are discovered and saved. Not so much if they choose an "instant death" method such as a gun, so I'd think that areas of high gun ownership would likely result in higher "successful" suicide rates since those people are are not exactly thinking straight in most cases. The subconscious desire to be "saved" is less likely to be heard above the "there';s the gun, just do it" of the more concious side of the mind.

                  1. Pompous Git Silver badge

                    Re: Presumably, Jake ...

                    "it's been said that statistically., many suicide attempts are "cries for help", ie they do it in such a way that they are discovered and saved. Not so much if they choose an "instant death" method such as a gun, so I'd think that areas of high gun ownership would likely result in higher "successful" suicide rates since those people are are not exactly thinking straight in most cases. "
                    Almost right. The best quick suicide weapon is a shotgun through the roof of the mouth. Lesser calibre weapons are not so effective and don't even think about a .22. Chemical methods frequently fail because the human body can be quite tolerant of high doses of potent drugs such as opiates that work by suppression of breathing. Very often they merely damage the brain of the would-be suicide leaving them in a worse state than before. Ditto for insulin which came as a bit of a surprise; writers of crime fiction have much to answer for.

                    It's a bad assumption to make that suicides are "not thinking straight". While it's the case that many suicides are down to depression, it's far from the case that all are. My own decision to terminate my life at a time of my choosing is entirely rational. As someone who has suffered depression in the past, I can say that I'm as undepressed as I have ever been and that the decision to terminate my own life was something of a relief.

                    In a nutshell, I suffer considerable pain from spinal stenosis (a form of osteoarthritis). There is no medical reason I need suffer this pain, but the law, doctors etc conspire to restrict my access to pain-relieving medication because junkies obtain pleasure by injecting these substances into their veins.

                    When the pain becomes unbearable I will cease eating and drinking, and I'm assured some two weeks after this will die. It's legal, effective and rates a 9 out of 10 for quality of death from those caring for the dying.

                    1. handleoclast Silver badge

                      Re: Presumably, Jake ...

                      @Pompous Git

                      Sorry to hear about your problems.

                      the decision to terminate my own life was something of a relief.

                      Apparently a lot of people feel a weight taken off them once they make the decision that, when the time comes, they'll take a quick and easy way out rather than a lingering, debilitating, painful one. So much so that, once they realize that it's possible and they have the will to do it, they no longer feel the urgency and can tolerate discomfort more easily than before.

                      That said, I think I'd wait to find out how much fun the opiods are before committing myself.

                      Which reminds me, marijuana is found by some to deal more effectively with some types of pain than opioids can. But if you find it works for you don't tell the doctors because they'll give you fun opioids too (sell them on if you don't find them enjoyable).

                      The best quick suicide weapon is a shotgun through the roof of the mouth.

                      More awkward than having the shotgun under the jaw.

                      Either way can fail. Do it wrong and you end up blowing your front teeth and nose off, or blowing your jaw off. And now I've said that, anyone with a basic knowledge of physics can figure out the difference between the right and wrong way to do it. One of Newton's laws and one of Archimedes' laws and you can figure it out.

                      1. Pompous Git Silver badge

                        Re: Presumably, Jake ...

                        "Sorry to hear about your problems."
                        Don't be too fussed handleoclast. I've had an interesting life and hopefully it won't be curtailed for some time yet. I've outlived most of my close friends and my younger brother.

                        I already take opioids, oxycontin and codeine, but I don't find them fun at all. I find fighting constipation and constant drowsiness a tad boring. Marijuana (the high cannabinoid sort) works very well. The legal sort is not available to me; I'm neither officially terminally ill, or a juvenile. Despite the recent change in the law, as of last week no prescriptions have been issued. Mainly I suspect because it requires three doctors to sign off on one.

                        Thanks for the heads up on how to use the shotgun. Or should that be a heads off?

                        1. handleoclast Silver badge

                          Re: Presumably, Jake ...

                          @Pompous Git

                          I find fighting constipation and constant drowsiness a tad boring.

                          Yeah, both are very common side-effects of opiods. As is suppression of the breathing reflex. That last one is often the cause of death if you overdose on them.

                          A possible fix for the constipation is lots of chilli in your food. It irritates the bowels, causing mucous secretion, which loosens faecal matter. Works well for my haemorrhoids, lubricating things enough that they no longer cause problems. However, don't overdo the chillis, otherwise if you cough hard you end up walking like a penguin to get a change of underwear.

                          As for the heads off, I figured that out many years ago. Caught something on TV (it was back when I had a TV, so many, many years ago) about some farmer whose farm was going bust shooting his jaw off with a shotgun. How humiliating: you decide to kill yourself because you're a failure and you fail at it. Enough to make you want to kill yourself. It was easy enough to figure out what he'd done wrong and how to do it right. Top tip: if you decide to go that way, do it outside, because otherwise you leave somebody with a very unpleasant redecorating job.

              3. Timmy B Silver badge

                Re: Presumably, Jake ...

                @Prst. V

                re: "I always assumed that the "killed by own weapon" stats were...."

                You'd be wrong.

            2. handleoclast Silver badge

              Re: Presumably, Jake ...

              @Timmy B

              They are not killed by their own weapons they are killed by themselves using their own weapons.

              That may be true for cases of people dealing with intruders. However, take a look at the suicide statistics. A lot of gun fatalities in the US are suicides.

              Oh, and then there are the frequent cases when a child gets hold of the gun and accidentally kills somebody. Which reminds me of one of my uncles. Many years ago, long before drink-driving became illegal, some people drove home after a heavy night of boozing. My uncle was one such. One day I heard how his young son had somehow climbed into the car, released the handbrake, and it rolled downhill and caused damage to the car and whatever it hit. Only years later did I find out that "the kid did it" was the cover story told to the police and everyone else and what really happened was that my uncle did it after driving home pissed out of his skull. So I have my doubts about the veracity of the many stories of children accidentally firing guns and killing people.

        6. AlexGreyhead

          Re: Presumably, Jake ...

          I thought it was rappers, not guns, which killed people...? (Or is it "wabbits"? The enunciation is poor on that song I'm thinking of...)

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Presumably, Jake ...

            The gun argument can be settled with the following options.

            1 Guns for anyone.

            2 No Guns for Anyone.

            3 Guns for all except, minors, people with mental health problems, domestic abuser, criminals and no automatic weapons or modifications designed to kill lots of people, it's the right to bear "arms" not "armies". The right to bear arms is for self protections and potentially to keep government in check.

            4 Carry on as you are.

            Personally if I was America I would choose option 3 and would put it that no one can give me any rational argument against those exclusions.

            1. Pompous Git Silver badge

              Re: Presumably, Jake ...

              "Guns for all except, minors, people with mental health problems, domestic abuser, criminals and no automatic weapons or modifications designed to kill lots of people"
              Good luck with that, or should that be "happy wishful thinking"? Criminals by definition do not obey the law and that includes gun laws. Mental health problems often happen to people who have previously been perfectly well mentally.

            2. Captain Obvious

              Re: Presumably, Jake ...

              Few interesting things to add to the topic:

              1) Switzerland is also a gun nut country

              2) About 22% of deaths by gun there are also suicides

              3) Almost every household has guns in Switzerland

              4) Homicides are far lower there than in most other countries

              Cons of this is that it appears to increase suicides as they have the means right there. However, I wonder if suicide rates are the same in countries that ban guns as people may use other methods.

              Pros seem to be low crime and low number of homicides in Switzerland.

              Take it for what it is, but America is not the only gun obsessed country.

        7. Lotaresco Silver badge

          Re: Presumably, Jake ...

          "I infer from your question that you believe guns do fire themselves at people?"

          There are many documented cases of exactly that happening.

          Sten guns will fire without human intervention and the Heckler & Koch G11 was infamous for "cooking off" and shooting people without being touched by a human being.

          Your question seems to imply that these things never happened.

          1. Pompous Git Silver badge

            Re: Presumably, Jake ...

            @ Lotaresco

            Just to add to your point, when I was a teenager a neighbour shot himself in the back with a shotgun. He was driving at the time and the shottie was on the back seat of the car pointing at his lower back. Why it was cocked and unlocked is likely because he was a complete and utter fuckwit. He didn't survive.

      2. Phil O'Sophical Silver badge

        Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

        ... you also agree that guns don't kill people, people kill people.

        Mostly it's people + guns that kill people, but good luck with banning people.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

          It's rappers, I saw it in a documentary on BBC2.

          1. jake Silver badge

            Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

            No, no, no. Rappers kill other rappers. Seems reasonable.

        2. Terry 6 Silver badge

          Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

          but good luck with banning people.

          Damn! That was going to be my suggested solution!

        3. bombastic bob Silver badge
          FAIL

          Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

          "Mostly it's people + guns that kill people, but good luck with banning people."

          let's ban ROCKS, too, while we're at it - because some border patrol agents were recently killed by ROCKS...

          and we'll ban knives, and cars, and airplanes, and ...

          1. Sorry that handle is already taken. Silver badge

            Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

            let's ban ROCKS, too, while we're at it - because some border patrol agents were recently killed by ROCKS...

            and we'll ban knives, and cars, and airplanes, and ...

            ...all of the things that are well known for their being designed to kill people?

            Oh wait.

      3. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

        "Presumably, Danny 14 ... you also agree that guns don't kill people, people kill people."

        Guns don't kill people. People with guns kill people.

        By the thousand in America.

        1. Tom 38 Silver badge

          Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

          “They say that 'Guns don't kill people, people kill people.' Well I think the gun helps. If you just stood there and yelled BANG, I don't think you'd kill too many people.” - Eddie Izzard

          (Yes, I couldn't help quoting my favourite British transvestite comedian commenting on US gun control. Try not to explode Big John)

      4. jmch Silver badge
        Flame

        Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

        People (without guns) kill people (mostly) individually and with difficulty

        People (with guns) kill people with great ease and in large numbers

        Guns don't kill people, but they sure make it a hell of a lot easier. Which is by design not by any sort of accident

        1. Uncle Slacky Silver badge
          Boffin

          Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

          As Dick Solomon (3RFTS) put it, "Guns don't kill people, physics kills people!"

      5. Nolveys Silver badge

        Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

        you also agree that guns don't kill people, people kill people.

        Guns don't kill people, Americans kill people.

      6. Hans 1 Silver badge
        Happy

        Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

        ... you also agree that guns don't kill people, people kill people.

        Exactly, and that's why we need severe gun laws ...Imho, the people who buy guns need to be locked up, never mind big or small ... but I understand that that is just me ... anybody should be allowed to scare off intruders with military-grade assault rifles, it is in the second modification to the bill of rights.

        Seriously, not doing away with over-the-counter assault or automatic rifles is severely brain-dead ... you know, the sort of kit that easily allows you to kill hundreds of people in no time .... who's house gets "invaded" by hundreds of burglars at once ? Besides, are you a responsible gun owner, like, the type that keeps his guns out of reach of children, locked up in a safe ?

        For more insightful arguments :

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0rR9IaXH1M0

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

          Your ignorance is laughable, and most people who are morons seem to be for some form of gun control, probably a belated recognition of their own inability to control themselves and a need to be told what to do.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Anonymous Coward

            Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

            most people who are morons seem to be for some form of gun c̶o̶n̶t̶r̶o̶l̶ ownership.

            FTFY.

          2. DavCrav Silver badge

            Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

            "Your ignorance is laughable, and most people who are morons seem to be for some form of gun control, probably a belated recognition of their own inability to control themselves and a need to be told what to do."

            No offence, but you are a fucking idiot. I'm for gun control not because I don't trust myself around guns, I think I'd be fine with them. I'm for gun control because I don't trust you, and if the price of you not being allowed to have a gun is that I can't have one, then I'm fine with that.

            1. jake Silver badge

              Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

              DavCrav, Thomas Jefferson said: "Those who would trade safety for freedom deserve neither." I concur.

              (I'll bet some of you were expecting the usual mangled Franklin quote ... )

              1. Pompous Git Silver badge

                Thomas Jefferson

                "(I'll bet some of you were expecting the usual mangled Franklin quote ... )"
                Jake, you'll need to give a reference for that. The original quote "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" occurs in a letter written on behalf of the Pennsylvania Assemby.

                The thought was used on more than one occasion by Franklin though often cast in different words. The exact quote was on the title page of Richard Jackson's An Historical Review of the Constitution and Government of Pennsylvania (1759) published by Franklin with some additional matter he attributed to himself.

        2. Long John Brass Silver badge

          Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

          @Hans 1

          Imho, the people who buy guns need to be locked up, never mind big or small

          Lots of farmers in prison in your perfect world? I'm not suggesting that some sane form of firearm control that limits the number of nut jobs with automatic firearms is a bad thing; But! Firearms are a valid and useful tool in the hands of someone with the requisite number of genes and a little training.

          Knee jerk reactions like ban em all is just as bad

          1. the Jim bloke Bronze badge
            Devil

            Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

            There are people or jobs which have a legitimate requirement for gun ownership/use.

            Defense forces - to shoot invaders/threats to national security

            Offensive forces - to shoot people in order to further political/strategic goals

            Police forces - to shoot dangerous criminals (not including unarmed non resisting non threatening confused people, or women in pajamas, to pick an example at random)

            Shooting sports competitors - for the glory of whoever they may be representing

            Agricultural and pest controllers - to shoot vermin

            Private citizens - to shoot corrupt or incompetent elected or public officials.

            Sadly the last group are failing dismally in the performance of their duties

            1. Pompous Git Silver badge

              Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

              "Agricultural and pest controllers - to shoot vermin

              Private citizens - to shoot corrupt or incompetent elected or public officials.

              Sadly the last group are failing dismally in the performance of their duties"

              Actually we would shoot the vermin in the last group if it was legal to do so. Make it legal, but don't stand in the way while we rush to perform our duties; you might just get knocked over...

      7. TheProf

        Re: Presumably, Danny 14 ...

        "guns don't kill people"

        I think it's the bullets that do most of the damage.

    3. JLV Silver badge

      Reading this I was thinking a bit of the ol' Niven & Pournelle quip: "evolution in action" at first.

      But... the person dying is not necessarily the distracted driver.

    4. Voland's right hand Silver badge

      That depends.

      If Pokemon Go was a gun, it would have killed NOONE.

      Because it is a game, the idea that it may somehow be involved can be contemplated without the NRA demonstrating outside your premises.

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2019