Violent Video Games "Warped" the Dark Knight Rises Killer

[mgirl]

That paper looks like it might be the daily mail. In which case, what on earth do you expect? It's a right wing rag that prints sensationalism, not news. Both the mail and the express do that, so anything that they print is not worthy of your time or attention. In any case, it's not going to be taken very seriously by many people.

 

[ChildofGallifrey]

I hold violent video games responsible for me not having snapped. Anytime I'm in a particularly pissy mood I throw on the most violent game I can get my hands on at the moment and work out all of my frustrations on a blob of gussied up 1's and 0's instead of people (or occasionally a punching bag, but that's beside the point. But seriously, that's just about the best stress reliever ever). I let my violent urges out in video games so I don't have to in real life.

On the flip side, I think it's because I played almost nothing but RPGs as a kid that I was reading at a college level in middle school. You never see a news story about that though, do you? That wouldn't sell papers quite so well as shock journalism does.

 

[Rainforce]

Most newspapers are like that. If I had to choose between the Sun, Mail, or Express. I'd choose the paper that doesn't tell me that literally everything in my home will give me cancer and one that tries to be a serious paper by having half naked girls on the third page. Yeah it's still crap, but it's one of the lessers of the crap.

According to this list [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_newspapers_in_the_United_Kingdom], all of those are right-wing/populist newspapers.
Maybe you want to try something more to the center/left.
Then again, I'm from germany, and the quality of our newspapers doesn't look that good, either. (except a few)
So maybe dropping the entire physical newspaper thing and sticking to news sites on the internet is the best move here.

Also everything anyone ever enjoyed/needed/used will or already has given you and everyone else cancer.

 

[renegade7]

Why must the media hate video games so much? It's getting out of hand the number of times video games are blamed for influencing awful crimes

Because if you're playing video games, you're not watching TV, and therefore can't watch the News and see the ads their parent companies pay for.

OT: Really? We're calling him the Joker?

So maybe that's why the Joker was so batshit insane.

 

[Toaster Hunter]

When in doubt, blame video games. Its easier than actually doing research and getting facts.

 

[Jamash]

"Sometimes when he was supposed to be reading a paper or something like that, I would see him playing online role-playing games like World Of Warcraft and League of Legends"

And that is the only sentance in a 3 page spread on the article that mentions anything about video games.

Where does it specifically mention "violent" video games, or was the word "violent" added by you?

It's interesting that for the title of this thread, you've turned a question about video games into a statement about a specific type of video game.

The way I see it, there are two different video game issues raised here, one raised by the newspaper's question and one raised by the title of this thread.

The issue raised by the newspapers question is "can an prolonged activity that causes someone to withdraw from reality into a immersive fantasy word (or alternate reality) affect someone's grasp on reality and sense of identity?".

The issue raised by your thread title is "can violence in the media inspire violence in real life?".

While there is some overlap between the two issues, the issue raised by this paper isn't what is being discussed in this thread, with some people assuming that the paper is labelling WOW and LOL as violent games, where in fact the key issue isn't violence in games, but escapism affecting the social interactions and world view of certain, vulnerable individuals.

I don't believe any kind of video game violence inspired a copy-cat reaction in this killer, but I think that prolonged escapism into a fantasy world may not have helped his already fragile psyche.

MMO and online gaming addiction and it's affect on the mind is a real issue that shouldn't be ignored (e.g. the woman who played Farmville while her baby died or the Asian people who drop dead from gaming for too long in internet cafes), but video game violence alone is more of a tabloid boogyman (e.g crime spree inspired by GTA) which shouldn't be confused with the real issue.

 

[GenericAmerican]

You know, I think all the violent movies caused it. . .batman goes and beats people up, I'm sure he has been shot at. . .I say batman caused this.

 

[TimeLord]

"Sometimes when he was supposed to be reading a paper or something like that, I would see him playing online role-playing games like World Of Warcraft and League of Legends"

And that is the only sentance in a 3 page spread on the article that mentions anything about video games.

Where does it specifically mention "violent" video games, or was the word "violent" added by you?

It's interesting that for the title of this thread, you've turned a question about video games into a statement about a specific type of video game.

The way I see it, there are two different video game issues raised here, one raised by the newspaper's question and one raised by the title of this thread.

The issue raised by the newspapers question is "can an prolonged activity that causes someone to withdraw from reality into a immersive fantasy word (or alternate reality) affect someone's grasp on reality and sense of identity?".

The issue raised by your thread title is "can violence in the media inspire violence in real life?".

While there is some overlap between the two issues, the issue raised by this paper isn't what is being discussed in this thread, with some people assuming that the paper is labelling WOW and LOL as violent games, where in fact the key issue isn't violence in games, but escapism affecting the social interactions and world view of certain, vulnerable individuals.

I don't believe any kind of video game violence inspired a copy-cat reaction in this killer, but I think that prolonged escapism into a fantasy world may not have helped his already fragile psyche.

MMO and online gaming addiction and it's affect on the mind is a real issue that shouldn't be ignored (e.g. the woman who played Farmville while her baby died or the Asian people who drop dead from gaming for too long in internet cafes), but video game violence alone is more of a tabloid boogyman (e.g crime spree inspired by GTA) which shouldn't be confused with the real issue.

Close up of the front page. First sentance.

 

[MrFalconfly]

Are you sure? I had thought that "assault weapon" was only a US legal term, not used anywhere else.

Well, except in 40k, where it is something you can move and fire.

Correct, assault weapon was a developed as a US legal term. It's been adopted by a bunch of people and has a life of it's own at this point. The assault rifle has been defined as a sub-class of assault weapons by anti-gun lobby groups but really not by the ATF.

The whole set of definitions is nebulous at best with people arguing about the definition. State to state it varies what the court would consider an assault weapon or assault rifle. The ATF is vague on it's own definition of it

The point about military personnel's "mental picture" of an assault rifle has nothing to do with what the word actually means, just what they'd guess it means based on the name, not specific a military nomenclature. (Not to say that they're not aware of the legal definition)

Basically the whole point of the post is the term means "scary looking" weapon and not much else.

Really?

I thought an Assault Rifle was pretty fixed at being any rifle which fires an intermediate caliber (5.56 x 45mm or 7.62 x 39mm), has a detachable magazine and is capable (in some cases if modified) of automatic fire?

Basically guns like the M-16 (or AR15 which is basically the same gun but with a carbine length barrel, a collapsible stock, smaller magazine, and Semi-automatic capability), G-36, AK-47, AKM, AK74, QBZ-97, Enfield SA80 A2 (aka. L85A2), or the original Stg. 44.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Are you sure? I had thought that "assault weapon" was only a US legal term, not used anywhere else.

Well, except in 40k, where it is something you can move and fire.

Correct, assault weapon was a developed as a US legal term. It's been adopted by a bunch of people and has a life of it's own at this point. The assault rifle has been defined as a sub-class of assault weapons by anti-gun lobby groups but really not by the ATF.

The whole set of definitions is nebulous at best with people arguing about the definition. State to state it varies what the court would consider an assault weapon or assault rifle. The ATF is vague on it's own definition of it

The point about military personnel's "mental picture" of an assault rifle has nothing to do with what the word actually means, just what they'd guess it means based on the name, not specific a military nomenclature. (Not to say that they're not aware of the legal definition)

Basically the whole point of the post is the term means "scary looking" weapon and not much else.

Really?

I thought an Assault Rifle was pretty fixed at being any rifle which fires an intermediate caliber (5.56 x 45mm or 7.62 x 39mm), has a detachable magazine and is capable (in some cases if modified) of automatic fire?

Basically guns like the M-16 (or AR15 which is basically the same gun but with a carbine length barrel, a collapsible stock, smaller magazine, and Semi-automatic capability), G-36, AK-47, AKM, AK74, QBZ-97, Enfield SA80 A2 (aka. L85A2), or the original Stg. 44.

That's what it means in military terms. In terms of what is banned under various "assault weapons" bans, "scary looking gun" really is a more accurate description.

OT: Guys, this is a tabloid. An anti-gamer article in a tabloid is as much a sign of anti-games sentiment still being prevalent as a "bigfoot is real" article is a sign that bigfoot is in fact real. I'm sure Bigfoot would feel wrongly persecuted too, if he existed. All that happened here is an unhinged individual decided to kill a bunch of people, and he picked a movie theater because of how convenient it is. I mean, lets see here: hundreds of people in one room, check. Clear line of sight to shoot, check. Dark room, makes it hard for people to figure out where you are, check. Two or three very small exits (read: choke points) through which everyone has to run to get away from you, check. This had nothing to do with batman, videogames, or any other external factor. It's just a crazy individual logically and methodically killing people. I know it scares a lot of people to think that's possible, and they'd rather there be something to blame, but as Alfred said, "some men just want to watch the world burn."

 

[Spartan212]

I blame old people

In the 1940s-1960s Music was the devil. That rock n roll caused people to do crazy things. Then, those "kids" got older and realized that wasn't the case, so the argument died down

In the 1960s-1980s TV and Movies were the devil. Then, the same thing happened

Now it's video games. Older folks don't really understand them because they didn't grow up with them. In 20 years or so when we're the old folks we'll realize the same things that the music and movies people did

 

[Headdrivehardscrew]

Read crappy, speculative or plain made-up stuff, go phwoarrrr, get a free rain poncho for the Olympics.

The "videogames corrupted the brilliant kid into a gun-toting madman" thing feels a bit like burning witches - very crude and inefficient.

I would be more interested in what really, as in actually, made it possible for what seems to at one point have been a top student to turn into a hatred-filled mass-killing loony.

It seems loneliness was one factor, and so far it looks like he's one of those folks that just plain should not have smoked weed or whatever it was he filled his social vacuum with.

While I have not yet read that anywhere, I would expect he would have been asked to leave his apartment or get evicted anytime soon, as it looks like he officially stopped studying, thus no longer being eligible for student housing. Maybe this change, and the unwillingness to face facts and come to terms with this and telling his parents turned him into a guy that might have wanted to kill hundreds of people that night. The fact that he did not kill himself makes me wonder - with his apartment booby-trapped, he obviously did not expect to go 'home' after the attack.

Yet, despite the pile of questions I have, I really hope he either gets his head smashed in with a broomstick in jail or cause a quick, express route for capital punishment to be paved. The families of his - random - victims cannot possibly have done him wrong, the probability of any of them even knowing who he is is so terribly small, there's really just nothing one could rationalize or justify about what happened, about what he did. If tax payer money needs to go anywhere, it's to the families of the victims, Mr. Holmes should not cost the tax payer one cent more than the bare minimum of what it takes to be all democratic and civil about it.

 

[DioWallachia]

Does the fucking concept of LYING IS ASS OFF is too abstract for the reporters? If the Norwegian guy was a nut job who wanted to spread chaos, then the best way to do so if he cant kill people anymore is by lying. And since videogames have the effect of reliving stress by being fun, the fucker though that the best way to spread chaos, killing and suffering is by attacking games by saying that "Those things made me do it". Games get banned, people get harassed for being "gamers" and lo and behold, the murderous psychopath gets what HE wanted.

Nutjob = 1
Reporters and the rest of Humanity = 0

 

[Jamash]

Spoiler: Snip

"Sometimes when he was supposed to be reading a paper or something like that, I would see him playing online role-playing games like World Of Warcraft and League of Legends"

And that is the only sentance in a 3 page spread on the article that mentions anything about video games.

Where does it specifically mention "violent" video games, or was the word "violent" added by you?

It's interesting that for the title of this thread, you've turned a question about video games into a statement about a specific type of video game.

The way I see it, there are two different video game issues raised here, one raised by the newspaper's question and one raised by the title of this thread.

The issue raised by the newspapers question is "can an prolonged activity that causes someone to withdraw from reality into a immersive fantasy word (or alternate reality) affect someone's grasp on reality and sense of identity?".

The issue raised by your thread title is "can violence in the media inspire violence in real life?".

While there is some overlap between the two issues, the issue raised by this paper isn't what is being discussed in this thread, with some people assuming that the paper is labelling WOW and LOL as violent games, where in fact the key issue isn't violence in games, but escapism affecting the social interactions and world view of certain, vulnerable individuals.

I don't believe any kind of video game violence inspired a copy-cat reaction in this killer, but I think that prolonged escapism into a fantasy world may not have helped his already fragile psyche.

MMO and online gaming addiction and it's affect on the mind is a real issue that shouldn't be ignored (e.g. the woman who played Farmville while her baby died or the Asian people who drop dead from gaming for too long in internet cafes), but video game violence alone is more of a tabloid boogyman (e.g crime spree inspired by GTA) which shouldn't be confused with the real issue.

Close up of the front page. First sentance.

Spoiler

So there were two sentences mentioning video games and the first labels them as violent... well that makes more sense and is more in line with a tabloid's stance on the matter.

 

[neonsword13-ops]

Free rain pancho? Fuck yeah! Sign me up!

Oh, I mean, uh..

Screw the media, they don't know about vidyah gaems.

 

[The Rogue Wolf]

"Sometimes when he was supposed to be reading a paper or something like that, I would see him playing online role-playing games like World Of Warcraft and League of Legends"

And that is the only sentance in a 3 page spread on the article that mentions anything about video games.

Where does it specifically mention "violent" video games, or was the word "violent" added by you?

It's interesting that for the title of this thread, you've turned a question about video games into a statement about a specific type of video game.

The way I see it, there are two different video game issues raised here, one raised by the newspaper's question and one raised by the title of this thread.

The issue raised by the newspapers question is "can an prolonged activity that causes someone to withdraw from reality into a immersive fantasy word (or alternate reality) affect someone's grasp on reality and sense of identity?".

The issue raised by your thread title is "can violence in the media inspire violence in real life?".

While there is some overlap between the two issues, the issue raised by this paper isn't what is being discussed in this thread, with some people assuming that the paper is labelling WOW and LOL as violent games, where in fact the key issue isn't violence in games, but escapism affecting the social interactions and world view of certain, vulnerable individuals.

I don't believe any kind of video game violence inspired a copy-cat reaction in this killer, but I think that prolonged escapism into a fantasy world may not have helped his already fragile psyche.

MMO and online gaming addiction and it's affect on the mind is a real issue that shouldn't be ignored (e.g. the woman who played Farmville while her baby died or the Asian people who drop dead from gaming for too long in internet cafes), but video game violence alone is more of a tabloid boogyman (e.g crime spree inspired by GTA) which shouldn't be confused with the real issue.

Close up of the front page. First sentance.

Dyed red hair, huh?

Keep on truckin' with that research failure, guys. Two out of three sentences complete bullshit? You're aces!

 

[DudeistBelieve]

Well there is a correlation between mass killers enjoying violent media, but it's akin to saying heart disease people eat a lot of fast food. Does eating a lot of fast food guarantee someone a heart attack? No, but it's certainly a risk factor.

That's where the inconclusive part comes in. You have the close-but-not-really part there, but the thing they're mistaking is that it's not because of the violent video games making violent people. It's just that people who are prone to violence like the video games that have violence in them. The violence was always there. The game didn't magically make it appear. That is why in the years of this dragging on and on, in and out, it never comes to fruition.

If anything one would imagine logically, reasonable human being like ourselves would use a tool like say Grand Theft Auto to act on/fullfill our power fantasies in.... wouldn't say constructive but harmless. I imagine what we need is a study on the mass killers and why fantasy alone wasn't enough quench that thirst, if you will.

Thing is Mass Killers usually kill themselves at the end of there spree. Ideally we should try to learn as much as we physically can from James Holmes before we execute him... Not to say such knowledge could prevent future killings, but maybe we can find some sort of hook to convince the people going down that path to get psychiatric help instead of killing people... Even that might be to idealistic but well... FBI pysch profiles say Eric Harris was a lost cause but Dylan Klebold probably wouldn't of killed anyone if he was free of Eric's influence.

really wish these debates didn't happen everytime this shit happens. Really nothing we can do.

 

[SnakeoilSage]

JESUS BLOODY CHRIST.

I read the title and I now want to murder anyone who was even related to writing it.

"THAT'S BECAUSE OF VIDE-"
Sorry folks, had to kill that person. Anyway, just because a VIOLENT person plays VIOLENT games, DOES NOT mean the games caused it. Think about it. I like Space Marines. I like playing games with Space Marines in them.

Violent people like violence. They like games with violence in them. This means VIOLENT people are drawn to VIOLENT games.

And also... Since when in the hell was World of Warcraft violent? All I remember was flashy cartoon colours!

This was a joke, right? This entire post was meant to be ironic, I hope? So you see a newspaper accusing video games of causing violence, and your knee-jerk reaction is to say you want to murder anyone even related to writing it.

Way to help the cause, genius. Send them bomb threats next, that'll show them what harmless and level-headed people we are.

 

[Stryc9]

Yep that didn't take very long for the papers to grab their baby bottle for safe assumptions. My paper came through my letterbox today and I sighed when I saw the front page article;

Took less time than I thought it would. I'm surprised they weren't spouting this shit within the first hour of it being reported.

Why must the media hate video games so much? It's getting out of hand the number of times video games are blamed for influencing awful crimes

Because video games are the current media whipping boy for all the bad things that happen in the world. It'll go away for the most part once people like us who were raised with video games start running our respective countries and media outlets.

Heh, I like how he shoots up an action movie based on comics, calling himself the name of a villain from another action movie based on comics, and it's games that are the problem.

Well you can't train yourself to keep your breathing steady, heart rate low and make sure you have a good sight picture before you apply even pressure to the trigger while watching an action movie based on comic books but you can do those things in video games according to some people so they get to have some of the blame.