Ex-soldier puts his girlfriends 8 year old kid into coma for accidently deleting his GTA save file.

[Jake Mosher]

I wonder why he's an ex soldier im guessing that he failed a mental screening the army hates people like that and they toss them pretty fast im suprised he got in or had a gf for that matter

 

[squid5580]

Lol that is your justification? Really? And yes I do have a hypersensitivity to blatant ignorance. Sorry if that offends you.

Dude, relax. Come on.

It is usually the videogames that get blamed by the meida in these situations, no matter what has happened in the person's life... I was merely pointing out that there could be other causes, one of them being the possibility of the trauma that lots of people in the military go through.

Now, before you jump down my throat again, know that I have good friends in the military and some of the stories I've heard are what inform my opinion here.

It would also be entirely unsurprising to see games blamed given that the newspaper that published the story has a colourful history of showing a very strong anti-gaming agenda, in particular towards Rockstar who made GTA:

http://www.x360magazine.com/say-what/daily-star-apologises-retracts-fake-gta-story/

And if it was a case like that I would be 100% with you. Don't get me wrong I am not frustrated about the soldier crack. Even though your post is doing the exact same thing you expect them to do. Blame 1 thing for what was a series of events that lead up to the tragedy. A chain of events called daily living. The only people that article is going to have up in arms about violence and games is the people who already believe video games make us all mass murderers. And as we all know they aren't going to be converted by things like facts anyways. But as for this article calling GTA ultra violent is just as much as a selling point to some as it is detrimental to others.

 

[Valksy]

Two things spring to mind:

1) If it hadn't been the GTA save file, it would have been something else. If the kid had dropped his toast on the carpet, would we blame the toast?

2) The bastard should be dragged out in to the car park and given an abject lesson on what it is like to have someone bigger and stronger than you fuck you up and put you in a coma (frankly, I would sooner that he be put in a box, worthless piece of shit that he is).

 

[Solstrana91]

Am I the only one that thought of Cloud Strife when I read the title.

I agree with the op this guy is a dick.

Great, now you've made me feel bad cause I'm pissing myself laughing ¬_¬

OT: Don't blame the game! This guys a soldier, I reckon it could be Post Traumatic Stress Disorder? Or something along those lines?

 

[squid5580]

I blame the videogame, not the traumatic and life altering events that can come with being a soldier.

Did you bother to read the article? It stated the facts. GTA is a ultra-violent game. The kid deleted his account that lead to the attack. No where does it blame anything, just states the events as they occurred. This hypersensitivity is just as ridiculous as the other side's.

Why was it relevant that GTA was 'ultra-violent'? It might as well have said "Donadio, who wears glasses". Sure, it's a fact. But it adds absolutely nothing to the report. The intent of its inclusion is obvious, there is no way you can misinterpret that. Plus, it IS the Daily Mail. I can say in complete honesty that the only reason they put he was an ex-soldier in there is so they have something to fall back on if they upset anyone.

Why is it irrelevant? It is what it is. Once gamers can stop being ashamed about it we will probably have an easier go against real enemies like that rapist ***** or the lawmakers that want to censor it.

Well, it IS irrelevant. Yes, the game is violent. It's also sold in a plastic case. Shall we mention that, next time? If they'd have put "...accidentally deleted his profile which was seven hours into the game's story line", they'd have been slated for advocating his behaviour. So that would be relevant, because it helps us tell just how seriously he took it, and how it affected his reaction.
It's journalism. Every word they use is specifically designed to provoke a response. Nobody's ashamed that the game's violent, I just can't understand why they felt it necessary to point out that it's violent. The only reason they would do that is to tell everyone that the game was violent, therefore the violent reaction was caused by the game's content.

Maybe they are trying to move more copies of GTA. When I hear a game or movie is ultra violent it peaks my interest more.

 

[Thyunda]

I blame the videogame, not the traumatic and life altering events that can come with being a soldier.

Did you bother to read the article? It stated the facts. GTA is a ultra-violent game. The kid deleted his account that lead to the attack. No where does it blame anything, just states the events as they occurred. This hypersensitivity is just as ridiculous as the other side's.

Why was it relevant that GTA was 'ultra-violent'? It might as well have said "Donadio, who wears glasses". Sure, it's a fact. But it adds absolutely nothing to the report. The intent of its inclusion is obvious, there is no way you can misinterpret that. Plus, it IS the Daily Mail. I can say in complete honesty that the only reason they put he was an ex-soldier in there is so they have something to fall back on if they upset anyone.

Why is it irrelevant? It is what it is. Once gamers can stop being ashamed about it we will probably have an easier go against real enemies like that rapist ***** or the lawmakers that want to censor it.

Well, it IS irrelevant. Yes, the game is violent. It's also sold in a plastic case. Shall we mention that, next time? If they'd have put "...accidentally deleted his profile which was seven hours into the game's story line", they'd have been slated for advocating his behaviour. So that would be relevant, because it helps us tell just how seriously he took it, and how it affected his reaction.
It's journalism. Every word they use is specifically designed to provoke a response. Nobody's ashamed that the game's violent, I just can't understand why they felt it necessary to point out that it's violent. The only reason they would do that is to tell everyone that the game was violent, therefore the violent reaction was caused by the game's content.

Maybe they are trying to move more copies of GTA. When I hear a game or movie is ultra violent it peaks my interest more.

This is the same newspaper that published a tirade against 'Grand Theft Auto: Raoul Moat'.

 

[Blitzwarp]

Ew, Daily Mail source. >:

I blame the videogame, not the traumatic and life altering events that can come with being a soldier.

Soundwave speaks the truth, as usual.

 

[Thyunda]

Oh dear god... We're all doomed. This story was in the Daily Fail which means that around 2,100,855 people Britain have read it. The Daily Fail is one of the worst gay bashing, ethnic minority hating, monarch loving, fascist humping, sensationalist piece of bullshit rag we have for sale in the UK and they absolutely LOVE stories like this, 'Society is going to hell because we have too many immigrants and they sell our children violent videogames that turn them into rapists and murders who don't want to watch the Queen's Speech at Christmas. Quickly, we must resurrect Princess Diana and use her to conquer Europe!'

The kind of people who read the Daily Fail are like people in America who watch Fox news and think that it's just great.

As a Daily Mail reader, I must say that this is the single greatest relevant post in the history of anything.

 

[Aphex Demon]

I wonder what the actual father of this kid is gonna do? Hopefully beat this guys ass.

 

[Wintermoot]

the war probaly fucked up his state of mind, the same thing could have easily happend if the kids accidently knocked over his beer or something

 

[Megacherv]

I hope the bandwagon doesn't pick up on this one...

Daily Mail

Too late my friend, too late...

 

[GavmatexD]

I blame the videogame, not the traumatic and life altering events that can come with being a soldier.

Did you bother to read the article? It stated the facts. GTA is a ultra-violent game. The kid deleted his account that lead to the attack. No where does it blame anything, just states the events as they occurred. This hypersensitivity is just as ridiculous as the other side's.

I think he was being sarcastic?

 

[Cherry Cola]

Once again, the pathetic nature of nerds wishing death upon criminals and hypersensitivity towards video games being named in news articles overshadow any emotions I might have for the subject at hand.

 

[Chechosaurus]

Oh dear god... We're all doomed. This story was in the Daily Fail which means that around 2,100,855 people Britain have read it. The Daily Fail is one of the worst gay bashing, ethnic minority hating, monarch loving, fascist humping, sensationalist piece of bullshit rag we have for sale in the UK and they absolutely LOVE stories like this, 'Society is going to hell because we have too many immigrants and they sell our children violent videogames that turn them into rapists and murders who don't want to watch the Queen's Speech at Christmas. Quickly, we must resurrect Princess Diana and use her to conquer Europe!'

The kind of people who read the Daily Fail are like people in America who watch Fox news and think that it's just great.

As a Daily Mail reader, I must say that this is the single greatest relevant post in the history of anything.

I'm glad you enjoyed it.

 

[squid5580]

I blame the videogame, not the traumatic and life altering events that can come with being a soldier.

Did you bother to read the article? It stated the facts. GTA is a ultra-violent game. The kid deleted his account that lead to the attack. No where does it blame anything, just states the events as they occurred. This hypersensitivity is just as ridiculous as the other side's.

Why was it relevant that GTA was 'ultra-violent'? It might as well have said "Donadio, who wears glasses". Sure, it's a fact. But it adds absolutely nothing to the report. The intent of its inclusion is obvious, there is no way you can misinterpret that. Plus, it IS the Daily Mail. I can say in complete honesty that the only reason they put he was an ex-soldier in there is so they have something to fall back on if they upset anyone.

Why is it irrelevant? It is what it is. Once gamers can stop being ashamed about it we will probably have an easier go against real enemies like that rapist ***** or the lawmakers that want to censor it.

Well, it IS irrelevant. Yes, the game is violent. It's also sold in a plastic case. Shall we mention that, next time? If they'd have put "...accidentally deleted his profile which was seven hours into the game's story line", they'd have been slated for advocating his behaviour. So that would be relevant, because it helps us tell just how seriously he took it, and how it affected his reaction.
It's journalism. Every word they use is specifically designed to provoke a response. Nobody's ashamed that the game's violent, I just can't understand why they felt it necessary to point out that it's violent. The only reason they would do that is to tell everyone that the game was violent, therefore the violent reaction was caused by the game's content.

Maybe they are trying to move more copies of GTA. When I hear a game or movie is ultra violent it peaks my interest more.

This is the same newspaper that published a tirade against 'Grand Theft Auto: Raoul Moat'.

Well if I didn't you know check the facts and believed that a game like that was coming out I would be offended as well. Just because a game about any subject matter can be made doesn't always mean it should. Or did you miss the part where they said we never bothered to do our jobs and check anything and just assumed this was in development? They could have said yeah we hate video games and looked stupid and lost credibility in front of a small minority (Faux News has no problem doing this). Instead they lost credibility to the vast majority by telling them we didn't bother doing our job and fact check before reporting.

 

[Nachtmahr]

I almost have to agree with the soldier's family. There seems to be a lot we do not know about the case (because really, Daily Mail), and 8 year olds can have a skewed memory of things, especially after such trauma. So considering the seriousness of the crime, I won't jump to any conclusions until his guilt is no longer in any doubt.

Though I agree that, if he is guilty, it is absolutely despicably and prison seems a kind punishment.

 

[Droppa Deuce]

What a tool.

75 years is just. Hopefully he won't get out early; that'll be his life over.

On the bright side, there's tonnes of stompin' to be done in the pen.

Only it'll be his ass being stomped by some A-Grade prison schlongs.

 

[Thyunda]

I blame the videogame, not the traumatic and life altering events that can come with being a soldier.

Did you bother to read the article? It stated the facts. GTA is a ultra-violent game. The kid deleted his account that lead to the attack. No where does it blame anything, just states the events as they occurred. This hypersensitivity is just as ridiculous as the other side's.

Why was it relevant that GTA was 'ultra-violent'? It might as well have said "Donadio, who wears glasses". Sure, it's a fact. But it adds absolutely nothing to the report. The intent of its inclusion is obvious, there is no way you can misinterpret that. Plus, it IS the Daily Mail. I can say in complete honesty that the only reason they put he was an ex-soldier in there is so they have something to fall back on if they upset anyone.

Why is it irrelevant? It is what it is. Once gamers can stop being ashamed about it we will probably have an easier go against real enemies like that rapist ***** or the lawmakers that want to censor it.

Well, it IS irrelevant. Yes, the game is violent. It's also sold in a plastic case. Shall we mention that, next time? If they'd have put "...accidentally deleted his profile which was seven hours into the game's story line", they'd have been slated for advocating his behaviour. So that would be relevant, because it helps us tell just how seriously he took it, and how it affected his reaction.
It's journalism. Every word they use is specifically designed to provoke a response. Nobody's ashamed that the game's violent, I just can't understand why they felt it necessary to point out that it's violent. The only reason they would do that is to tell everyone that the game was violent, therefore the violent reaction was caused by the game's content.

Maybe they are trying to move more copies of GTA. When I hear a game or movie is ultra violent it peaks my interest more.

This is the same newspaper that published a tirade against 'Grand Theft Auto: Raoul Moat'.

Well if I didn't you know check the facts and believed that a game like that was coming out I would be offended as well. Just because a game about any subject matter can be made doesn't always mean it should. Or did you miss the part where they said we never bothered to do our jobs and check anything and just assumed this was in development? They could have said yeah we hate video games and looked stupid and lost credibility in front of a small minority (Faux News has no problem doing this). Instead they lost credibility to the vast majority by telling them we didn't bother doing our job and fact check before reporting.

Evidently you missed the point of me mentioning that, thus demonstrating further your inability to pick up on this sort of thing. I pointed that out because you said the Daily Mail might be trying to get more copies of GTAIV sold. That is exactly the opposite of what they want. I'm not one for saying "Bill said this, but he's a dick so he must have meant this", but the tone implied by the article said the whole thing. And I hate the phrase 'ultra-violent'. GTA is not 'ultra-violent'. It's violent. But you're limited in what you can actually do to people...the violence extends to 'you can either kill them or partially kill them'.

 

[squid5580]

I almost have to agree with the soldier's family. There seems to be a lot we do not know about the case (because really, Daily Mail), and 8 year olds can have a skewed memory of things, especially after such trauma. So considering the seriousness of the crime, I won't jump to any conclusions until his guilt is no longer in any doubt.

Though I agree that, if he is guilty, it is absolutely despicably and prison seems a kind punishment.

How is 75 years in prison being branded as the guy who beat an 8 yr old into a coma a kind punishment? A death sentence would be a kind sentence for him. This way he gets to suffer lots and lots.

 

[Bender Rodriguez]

Honestly, i must be going to hell for thinking this is funny.
But this sounds made up.