Retired Lt. Col.: Violent Media Has Bred A Generation Of Killers
from the not-to-subtle,-huh? dept
I can understand why someone who watches the news on a daily basis might shake their head in dismay. I get how it must feel necessary to put the blame for tragedies like Sandy Hook somewhere, anywhere, even if the eventual target of ire is misplaced. There's probably a certain ill-conceived synergy in pointing at violence in movies for a horrific theater shooting, even if the jury is at best out on the concept of violent media causing violent behavior. But when you hear someone so arrogantly sure that all of this wrong thinking is right and then using that arrogance to pompously try and scare the shit out of everyone, it deserves pushback.
So push back in your own way on Retired Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, whose hobbies amount to telling anyone that will listen that violent media has bred a "generation of vicious, vicious killers."
“This generation is going to give you massacres in the domestic environment and in the work environment,” he predicted, with unrestrained outrage, after ticking off a sobering list of mass murders -- particularly those that have occurred on school grounds and university campuses -- which have plagued American society in recent years.It's a scare tactic that would be absolutely compelling were it not so absolutely wrong. Nevermind that no conclusive link between violent media and mass violence has been demonstrated, the fact of the matter is that in the long view, mass shootings are decreasing. As is violent crime in general. If one wanted to play the correlation game, they might happily state that violent media is decreasing violent output. I personally won't go that far, but it's fairly difficult to square Grossman's claims with reality.
“There is a generation of vicious, vicious killers out there,” he told his audience. “The video games are their trainers. They’ve been playing Grand Theft Auto every spare moment since they were six years old.”Oh, please. Who the hell could listen to Niko's voice for years without killing themselves long before they killed anyone else? And besides, if these children are killers and the games their trainers, given the statistics already noted, then the little bastards are really bad at being killers and the games are a poor training manual, since none of this seems to be coming true. But if you thought Grossman had emptied his scare-clip at you already, you're wrong.
His views were no more subtle when he turned his sights to the international scene. A dozen years after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the energetic and charismatic speaker sees life-threatening threats emanating from Pakistan, Russia, North Korea and Iran. What will the next 9/11 look like, he wondered aloud, before answering his own rhetorical question: “We’re going to get nuked.”Lovely, and perhaps it will someday happen, but he forgot to mention something: if you look at the number of terrorist incidents in America throughout history, you'll note that the sharp increase in their occurence is non-existent. An enterprising commenter can graph the whole list out from that link if they like, but here's a brief example. We live in the year of our lord, 2013, so let's just start in 2012 and count how many terrorist incidents happened every ten years back:
- 2012 - 3 incidents, 9 killed
- 2002 - 14 incidents, 15 killed (note: the beltway sniper is counted as 11 separate incidents, which is stupid. This number should be 3 incidents total.)
- 1992 - 2 incidents, 1 killed
- 1982 - 6 incidents, 3 killed
- 1972 - 7 incidents, 6 killed
- 1962 - 1 incident, 44 killed
- 1952 - 0 incidents, 0 killed
Now, my use of 2012 as a starting point certainly is convenient in leaving out 9/11, but it's useful to note that outliers don't dominate the statistics. I should also note that this list ignores Pearl Harbor as the site of a terrorist attack, which seems incorrect in a way. The idea isn't that we can't be concerned about terrorism of any kind, be it Islamic fundementalist or the home-grown Aryan Nation variety, but if you make it your business to go around scaring people like Grossman does, you shouldn't leave out the more comforting facts simply because it is inconvenient to your narrative.
The next generation is not one of killers, this generation is not having to deal with terrorism in a way never before required, but it may be true that the media is more like Grossman and less like myself in that they enjoy scaring you for profit. Beware the man or woman who makes simple proclamations, because they're usually forgetting to tell you something.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Filed Under: data, dave grossman, stats, video games, violence
Reader Comments
The First Word
“Ironic considering his career
And what does the military train people to do retired Lt. Col? Go to the middle east and have picnics with and dances with our enemies?Sure it's not teaching people to go up and shoot random Americans in the street, and most military people are law abiding citizens, but some of them do kill innocent Americans and commit violent crimes. Just like some violence video game players do those things, but most don't. By your same logic we should therefore be blaming the military for violent crime done by people in the military.
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Tim says it like it's a noble stance but the anti ip attitude of the techdirt "crew" is always against profit, at least of the created by forced IP rights kind.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Topic?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Topic?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Topic?
So, just like techdirt's general tone of criticising those who attempt to profit from the blind wielding of IP enforcement he is again criticising those who attempt to profit from actions that are fully legal. The man is against profit except his and techdirt's own accepted means of making profit which is some kind of liberal nonsense about providing good things that people actually want at a reasonable price.
Pirates ... Pshaw
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Topic?
7/10 on the troll-meter, someone is actually engaging in discussion on your own level and the subtle way you get that attention is by making wrong assumptions and discrediting on the surface, while being complete nonsense underneath.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Topic?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Much easier to just imagine what you think or want the articles to say, and post accordingly, as it's a huge time and thought saver.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
If your marketing strategy involves the use of any kind of "force", then maybe your doing it wrong.
Just my 2¢.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
There's always a scapegoat
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There's always a scapegoat
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There's always a scapegoat
I don't remember the mass killer part. People who used to ridicule me about D&D said it was antisocial, devil worshiping, and made me susceptible to killing myself, but I'd always laugh because they obviously never played themselves and didn't have a clue.
It will be sad when enough people start believing this bull and put some bad laws in place.
Unfortunately, and it may be my cynicism, but that is likely the expected outcome (for the children.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: There's always a scapegoat
then you ARE a mass murderer, OWN IT, psycho killer...
OUR Empire murders,
we (including me) do NOT overturn Empire,
therefore, we are complicit in the murders,
we are ALL psycho killers by proxy...
art guerrilla
aka ann archy
eof
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ironic considering his career
Sure it's not teaching people to go up and shoot random Americans in the street, and most military people are law abiding citizens, but some of them do kill innocent Americans and commit violent crimes. Just like some violence video game players do those things, but most don't. By your same logic we should therefore be blaming the military for violent crime done by people in the military.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ironic considering his career
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ironic considering his career
“There is a generation of vicious, vicious killers out there,” ... “The military are their trainers. They’ve been trained to kill every spare moment since they were eighteen years old.”
Fixed that for Lt. Col. Dave Grossman.
Note: I am NOT anti-military, I fully support the troops and the sacrifices they make. Just pointing out the hypocrisy in the Lt. Col.'s statements.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Ironic considering his career
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I’ve watched all seven Saw films, Ninja Scroll, just about every Freddy and Jason movie (including Freddy vs. Jason), and a countless number of other violent or otherwise horrific films.
I’ve seen pictures of and read descriptions of horrors so disturbing and nauseating that I cannot speak them aloud.
I’ve done all of these since well before I turned eighteen.
I turn thirty-two this July.
I have never commited a violent crime in my entire life, and I haven’t commited an act of violence against anyone since the eighth grade. I might have a bit of a fucked-up imagination and a foul mouth, sure, but I don’t confuse fantasy with reality.
I don’t disprove his bullshit claims, but I’d like to think I serve as a strong defense against them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
There will always be people who can't distinguish fantasy from reality (schizophrenics) and there will always be people who like violence (psychopaths). Violent video games and movies have nothing to do with either.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
War of course is nothing more than a 3D game people play similar in some aspects to the electronic version with real consequences.
(If this is not understood read "Games People Play" by Eric Berne.)
For normal people violent games are simply a game; for a small minority of nut cases they are training for mayhem which no rational person can comprehend.
The basic problem here is not the game or the guns used in the game but the nut cases that play the game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Ahhh, the heart of the bullshit, served with the duck included. No rational people can comprehend but trust us, it's there.
This notion that video games train people is such epic bullshit. Let's break it down shall we?
Let's analyze a bit what's needed to kill, and how videogames do or do not help:
1. Knowledge of how to use weapons - I've never fired a gun in my life, but I've heard tell from people who have that video games don't help you shoot. I've never learned shit about knife work from video games, though two years in a butcher shop sure helped.
2. Physical conditioning - Running around attacking people takes a certain amount of stamina. Halo never helped my endurance of anything except junk food.
3. Strategy and tactics - Video game AI is pretty lame sauce when compared to the real thing, even to this day, and game scenarios are rarely realistic.
Now, if what you're trying to convey is that video games somehow morally "train" people to kill (which is nonsense on its face) bear in mind that the VAST majority of games have strong moral overtones, at least in the broad strokes. DOOM is fighting demons from Hell, Halo is fighting aliens who want to exterminate humanity, Warcraft is fighting the undead who want to exterminate life (there are other baddies in WoW, but that's 40 paragraphs on its own). Sure there are outliers such as indie/homegrown stuff with any kind of content you can imagine (and probably some sick shit you would have never thought of), but that's not what we're really talking about, is it?
In fact part of the appeal of many video games is being the good guy, saving the civilians, blah blah blah. It aligns with our pre-existing morals and hero fantasies.
So, how exactly does a video game train someone in ways no one can understand? Cause I sure can't understand it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I am so sick of our scapegoating society.
Immigrants and unemployed blamed for government deficits - bullshit.
Violent video games blamed for real world violence - double bullshit.
Current governments blaming previous governments for the 'problems they left behind' - infinity bullshit.
It is time for politicians, corporations and the general public to step up and take responsibility for their own failings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Iraq: A War of Aggression. No WMDs, No Connection to Al Qaeda
http://www.globalresearch.ca/iraq-a-war-of-aggression-no-wmds-no-connection-to-al-qaeda/532 7548
'"Operation Iraqi Freedom" unleashed a tragedy of immense proportion. More than 3,000 American soldiers and tens of thousands of Iraqis have been killed. Close to 7,000 Iraqi civilians were killed in July and August 2006 alone. In October 2006, the British medical journal the Lancet published a study conducted by Iraqi physicians with oversight by epidemiologists at Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health. The study estimated that 655,000 Iraqi civilians had died since Bush invaded Iraq in March 2003.
Loss of life isn’t the only shocking and awful consequence of “Operation Iraqi Freedom.” The United Nations concluded in its July-August 2006 report that bodies found “often bear signs of severe torture, including acid-induced injuries and burns caused by chemical substances, missing skin, broken bones (back, hands and legs), missing eyes, missing teeth and wounds caused by power drills or nails."'
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Oh yeah, they are.
Hell though, if it was really videogame related they'd be piloting remote controlled vehicles all over the middle East and killing people whilst sitting safely in a shed in some backwater piece of some redneck state and complaining about the PTSD they suffer for it.
Oh...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
It's worth remembering that nothing breeds terrorists faster than being instrumental in the deaths of their loved ones.
Between drone strikes and illegal wars the US has alot to answer for. When it ignores it's crimes can anyone really be surprised that it's victims (or their families) want revenge?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Iraq: a country that DID use WMDs, DID harbor international terrorists, DID invade other countries (twice), and DID commit genocide. The Iraq War wasn't only not illegal, it was technically mandated by the UN genocide convention. What was illegal was anyone voting against it. Don't let Bush's bumbling confuse you into thinking it was an illegal war.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Then the people revolted and we did nothing to help them.
Then we realised we didn't like the price of oil and invaded.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
If your point is our ouster of Saddam was done far too late, I agree. That doesn't negate the rightness of doing so in 2003.
"Then the people revolted and we did nothing to help them."
If your point is we didn't help our Kurdish allies in the north and rebels in the south when we first should have, I agree. That doesn't negate the rightness of doing so in 2003.
"Then we realised we didn't like the price of oil and invaded."
It's always fun to listen to the anti-war in Iraq crowd, since they negate their own arguments so much. Bush wanted to avenge his father, so he had plans to go into Iraq when he first came into office, but he also didn't do so until oil prices weren't what we wanted. The war was illegal, except it would have violated the international charter we signed NOT to go to remove Saddam for his genocidal actions. We can't go to war over oil, instead leaving one of the world's largest oil supplies in the hands of an international gangster crime family that treated its own citizens as its own personal property.
It's very easy and currently in vogue to decry the war in Iraq. Too bad doing so puts you on the side of a genocidal dictator. Too bad doing so ignore the fact that a confrontation with that country was GOING TO HAPPEN one way or the other, and it was better for us to choose the time and place for it. Too bad Saddam said after the Gulf War that his only mistake was invading Kuwait BEFORE getting the nuclear bomb he wanted so badly. Too bad he gassed the Kurds, killing thousands of people in his own country. Too bad we were spending untold amounts of money enforcing a never-ending no fly zone as the only means to ensure he didn't commit genocide AGAIN. Too bad Saddam did harbor terrorists and did financially support suicide bombers in Palestine/Israel. Too bad Saddam turned the oil for food program into his own personal palace-building slush fund.
Christ, are you even listening to yourself?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
No-one is saying Sadam wasn't a bad guy, he really was, but that alone doesn't validate the invasion. It certainly doesn't make the lies told to congress and the American people OK.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
For those reading this string, if you ever want to confirm that someone doesn't know what they're talking about when it comes to Iraq, just wait for them to say "Saddam is a bad guy" and you'll have all the confirmation you need. Saddam wasn't a "bad guy". He was a homicidal crime boss that committed genocide, invaded two foreign nations in aggression, bombed another, harbored terrorists, and previously used WMDs. If you can't take out that kind of dictator, who COULD you take out?
"It certainly doesn't make the lies told to congress and the American people OK."
Well, no kidding. What Bush did was reprehensible. And it wasn't even NECESSARY. The case could have been made on the merits rather than with lies, half-truths, and bad intelligence. I'm not pro-Bush, I'm pro-removing Saddam.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
That can all be applied to the USA. So unless you feel other nations would be within their rights to invade the US I think you need to sit down and work this out.
The timing of the invasion was wrong, the info was wrong the only thing about it was right was the target. That is DoJ style thinking and is certainly not a valid argument for the invasion being legal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Ones who are attacking us or our allies. None others.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
You'd rather abdicate our human obligation to keep genocides from occurring? That's fine if you want that to be your policy, but then we need to remove our signature from the genocide convention....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
"Oh the almighty US of A, please deliver us from our pain and suffering..."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Setting the record straight
The US also implemented Saddam in Iraq to help in the 70s.
Both groups hated each other which can't be said enough.
The US, being run by neocons, ignored Afghanistan and Al Qaeda even though Rumsfeld was given Bin Laden on a silver platter and he opted to ignore it.
The public was lied to with Bush admitting that he committed the War effort to try to privatize Social Security (it's in his autobiography).
He never should have been president. He had the longest vacation of any president. He increased our deficit to fund two illegal wars. He destroyed civil liberties which Obama has continued when there are far better alternatives.
Saddam was nothing more than a target for neocons for oil and the US got kicked out for having a private force (Blackwater) running like an occupation and killing people in the name of the US.
Meanwhile, Cheney makes BILLIONS off of the war effort for guns and murder while the soldiers get the mental health issues.
And when we look at the costs.... The explosions of democracies from the removal of the status quo...
I can't say it was worth taking out a dictator that we installed in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Did invade 2 other countries, the first of which they were both encouraged to do and supported in doing by the US.
The second of which the UN ruled against them on and the provisions of that resolution were what was followed to toss them out of Kuwait, albeit the US went far beyond the provisions of that resolution.
As far as genocide goes, that was awful but historic. It was neither happening nor possible by 1992 never mind 2003 and was not a reason nor justification nor could it be for the glaringly illegal invasion in March 2003, the consequences of which led to far more deaths, maimings and dislocation than even the worst excesses of the al-anfal campaign could be credited with. Apologists for the crimes of the US are nearly as bad as the murderous self enriching assholes at the heart of the US government who brought the US to the depths of ignominy and shame; which is their enduring and ongoing legacy going hand in hand with the full on dismantling of the rule of law within the US the full consequences of which still hang upon a few last remaining threads over the heads of it's citizens.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Huh? The inspectors were sent in in 2002. What does their not having WMDs after 2006 have to do with anything? We did NOT know they didn't have any in 2002, which was the whole point of the inspections farce.
"Did invade 2 other countries, the first of which they were both encouraged to do and supported in doing by the US.
The second of which the UN ruled against them on and the provisions of that resolution were what was followed to toss them out of Kuwait, albeit the US went far beyond the provisions of that resolution."
Again, the sins of our past don't negate the rightness of subsequent actions. In fact, it only strengthens the argument to oust Saddam in order to correct the mistake we made back then. The largest of those mistakes was not removing Saddam in 1993, which has since been corrected.
"As far as genocide goes, that was awful but historic. It was neither happening nor possible by 1992 never mind 2003"
Only because of the no-fly zone, which we put in place, paid for, and in which we were flying the sorties. It's worth remembering that the air patrols over northern Iraq were often times fired upon by Iraqi soldiers. It was only our restraint at the time that kept us from obliterating the soldiers at that time, but that is an act of war.
"the consequences of which led to far more deaths, maimings and dislocation than even the worst excesses of the al-anfal campaign could be credited with."
If you want to play the game of accounting for the consequences of the war, at least play it fairly by listing them all. No longer does the Iraqi government host terrorists like Abu Nidal. No longer are the marshlands burning to the ground, what has been called the greatest ecological disaster of our era. No longer is the Middle East a land of people unwilling to determine their own future, instead rising up against their oppressors. No longer does the government of Qaddafi have WMDs, since he gave them up when he saw Saddam's fate and they are now stored safely in the United States. No longer does our ally Israel have a madman at their gates, one who previously launched missiles into their borders.
Do you really suggest the Arab Spring had nothing to do with our ouster of Saddam? Do you really think the message hasn't been sent to the region that the world will not accept dictators of Saddam's kind? You need to do more than just count up the deaths when it comes to consequences of war, friend....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Seriously?
The fictional justification for the invasion was the claimed existence of the non existent WMD, so what does them not having them over 6 years prior to the invasion have to do with anything?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
There is a truly unfortunate amount of rhetoric in your post, and demostratably false things.
Also, the actions starting the war are NOT justified by the ousting of Saddam, sorry.
You're also negating all the negative consequences (the war has NOT reflected well on the US) such as the undermining of the UN, imposing US brands of justice and government on people who don't want it, and the ruination of the country.
There were people who were worse than Saddam who could have been ousted as well, so saying all this junk about Saddam is just so much crap. It is the ruination of a country for ostensibly doing nothing, and attempting to intimidate the middle east into quieting down.
Cause that's worked so well in the past.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
The United States is the only country to use nuclear weapons in battle, and still has the world's largest stockpile of them.
The United States government ignored requests to extradite Luis Carriles to face terrorism charges. Oh, and don't forget about The School of the Americas
The United States government overthrew the government of Iraq in 1963, bringing Saddam Hussein to power. The US also overthrew the democratically elected government of Iran in 1953. There are at least a dozen other times and places where the United States has intervened in the governments of other countries.
Even a simple scan of the history of the United States will show the blatant genocide commited against the native tribes of the US midwest and west.
By your logic, the rest of the world is not only permitted, but obligated to invade the United States and replace the government.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Incorrect. For a country to lost its sovereignty in the international community, it must break all FOUR:
1. Engage in wars of aggression
2. Commit genocide
3. Harbor international terrorists/gangsters
4. Be in non-compliance with the UN WMD regulations
The US has certainly NOT violated all four of those. Iraq, on the other hand, was guilty of all four on multiple accounts each....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
With Vietnam, Afghanistan, Iraq and many others, the US has engaged in many,many wars if aggression.
The US as well as engaging in terrorism as well as providing financial and material support to terrorists as they did with the IRA and the Congrats they have and continue to harbour terrorists wanted in other countries Luis Posada Car riles to name but one.
As far as WMD goes, non of the nuke poses sing nations have fulfilled or have attempted to fulfill their obligations under the non proliferation treaty which requires them to disarm something they are not even attempting to do and on which no meaningful progress has been made in the 45 years that they, including the US have been subject to that agreement.
So, yes, the US does meet your requirements to be invaded and have regime change enforced on it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Which is rather the point.
When the US and it's tagalongs of the bullied and the credulous invaded;
Iraq did not have WMD or the capability of manufacturing them.
It was not engaged in any form of genocide.
It was not engaged in war with any other country and it was not harbouring terrorists despite much manipulation to play make believe with that.
The invasion of Iraq was a war of aggression, the very crime that Iraq committed and the people responsible for it and the subsequent deaths, maimings etc are at least as criminal as Hussein was.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
2) borerline, how many Iraqis and Afgans do you need t kill before you're genocidal?
3) Check
4) I don't know about "non-compliance" as such but I do know that the availability of WMDs n the worlds markets is largley due to the US's refusal to accept disarment after Russia lost the cold war.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
1. Engage in wars of aggression - likely there are examples of this
2. Commit genocide - Not even close. To suggest this means you don't understand the definition. No specific ethnic group or people was singled out for destruction in whole or part in either Iraq or Afghanistan. Only armed combatants were sought, with no distinction on ethnicity or race made.
3. Harbor international terrorists/gangsters: Please provide examples, as many as you can over the 200+ year lifespan of our country, and let's see what that list looks like. Keep in mind Saddam personally harbored such terrorists himself over a much shorter timespan.
4. Be in non-compliance with the UN WMD regulations - The US absolutely IS in compliance with this treaty. In addition to being an allowed nuclear state, the US has eliminated over 80% of it's deployed nuclear warheads and 90% of its non-strategic warheads in NATO. We're currently in the process of eliminating entire categories of warheads and delivery systems as well. We've also reduced the role nukes play in the military since WWII. The treaty does NOT mandate immediate disarm of nuclear states, but gradual disarming as a prime policy. The US has done that.
All you've proven is that the US does NOT meet the criteria, so this discussion should be over....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
Just as a sidebar, there is no such thing as an allowed nuclear state.
The NPT has two types of signatories, states with nuclear weapons who are promising to disarm and states without nuclear weapons who are promising not to develop nuclear weapons. The only nuclear related thing "allowed" to states is that every signatory nation is "allowed" to develop nuclear power for peaceful purposes, although US interpretation of that is, as is generally the case in their foreign relations, unless we don't like you.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
But you know, if you combined your insane drivel with something that at least gives people a clue as to what the hell your point is, you might get somewhere. As it is, you're just informing me of a well known failure of US foreign policy under the previous administration. Yep, that happened. What that has to do with the article is something you need to make a little clearer.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: HEY, TIMMY, don't forget the illegal WARS:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_control_in_Australia#Measuring_the_effects_of_firearms_laws _in_Australia
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ripping wings off flies
So with my ill conceived logic the introduction of violent video games should show a reduction in animal cruelty and flightless flies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ripping wings off flies
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Responsibility
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Responsibility
And here we see the other responsibility issue people refuse to take action about. It was done with a gun.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Something always has to be the scapegoat and it's video games turn now. Started with comics, then TV, then D&D, then on to video games. I'm sure something in the future will displace video games as the scapegoat.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not to Nit-Pik
2002 - 14 incidents, 15 killed (note: the beltway sniper is counted as 11 separate incidents, which is stupid. This number should be 3 incidents total.)
I believe that should be 4 total - gotta count one of those 11 at least ;)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
He did also report that the number of violent crimes has decreased, which is true, but that's a different thing from mass shootings.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Latest in a loooong line of people pointing fingers at the wrong thing
He was being facetious, of course, but it was evident that he was disturbed by the accusation. It hurt him that this thing he'd made that had entertained several generations of kids and adults was being used as a prop in some idiot's game. This latest iteration is the same old, same old. Let's point an accusing finger at everything and anything; anything to distract from the conversation we need to have about gun control. I wonder what this retired light colonel's stake in the fear is.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The military's job is to break shit and kill. That's what they do. I suspect the good Lt. Col. never had to get out in it and find out just what his branch did do.
You can desk jockey your whole career or you can come in say a psychologist and start out as a Lt. Col., which means he never got promoted if that is the case.
On the whole it sounds like he's someone with enough rank to be stupid and dangerous to those around them. That is exactly what started fraggin' parties in Vietnam is the troops wanted to survive the experience and it was unlikely with leaders such as this bonehead would have been.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Apparently the Lt.Col. has never served...
Grossman was an Army Ranger. His bio is not that difficult to find.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Pshaw
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Go back to the dark ages asshole we have no use for people like you in this age.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Ummmm 9/11
It represents a massive outlier in the number killed, but to be fair about the data it really should be in there.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ummmm 9/11
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Ummmm 9/11
Since Timothy is grouping by year, 9/11 doesn't belong in the 2002 grouping, but the 2001 grouping. If you don't believe me, check out this Wikipedia article on the attacks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Really? I thought the military did that.
*BURN*
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Advertisers spend millions to convince people to buy anything from sugared water to sexy unmentionables because they and their target audience believe those messages, subtle and not so subtle, works. How much did those Stupor Bowl ad spots cost? It is possible to persuade people to buy and to soothe their rage, but impossible to provoke passion and persuade to kill?
There is no comparison between the military and violent entertainment games. Grossman made clear those distinctions in his articles and two books: On Killing and On Combat. Both of which am willing to bet none of his critics here have read. On Killing is on the Marine Corps Commandant required reading list.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Yes, they should.
Not impossible, but highly unlikely in the context of violent media. You need something more personal, or at least more profitable, to manipulate a person into killing.
Which no doubt lends validity to its content and leads to a much healthier attitude toward shooting the enemy in the head.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Good. Then we can say that artists of all stripes are grossly overpaid since their works are essentially worthless.
"Not impossible, but highly unlikely in the context of violent media. You need something more personal, or at least more profitable, to manipulate a person into killing."
If it is not impossible, then that is exactly what Grossman is and have been trying to explain. We do not live our lives in a moral and intellectual vacuum. If we do not receive those moral and intellectual education from our parents, we will receive them from elsewhere, from a family mentor or even a murderer. Entertainment and political commentaries are no different in that regard.
"Which no doubt lends validity to its content and leads to a much healthier attitude toward shooting the enemy in the head."
This tells me you have not read Grossman's books.
The difference between violent entertainment and the military is that the latter is a controlled environment. Under that is the difference that recruits in the military are of sufficient mental and intellectual maturity to understand the atrocity of killing another human being. For an an Air Force guy like myself, that atrociousness is more intellectual than emotional. But for an Army soldier and a Marine, either trooper are required to know killing at a much more physically personal level and that made the atrociousness of the act more emotional.
This crucial difference is exactly what Grossman tries to make clear but people in their knee-jerk reactions to any alleged infringement of the First Amendment rights immediately ignored.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
Why worthless? Does music need to turn savages into princes for music to have any value?
Not impossible in the same way it's not impossible for a beautiful work of art to inspire a person to kill. That's nowhere near likely enough for concern.
That's right. The irony is nevertheless plain to see.
The only difference appears to be that killing in times of war is somehow perceived to be legitimate regardless of the motives for whichever side you're on, and that the role of psychologists like Grossman is to help young cadets come to grips with the emotional consequences of such a necessary act.
You think Grossman would have a bigger problem with that than with fictional violence.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Not impossible in the same way it's not impossible for a beautiful work of art to inspire a person to kill. That's nowhere near likely enough for concern."
Worthless if you consider what Grossman argued to be worthless. Face the music (pun intended), if you honestly believe that the arts have value to the moral and intellectual development of a person, then equally valid would be violent entertainment, especially the interactive kind. Critics like you and the Hollywood types want to have it your way: When someone does something good because of the creative arts, you have no problems putting on false modesty and spew flowery rhetoric on how much you contribute to humanity. But when someone does something bad because of the products that came from those same creative minds, you are equally quick to disassociate the human mind from your products and the same ability to influence.
"That's right. The irony is nevertheless plain to see."
The irony that I see so far is that those who have never read and think about what Grossman wrote have no problems criticizing him and his work.
"The only difference appears to be that killing in times of war is somehow perceived to be legitimate regardless of the motives for whichever side you're on, and that the role of psychologists like Grossman is to help young cadets come to grips with the emotional consequences of such a necessary act."
You do not need to go to war. Look at your own paramilitary peacekeeping forces: the local police. They have the authority to openly bear arms and to kill if necessary in belief of a higher cause. Just like the military does. The common theme here is that both the police and the military are controlled environments in training adults on how and when to kill. They do it in virtual as well as real world conditions. They talk with their veterans, especially those who had to take human lives in the course of their duties, on what it feels like to kill and the emotional toll upon a person after the act.
The creative community glorifies killing, as in making the act enjoyable for the person, at least in the virtual world. The police and military forces do not have that luxury, if anything, they discourages such mentality, because they know that what they learned in training (virtual) they may have to do it in the real world.
"You think Grossman would have a bigger problem with that than with fictional violence."
This is where you and critics like you are wrong. The human mind is the source of our problems and solutions. Anything that influences the mind to solve problems and create solutions deserves scrutiny.
I was in Kuwait City after we booted out the Iraqi Army. I saw the results of what one person did to another, especially to women, and wondered what were in their minds before they did those things and while they were doing those things. I look at the violent video games we have today and cannot help but seriously wonder if Grossman may have understated the effects of uncontrolled provocation of passions in a human mind, especially when the entertainment is interactive like games instead of passive reception from watching movies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Error in article
(note: the beltway sniper is counted as 11 separate incidents, which is stupid. This number should be 3 incidents total.)
Eleven plus three equals the total of fourteen, so shouldn't the total of incidents be four in a sensible world?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Kid does something wrong and you spank them? They'll go tell a teacher and you'll be the one in trouble. Send a kid to bed hungry and you'll get a visit from social services for child abuse. Parents today are afraid to punish their kids and the kids know it. They know that they can get away with almost anything and there will be few consequences for it.
Back when I was little, I was afraid of my father. He wasn't a bad man, but he did have a fairly bad temper and I got swatted more than a few times. I didn't dare do anything that would actually break the law. Unlike today, where the worst thing about a trip to court for most kids is being bored listening to the judge.
Not to mention the "everyone's a winner" mentality that gives kids a sense of entitlement. "Of course you all get stars because you're all winners!"
We're raising a nation of arrogant, over-entitled kids who have no fear of punishment and then we're surprised when they go out and commit real crimes such as murder?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grossman On Violent Entertainment
Religions have nothing to do with good and evil acts. People who are associated with religions often have unexplained sudden compulsion to give some of their monies away or kill others for no reasons.
Charles Manson and other notorious murderers should be excused since we do not know what went thru their minds and are forbidden to speculate on the intangible influential factors that made possible their deeds.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Grossman on Violence
[ link to this | view in chronology ]