Hooo take it easy there. All I'm saying is that one simple little word can have quite a big effect, you'd really be surprised. But you never caught me raising the pitchforks against this man or the newspaper now did you?squid5580 said:Oh I see now. It is because of one adjective that the article is anti gaming even though there is way more emphasis on him being an ex-soldier than GTA or video games. Got it. Nope no hypersensitivity here.
That's not even close to what happens when someone has PTSD...binvjoh said:PTSD?
Didn't read the article but that's the impression I get from the "ex-soldier" part.
He would have to be donor-able. You can't just pull the organs out of any random animal and stick them into another animal.EHKOS said:Are you kidding? I love re-playing that game, so what if he lost his data, video games are meant to be played more than once! I say they tear out his organs and give them to the kid.
He even looks like the sterotypical bad boyfriend!
This enrages me, I'm serious, if he has so much time in jail, give his organs to the kid. That's justice.....rrrrrr I am just so angry right now. Instead of punching a kid, I think I will use video games to cool off, as they deter violence by offering a healthy alternitive where nobody gets hurt.
And the people in the article themselves, for that matter. Media thrives on making innocent situations bad and bad situations worse. I'm not saying this ass doesn't deserve what he gets, but I tend to hold back my judgement on such things because media outlets love to exaggerate everything, especially anything bad that will fetch viewers... like all of us here in the forums who clicked the link just to see what you were talking about. The more they exaggerate, the more clicks they get, and thus the more advertising money they make, which is all that matters anymore.Aphex Demon said:Now, news articles like this put a bad reputation on gamers, and the developers of such games.
I guess it must be that the guy and the boys mother initially said that the kid fell off his bed, which was revealed as an absolute lie. I guess if there's only 3 people who knows what happened, and 2 of them are revealed as lieing to avoid the guy getting prison time, then the only thing that's left to do is to take the word of the victim. I think if it came down to someone who has been lieing being imprisoned, and a victim getting no justice, they'd go with the first option. It might be true that they'd prefer to have wrongful justice than no justice at all?Protomega said:I realize that the boy was the one who gave these claims but it just seems skeptical to me that the blame was so easily given (At least from what the article says).