The NRA's Press Statement

They called it a “press conference” but NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre read a statement (pdf) and then left.

The big takeaway people are talking about is the NRA’s call to have a cop in every school. I’ll get to that in a moment but first I want to run through a couple of the statements that I found to be problematic.

And here's another dirty little truth that the media try their best to conceal: There exists in this country a callous, corrupt and corrupting
shadow industry that sells, and sows, violence against its own people.

Through vicious, violent video games with names like Bulletstorm,
Grand Theft Auto, Mortal Kombat and Splatterhouse. And here’s one:
it’s called Kindergarten Killers. It’s been online for 10 years. How come
my research department could find it and all of yours either couldn’t or
didn’t want anyone to know you had found it?

Then there’s the blood-soaked slasher films like "American Psycho"
and "Natural Born Killers" that are aired like propaganda loops on
"Splatterdays" and every day, and a thousand music videos that
portray life as a joke and murder as a way of life. And then they have
the nerve to call it "entertainment."

But is that what it really is? Isn't fantasizing about killing people as a
way to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography?

In a race to the bottom, media conglomerates compete with one
another to shock, violate and offend every standard of civilized
society by bringing an ever-more-toxic mix of reckless behavior and
criminal cruelty into our homes — every minute of every day of
every month of every year.

So guns don’t kill people, video games and movies do?

The NRA has rightly fought back against the notion that guns and not people are the problem. To see them try and shift blame and undercut the logic of their own argument is disappointing and beneath them.

It’s always easy to say, “don’t take away my freedom, take away the other guy’s” but we shouldn’t even entertain ideas like that. It’s stupid when liberals set up a choice between 1st and 2nd Amendment rights and it’s not any better when the NRA does it.

A child growing up in America witnesses 16,000 murders and 200,000 acts of violence by the time he or she reaches the ripe old age of 18.

Bull. Again he’s talking about TV, movies and video games. Aside from the fact that not all fictional violence is equal (a slasher movie and say the deaths in Band of Brothers serve very different purposes), fictional violence is…fictional.

Once again, the NRA is simply resorting to the same cheap, emotional tactics we loathe from the left (remember it was Tipper Gore who waged a campaign against the music industry).

Are imagines of violence prevalent in our society? Of course. But who is the proper guardian of what children see, the government or parents?

As parents, we do everything we can to keep our children safe. It is now time for us to assume responsibility for their safety at school.
The only way to stop a monster from killing our kids is to be personally
involved and invested in a plan of absolute protection.

There’s no such thing as “absolute protection”. Again, this is the kind of cheap, lazy argument we’d bash liberals for, it’s no more attractive coming from someone on “our” side.

I call on Congress today to act immediately, to appropriate whatever is necessary to put armed police officers in every school — and to do it now, to make sure that blanket of safety is in place when our children
return to school in January.

What could go wrong will urging the federal government to “act immediately” and to spend whatever is necessary on a project without any time to consider options or the ramifications? The last time we did something in such a knee jerk fashion we got the TSA. How’s that working out for you?

And why is this a federal responsibility or mandate? Shouldn’t these kind of decisions be made at the local school board and community level? How is massive, thoughtless, rushed action a good idea?

There'll be time for talk and debate later. This is the time,
this is the day for decisive action.

Again, how is this a good way to make policy? Oh and you know who would agree with the sentiment if not the proposed policy? Gun grabbers. They’d love to act first and debate later.

As for the NRA’s main idea, cops in every school, it’s an incredible waste of resources.

The Sandy Hook School in Newtown, CT was established in 1956. What would a cop have been doing for the last 56 years? Now multiply that by tens of thousands of schools that have not and will not experience a shooting incident.

One reason that the shootings in places like LA and Chicago don’t make much news and Newtown does it what happened at Newtown is exceedingly rare.

Far more children die crossing the street than at the hand of a gunman in a school. Should we have crossing guards on every street in the nation?

And yes, we have armed guards at all sorts of places, the Capitol, Court Houses, the Holocaust Museum. But those places are all identifiable targets. The overwhelming majority of schools (the proverbial 99.99999%) simply aren't.

Should some schools have cops stationed at them? Absolutely and they do. School Resource Officers do amazing work but they simply aren’t needed in every school house all the time. If a locality or a district wants to have cops in schools, nothing is stopping them from doing that. That doesn't translate into a national mandate to have them or change the cost/benefit analysis.

About all the NRA had going for it today is the idiocy of their opponents.

I’m not sure why the NRA felt the need to talk about this at all. Yes, the media has been hitting them but the media always hits them. The important thing to remember is the media is full of idiots. You don’t see AAA holding a press event when a car is used in a crime.

But if you are going to hold an event and make national news, you should make a strong case for yourself and your cause. I think the NRA has one, they just didn’t make it today.

Posted by: DrewM. at 02:45 PM



Comments

1


So guns don’t kill people, video games and movies do?



Yes, that's exactly his point.


/rolls eyeballs

Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 02:46 PM (ptD6d)

2 The fed should be nowhere near the issue of school safety.

Posted by: RWC at December 21, 2012 02:48 PM (fWAjv)

3
I can find absolutely nothing wrong with what Wayne Lapierre said. Nothing.

It made perfect common sense. And it's about godamm time someone said it.

Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 02:49 PM (ptD6d)

4 if the NRA had just focused on the "right to defend oneself" argument, they would have been on firmer ground

going after the culture is a distraction

Posted by: Jose/ningrim at December 21, 2012 02:49 PM (srIqv)

5 What is it with Republicans/Conservatives/Wingnuts these days? They just read statements and leave!

/Libtards

Posted by: uterus cannon at December 21, 2012 02:50 PM (3ZtZW)

6 Bravo NRA - I think its fighting fire with fire.....! People will now say, we don't have a budget for that, why pay for cops when a few armed teachers could handle this.... voila! Now the "arming teachers" isn't such a bad idea...since we are talking about having armed cops anyway.

Posted by: Kevin C at December 21, 2012 02:51 PM (9kCiU)

7 If a car is used to run someone over, is it referred to as an 'assault car?'

Posted by: Zac at December 21, 2012 02:51 PM (F6KtL)

8 "So guns don’t kill people, video games and movies do?"

That's not the point.

Video games and movies are dehumanizing us, and glorifying death and destruction. They are creating the social norms that claim no moral virtue in restraint, control and respect.

What he said was reasonable.

Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo at December 21, 2012 02:51 PM (GsoHv)

9
I agree that all schools are currently gun free hunting zones for the psycologically distured, something does need to be done about that and 'armed guards' is not it, maybe take away the 'gun free' zones that criminals so obviously ignore and perhaps permit either teachers or maintenence pernoell to carry concealed?

Hollywood does glorify the use of firearms illegally in almost all of their productions, there are a lot of laws on the books for gun ownership, perhaps there needs to be restrictions on the glorification of illegal firearms use as well.

Posted by: Gmac - Who wishes all a Merry Christmas, except for those retards that re-elected the SCOAMF at December 21, 2012 02:53 PM (IanLz)

10 I can find absolutely nothing wrong with what Wayne Lapierre said. Nothing.

It made perfect common sense. And it's about godamm time someone said it.


Are you serious? How in the hell did you come to that conclusion?

Posted by: ElKomandante at December 21, 2012 02:54 PM (k9osu)

11 I think I'm going to order a Hi-Point C9 Saturday Night Special, just because I can, and it costs less than taking four people out to dinner and drinks.

Posted by: toby928© for TB at December 21, 2012 02:54 PM (evdj2)

12
For the hard-of-understanding, here's what Mr LaPierre was saying:

You're barking up the wrong tree, you asshole-totalitarians. Citizens owning guns is not the problem.


Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 02:54 PM (ptD6d)

13 I don't believe Pierre was blame shifting as much as he was pointing out hypocrisy. "You want to blame an inanimate object that does nothing on its own while simultaneously glorifying and promoting every negative use of the object, for fun and profit."

Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 02:55 PM (6H6FZ)

14
Crap, personell.

I can't type and eat at the same time.

Posted by: Gmac - Who wishes all a Merry Christmas, except for those retards that re-elected the SCOAMF at December 21, 2012 02:55 PM (IanLz)

15 I’m not sure why the NRA felt the need to talk about this at all.

You don't?

They're changing the subject. Now the media and Hollywood will defend themselves against these "scurrilous" allegations by the "irresponsible" NRA.

This is how you work PR. We are too honest, stop reading the stage directions.

Nonetheless, it gets them off the front page and now the "conversation" switches to violent video games and video game-like movies.

And in defense of LaPierre, these movies and video games with their violent revenge fantasies are as much to blame as guns.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 02:57 PM (T0NGe)

16
Wayne LaPierre: The NRA didn't create that monster.


Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 02:58 PM (ptD6d)

17 maybe if you lived in a city like LA or Chicago you would realize that cities like those already have armed police on site ... so no, its not too expensive to have cops in schools ...
the Newtown police headquarters is 1.6 miles from the school ... 20 minutes ... let that sink in ... Did they walk ?

Posted by: JeffC at December 21, 2012 02:58 PM (A3tpD)

18 Unless he was saying "ban video games, not guns", I don't really have a problem with what he was saying. I enjoy violent video games, but it's probably safe to say they are a SMALL part of the overall problem. Along with a megaton of other shit. I think that was his point.

Posted by: yinzer at December 21, 2012 02:58 PM (/Mla1)

19 Get a grip, Drew. At this point I'm welcoming any discussion at all on the lack of moral guardrails in this country. Because if one is really honest with themselves, this is the base of the problem.

Posted by: Soona at December 21, 2012 02:58 PM (fQaiK)

20
It's not the violence per se, that I have a problem with...

It's the glorifying of Evil as something that is 'cool'.

Violence done in a fight against evil bad guys is sort ofgratifying to watch.
Goodtriumphing over evil, in otherwords.
But violence done by bad guys that we are supposed tosee as 'cool' and 'misunderstood'...so we're supposed to be sympathetic to them...is not good, imo.

If movies and tv don't have an effect on people...
Then I guess all thatLeftist Propaganda that has been stuffed into movies and shows has had no effect either, right?

Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 02:59 PM (K4wCe)

21
Video games and movies are dehumanizing us

Bullshit.

If they're dehumanizing you (and apparently the mouse in your pocket since we got that royal 'we' thing going) then you stop playing them.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 02:59 PM (TULs6)

22 If you don't believe that constant exposure to pointless violence has no impact on this society...I don't know what to say. And I emphasize the word "pointless". Violence is fine for young minds IF it is coupled with clear cut "good guys" violently dispatching clear cut "bad guys"....think Bonanza. Real life? Not always, certainly, but kids will be dealing with real life soon enough. I'm not calling for a ban on pointlessly violent games, movies, etc., but neither was Wayne LaPierre. However, your damned right high-profile people need to be calling attention to this crap.

Posted by: WVinMN at December 21, 2012 02:59 PM (4Pleu)

23 And I have to tell you, I'm not all that worked up about defending the First Amendment from these anti-2nd Hollywood assholes, not to mention us being in the days in the days when the ACLU doesn't lift a finger to get a political prisoner out of jail for the crime of making a movie.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 02:59 PM (T0NGe)

24 Come see my film that glorifies murder, buy the video game, and hey, let's get these awful guns off our streets.

Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 02:59 PM (6H6FZ)

25
Is that 20 minutes absolutely true and accurate, or just some rumor?

Because I find it very hard to believe.

Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 03:00 PM (ptD6d)

26 Guns are not the problem - guns in the hands of violent people ARE the problem.

It is good to finally see the connection between non stop violence on the screen of what ever media and the killing of innocent people.

It is the NRA which has preached and taught responsible gun handling for over 100 years - and it is the left which has glamorized gun violence from the beginnings of hollywood.

LaPierre hit it out of the park.

If you are going to go down the lame, goofy lane of how depictions of violence doesn't influence people - then those folks who spend millions for a few seconds of commercials to influence buyers sure are getting ripped off.

Posted by: george at December 21, 2012 03:00 PM (qBLA2)

27
maybe it took 20 minutes for their SWAT team to assemble and enter the premises, but there had to have been patrol cars sent their immediately...and then they just hung out outside and waited

Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 03:01 PM (ptD6d)

28 You don't need cops in every school. All you need is someone who can shoot back. If you're not going to let teachers carry, a trained security guard would work. You don't need someone trained to respond to domestic violence, DUI, burglary, and every other offense under the sun. And you don't even need someone with arrest authority. Just somone who can shoot back if necessary, and mostly just be a presence.

Posted by: yinzer at December 21, 2012 03:01 PM (/Mla1)

29 LaPierre: NRA wants to rewind movies to 1958

/Libtard Media

Posted by: uterus cannon at December 21, 2012 03:01 PM (3ZtZW)

30
However, your damned right high-profile people need to be calling attention to this crap.

Because we need to alienate everyone under 35 MOAR by not only talking up birth control bans, but also video games and movies?

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:02 PM (TULs6)

31 simply making a point that most of modern culture is a sewer glorifying our base and vile instincts is in no way saying "take the other guys rights" it is simply saying if you are wondering how such things come to pass you should look over there." no one is saying restrict free speech in movies, video games, comic books, television, or anything else, however, when you see some guy go on a murder spree it is wise to consider his motivation may have come from games that give you points for murdering hookers and running people over.

Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 03:02 PM (Z9EHQ)

32 Until somebody does the very hard work to understand the true root causes of mass murder tragedies, and then works to correct those true root causes, then such tragedies will recur. It's inevitable. Nearly 50 years of increasing gun control is not addressing the problem at its root, but only creates the illusion of effective corrective action.

Posted by: LTMG at December 21, 2012 03:02 PM (egC7r)

33 Pointing out the hypocrisy in The Left's position on guns is a win.

The gun violence displayed in media of all kinds is shocking. Pointing out Kindergarten Killers needed to be done. It is not conservatives who make the decisions to produce these violent games, movies, tv shows, graphic novels, etc.

LaPierre had everybody's attention today, and what he said has to be covered because it's all he said, and the spotlight is on him.

Now let the people responsible for glorifying gun violence explain why it's such a good thing that they make billions a year glorifying gun violence.

Let's start with Jamie Foxx saying how great it was to kill all the white people in his movie, how much fun he had doing it.


Posted by: Boots at December 21, 2012 03:03 PM (neKzn)

34
Why do you deny what you see right in front of your face, entropy?

Kids today are exposed to so much poison and it's reflected in their shitty behavior.

Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 03:04 PM (ptD6d)

35 Good ju-jitsu move I was hoping LaPierre would make. The NRA can gore your ox, too, Statist, gun-grabbing f*ckers. And LaPierre has a stronger argument given that the mind drives behavior. Which molds thoughts more: an inanimate object or media?

Bravo, Wayne. Now keep saying it.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 21, 2012 03:04 PM (eHIJJ)

36 If gun control worked, Chicago would not be Chicago.

As an honest gun owning American, I am not going stand for being blamed for the actions of lunatics.

Is obama going to apologize for Stalin?

No, well, then fuck you.

Posted by: george at December 21, 2012 03:04 PM (qBLA2)

37 nice going, dummy

Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 03:05 PM (ptD6d)

38 Wayne, IMO, just jumped the Shark...

This is EXACTLY like Bob Costas talking about Gun Control on a Sportscast...

The ONLY way Hollywood and Vidoe games will change is with Government intervention... ie.... limiting Freedom of Speech...

So Wayne, speaking for an organization which exists to defend the Second Amendment, puts forth a postion which will have to limit the First?

/Libertarian Facepalm

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:05 PM (lZBBB)

39
Video games do not cause school shootings.

If video games caused school shootings, we'd have 15 million school shootings.

We have about 15 total, not 15 million.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:05 PM (TULs6)

40 end oops.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 21, 2012 03:05 PM (eHIJJ)

41 test

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:05 PM (TULs6)

42 Eh

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:06 PM (TULs6)

43 AmishDude at December 21, 2012 02:57 PM (T0NGe)

This.

The I suspect NRA doesn't give a shit about violence on TV and in video games. It does, however, understand how politics and the MFM work (unlike one particular political party). Obama is already giving campaign speeches about guns, and the NRA is pointing out that there's a root cause to gun violence that needs to be addressed. I don't know that it's entirely clear to anyone what that root is, but the media depictions of violence example at least provides a starting point for the conversation.

Posted by: Xander Crews at December 21, 2012 03:06 PM (24UOj)

44 Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 03:04 PM (ptD6d)

Yet, by all Valid Measurments, Violence is actualy DOWN...

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:06 PM (lZBBB)

45 You know who kills people? Schizophrenics listening to the voices in their heads. Take the gun away and the voice tells them to pick up a knife or for quicker results, the car keys.
You know who kills people? Bangers defending their turf from other gangsters we're better off without - and unfortunately, the innocents who get in the way. If it weren't for the innocents, good riddance.
You know who kills people? The self murderers committing suicide.

First and third categories could be helped if we had fixed the shortcomings of the mental health institutions rather than spent three decades dismantling them.

LaPierre is right about one thing. Guns have been a constant from Revolutionary times, but the level of virtual violence has really spiked in the last couple of decades.

What the DC clown circus will accomplish? A tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.....

Posted by: chuckR at December 21, 2012 03:06 PM (XLu7l)

46 Get the barrel ready.

Posted by: Soona at December 21, 2012 03:06 PM (fQaiK)

47
The NRA can gore your ox, too, Statist, gun-grabbing f*ckers.

WTF are you talking about? That's not THEIR ox you're goring back it's mine you morons.

You think statists are pro-first ammendment?

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:07 PM (TULs6)

48 If the NRA is a viable organization, it should be able to survive replacing LaPierre. If it can't, then it's not worth taking seriously.

Posted by: SFGoth at December 21, 2012 03:07 PM (dZ756)

49 I'm going to have to disagree with almost all of your analysis Drew. La Pierre got the message in November. Emmotion drives. So he fought fire with fire. Does he suggest banning Video games. No, he notes that inviting violent content into our lives, and our children's lives is a problem. And arguably it is. While Video games may not kill people, and movies do not kill people any more than guns do. Our wholesale rejection of common morality does kill people. It's a salient point that we as a people have to change, back to a more virtuous people.

Not lost in me is the media attacked him and his organization for a week solid as the "Real Problem" so he did a reverse trajectory return fire right back on them.

Should you be letting your 8yo watch ultra violent movies, and play ultra violent video games? I think the responsible answer to that is no. And that answer agrees with the premise layed down by La Pierre in a way even the squishy middle mouth breathers who decide their votes based off of recent weather can understand. Emotionally.

Because looking at America and telling them "THIS IS YOUR FAULT!" while true is a non starter. Perhaps if you can get them to examine the corrupting influences in their lives you might get someplace, but you can't do that by attacking them, to do it by attacking those influences.

Again in November, the people of this nation made it clear the content of debates and discussions they were willing to entertain, and that which they would ignore. La Pierre just gave them what they asked for.

Posted by: MikeTheMoose is Shrugging at December 21, 2012 03:07 PM (0q2P7)

50 Statists gore your ox, so you shoot mine and declare victory.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:07 PM (TULs6)

51 They can have my Borderlands 2 when they dig through a mountain of my empty brass and pry it from my cold dead Xbox.

Posted by: Some feller from Arkansas at December 21, 2012 03:08 PM (V2UBn)

52 I'm with soothsayer and wheatie. The problem is not that games and movies are so bad that they make people kill. The problem is the message that they send. The problemis notviolence per se, it's a glorification of mindless, disgusting, pointlessviolence. It's slasher and snuff-type movies that serve no point other than to show violence and bloodshed for its own sake,to revel in new and more disturbing images and to push the limits of what came before,and to cause fear. There are a lot of movies like that out that, and it's a drum-beat of a glorification or at least a celebration ofnihilistic, pointless explicit bloodshed.If that doesn't haveany negative effect at all onthe people who consistently take it in (and not everyone does), then call me a cod.

Posted by: Cogadh at December 21, 2012 03:08 PM (g1xkX)

53
Drew, it was brilliant to bring in video games, movies, and TV. Because lefties have been beating the 1A drum on those a loooong time now and have been making tons of arguments that a kid simply watching a TV show or playing Halo won't magically make him into a murdering lunatic.

And that just because an argument against banning guns. Owning a gun doesn't magically turn a person into a murdering lunatic either.

As for the rest, well, there's what's politically possible. LaPierre did a good job talking about how dumb gun-free zones are, but it's a tough argument to make to arm teachers since lefties are culturally opposed to that. But lefties can't credibly oppose police officers, since those are the guys they want us to call when we get into trouble. And in the wake of the anti-gun Left's newfound fiscal conservatism, if it's too expensive then the NRA will train any school administrator under their new program for free.

LaPierre turned the narrative around on its ear and put the ball squarely where it belongs.

Posted by: JohnTant at December 21, 2012 03:08 PM (eytER)

54 Here is one option to fund school protectors

Enlist retired law enforcement officers of which there are over 500,000 in NY alone to draw from for example. You would draw from the retirees in other states.

Give them a $55.00 dollar per-diem to cover travel and lunch.

You would have 2 per school.

There are 180 days in a school year.

That comes to $20,000.00 for the two school protectors.

They have health insurance and main income from their pension.

The state and fed will pass a law to make the income from these school protector duties tax free below $25,0000.00

The average elementary school has 1,000 students that would amount at max to $25.00 per year per student or $0.14 cents per day.

Most parents shell out more than 20x that number per day to buy school lunches for their children.

That's just one real attempt to solve the problem that is workable and has a realistic shot at stopping these incidents.

The lefts solution is to ban "scary" guns and limit the number of rounds a clip can have and expnad "gun free zones" which would do absolutely nothing to prevent these incidents from occurring but would make you feel better because, "WE DID SOMETHING"

Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 03:09 PM (RrD4h)

55
Yet, by all Valid Measurments, Violence is actualy DOWN...

Shhhhh.

You can't get pointless legislative action without fear mongering.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:09 PM (TULs6)

56 Oh and Drew is a dick.



Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 03:09 PM (RrD4h)

57 Posted by: JohnTant at December 21, 2012 03:08 PM (eytER)

Soon to be heard Lefty Headline... NRA supports Censorship!

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:10 PM (lZBBB)

58 Come on...Tarantino's new black Birth of a Nation has made racism funny again.

Posted by: zsasz at December 21, 2012 03:10 PM (CRLoc)

59
Because lefties have been beating the 1A drum on those a loooong time now and have been making tons of arguments that a kid simply watching a TV show or playing Halo won't magically make him into a murdering lunatic.

That's not lefties that's libertarians you morons.

I know you think it's the same thing but trust me, it's not.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:10 PM (TULs6)

60 I am currently looking at my Maverick model 88 bullpup. It may only be a pump but will probably be one of the first the assholes come after. Time to dig.

Posted by: JimboHoffa at December 21, 2012 03:10 PM (qEZxt)

61 he never calls for banning or doing anything restricting anyone's first amendment rights.

he does point out that there are other potential causes for the violence. it is useful to do so since everyone is focusing all of their attention on guns.

LaPierre was right. Not much point it tearing him to shreds for something he did not say. mfm is going to do that anyway.

He made good points and he presented them well. let him have his win.

Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 03:12 PM (Z9EHQ)

62
"going after the culture is a distraction"

Exactly. And not as you think.

The hyperemotional rush to ban guns had to be short-circuited. All those presstitutes, soccer moms, and assorted examples of ignorance needed to be shown a shiny object. Distracted. Step One: Hold The Line.

In the coming days, WLP the NRA and everyone who supports the 2A will be ridiculed by the ususal suspects over this, but in doing so the conversation about its merits and alternatives *will* be had. Step Two: Turn their flank.

When the conversation is had, with time to think, time to come up with alternatives, time to get the ignorant somewhat educated. we can get something we want. Or we can simply maintain the status quo through gridlock. Step Three: Roll up resistance.

Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 03:12 PM (4I3Uo)

63 LaPierre has a valid point about the ultra-violence that can be found in movies and video games. They make murder and death appear commonplace.

It turns them into entertainment.

How can this be good?

Posted by: Jones in CO at December 21, 2012 03:13 PM (8sCoq)

64
38...The ONLY way Hollywood and Video games will change is with Government intervention... ie.... limiting Freedom of Speech...

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:05 PM (lZBBB)

----------

Maybe it's not the only way.

All other industries have to be concerned with Liability for the products that they produce.
But the Entertainment Industry gets to hide behind the 1st Amendment.

Perhaps if they were worried about having to pay damages to victims, they might police themselves.

Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:13 PM (K4wCe)

65 Let's consider what LaPierre said (with my comments added)

And here's another dirty little truth that the media try their best to conceal: There exists in this country a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry that sells, and sows, violence against its own people.

Sells, and sowing ... that sounds like someone providing a service/information ... that IS what the Media does ...


Through vicious, violent video games with names like Bulletstorm,Grand Theft Auto, Mortal Kombat and Splatterhouse. And here’s one:it’s called Kindergarten Killers. It’s been online for 10 years. How come my research department could find it and all of yours either couldn’t or didn’t want anyone to know you had found it?

Kindergarten Killers? Why hasn't the news media, or at least any of the various Liberal, anti-violence coalitions, been screaming bloody murder about this? But this has been around for 10 years?!?!?!? Why didn't the various Liberal, anti-violence coalitions say or do something? Why?


Then there’s the blood-soaked slasher films like "American Psycho" and "Natural Born Killers" that are aired like propaganda loops on "Splatterdays" and every day, and a thousand music videos that portray life as a joke and murder as a way of life. And then they have the nerve to call it "entertainment."

"Splatterdays" ... a thousand music videos that portray life as a joke and murder as a way of life."

How many children emulate what they see on TV? Emulating TV stars is one of the major sources of income for stars. Where are the Liberal, anti-violence coalitions when things like this happen???


But is that what it really is? Isn't fantasizing about killing people as a way to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography?

Do I need to comment here?


In a race to the bottom,media conglomerates compete with one another to shock, violate and offend every standard of civilized society by bringing an ever-more-toxic mix of reckless behavior and criminal cruelty into our homes — every minute of every day of every month of every year.

A comment I saw at Hot Air yesterday ( http://tinyurl.com/bpr57f9 ) sums this up nicely:

"I added this comment to a CNN story recently.

The exploitation of the deaths of innocents, the trauma of the survivors, the grief of the families, and the horror of the nation for

ratings and profits by these mega-corporations has gone on for too long.

It is time for a rational discussion of reasonable media controls.

Do it for the children.

Took them less than 5 minutes to delete it.

agmartin on December 19, 2012 at 3:09 PM
"


LaPierre is correct.

... and it seems that the Rhode Island prof who twittered about wanting L's head in a stick, got a visit by his campus police ... and shut his mouth.

... heh.

Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 03:14 PM (MgGyQ)

66
59, disagree. Al and Tipper Gore were all about the music and game ratings system until they wanted to get into higher politics. The Hollywood masters of the Democrat Party told them to ease up on the talk, and ease up they did.

There may be common cause between the Left and the Libertarians on the issue, but it's a mistake to think the Left doesn't defend Hollywood violence under the 1A with the same zeal as Michael Moore chasing down a bagel.

Posted by: JohnTant at December 21, 2012 03:14 PM (eytER)

67 Reply to Entropy, 30....
"Because we need to alienate everyone under 35 MOAR by not only talking up birth control bans, but also video games and movies?" Reading comprehension is not you're strong suit I see.
"I'm not calling for a ban on pointlessly violent games, movies, etc.,"

Posted by: WVinMN at December 21, 2012 03:14 PM (4Pleu)

68 @63


It isn't good.

So leftists like Drew say our gun culture has made us violent, but our culture-culture has no bearing?


Right.

These guys are wicked smart!

Like Boehner!

Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 03:16 PM (RrD4h)

69 Michael Moore doesn't chase down bagels. He traps them in his gravity well and they come to him.

Posted by: SFGoth at December 21, 2012 03:16 PM (dZ756)

70 and I know the moron horde includes a lot of gamers, and you are certainly pre-disposed to reject LaPierre's comments about video games

mustn't take away your precious HALO


YES YES "But I play HALO regularly and haven't shot up any schoolrooms!"

Good. Good for you. And you're sure everyone is like you?

Posted by: Jones in CO at December 21, 2012 03:17 PM (8sCoq)

71 I'm not down with moral relativism. Right and wrong need to be defined again. And there's text and practice that supports those ideas. The US used to hold those standards high.

Political correctness is also killing us. It's part of the moral relatavistic meme. It prevents anyone from being honest.

Posted by: Soona at December 21, 2012 03:17 PM (fQaiK)

72
"I'm not calling for a ban on pointlessly violent games, movies, etc.,"

There's no other reason to talk about it in a political context.

The fact that he didn't say that explicitly is meaningless, since when do they ever tell you what they're going to do explicitly? It's all misdirections and games anyway.

Trust me, start bitching about video games in a political context and people WILL think you want to ban video games. Whether it's warranted or not.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:17 PM (TULs6)

73 I have no problem with what he said either. Where did he say we should ban anything? You're way off on this Drew. It's about damn time that Hollywood libs, the MFM etc. all of them had it turned on them. Fuck them with a red hot poker. Flipping the mirror back on the Pierce Morans of the world is exactly the right track to take.

Posted by: Minnfidel at December 21, 2012 03:18 PM (bXdYS)

74 That would have to be one stupid, confused monkey.

Posted by: jwest at December 21, 2012 03:18 PM (ZDsRL)

75 The reason I hate this "blame media" stuff is because I'm fucking sick and tired of people wanting to ban things, take things away and legislate us back to Happy Times. It doesn't work like that.

I don't care if it's just a political maneuver. That's what everything is these days! This is not getting tough, this is pointing the finger at something else.

Now, do a Google news search for "Kindergarten Killer." The media is already publishing this headline:

NRA Blames 10-Year Old Game for Sandy Hook.

Fuck the media.

Posted by: ElKomandante at December 21, 2012 03:19 PM (k9osu)

76
Good. Good for you. And you're sure everyone is like you?

Yes.

We don't have 15 million school shootings. We have 15 million copies of HALO and15 school shootings over a decade.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:19 PM (TULs6)

77 Hey, why don't we compromise and just repeal the ENTIRE Bill of Rights?

Posted by: Rodrigo Borgia, Pope Alexander VI at December 21, 2012 03:21 PM (w9BpZ)

78 Someone else pointed out, contrary to some hysterical posts here, LP never once called for a ban on these movies and games.

He merely rubbed the media's nose in what they are purposefully ignoring.

Posted by: george at December 21, 2012 03:22 PM (qBLA2)

79 Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:13 PM (K4wCe)

Problem is that to be Liable, you have to proove Causation...

Ergo, its not just that someone played a game then shot up someplace, you have to proove it caused it...

Or, do you want to create a Legal Structure where you do NOT have to proove that? Where EVERYTHING is responsible for everything?

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:22 PM (lZBBB)

80 Come on...Tarantino's new black Birth of a Nation has made racism funny again.

Posted by: zsasz at December 21, 2012 03:10 PM (CRLoc)


CNN is reporting that Jamie Foxx listened to Notorious BIG while getting into character for his race motivated murdering spree on film.

nope, there's NO racism or racist implications in the black community. Ever.

Posted by: © Sponge at December 21, 2012 03:22 PM (UK9cE)

81 The guy stepped in it. He has no clue how to handle the press in crisis scenarios. He was so anxious to punch back at the wind-bag politiciansthat he was tone deaf to what he himself was saying.
He should've not engaged the press at allfor at least a few more weeks and addressed a well-prepared strategy to America's gun owners. These things will settle down over time. Instead, he fanned the flames. How stupid.

Posted by: Manolo at December 21, 2012 03:22 PM (aO1W9)

82 American Psycho does not "glorify" violence anymore than Clockwork Orange. I guess retards incapable of understanding basic literary themes might miss the point (which is admittedly easier to see in the books), but you might as well attack Romeo and Juliet for glorifying suicide.

Now excuse me, I need to return some videotapes. Viddy well.

Posted by: Wooga at December 21, 2012 03:23 PM (DZ6fq)

83 Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:19 PM (TULs6)

Its the same arguement as Global Warming...

We have Warm Weather, and CO2 is up, so it must be CAUSED by the CO2! and the Science is SETTLED!

We have violent video games and movies NOW.... and although we have about the same amount of Mass events as before... it MUST be caused by video Games!

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:24 PM (lZBBB)

84 There's no other reason to talk about it in a political context.

The fact that he didn't say that explicitly is meaningless, since when do they ever tell you what they're going to do explicitly? It's all misdirections and games anyway.

Trust me, start bitching about video games in a political context and people WILL think you want to ban video games. Whether it's warranted or not.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:17 PM (TULs6)

you are making an unnecessary leap. he said what he said - do not put words in his mouth. you are not helping anyone by undercutting his argument on the right. no one wants any of their rights minimized.

he is correct in his point and in putting it out there it is in the conversation. mfm is going to ridicule and ignore it as they would with anything he said short of agreeing with them.

he is supposed to protect gun rights - it is his job.

Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 03:24 PM (Z9EHQ)

85
Let's just ban people.

Turn the whole country into a giant nature preserve.

Everyone has until next Thursday to find somewhere to scootbefore we gas the place.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:25 PM (TULs6)

86 >>>Owning a gun doesn't magically turn a person into a murdering lunatic either.

I've found people that get into owning guns on their own later in life go through an interesting maturing process regarding their public behaviors.

Posted by: uterus cannon at December 21, 2012 03:25 PM (3ZtZW)

87
you are making an unnecessary leap.

I'm making an unnecessary leap that will be made by 85% of low info voters regardless of whether it is necessary.

There's no political context in which video games need be discussed. It's the same thing with birth control. Rick Santorum doesn't want to ban it, he just wants to 'talk about it' is all. Just like with this.

Except everyone thinks he really wants to ban it, because why else talk about it?

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:26 PM (TULs6)

88 He was stupid because he forgot who he was going up against: the mainstream liberal press.Shooting from the lipis no matchagainst journalists who buy ink by the barrel.

Posted by: Manolo at December 21, 2012 03:27 PM (aO1W9)

89 He should've not engaged the press at allfor at least a few more weeks and addressed a well-prepared strategy to America's gun owners. These things will settle down over time. Instead, he fanned the flames. How stupid.
Posted by: Manolo at December 21, 2012 03:22 PM (aO1W9)

nope, he was exactly right - he was getting vilified, and wrongly so, for not having done or said anything earlier every day. he made a statement and walked off. nothing good would have come from taking questions from a hostile mfm.

Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 03:27 PM (Z9EHQ)

90 Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 03:24 PM (Z9EHQ)

Once again... the ONLY way to reign in violent Video games and Movies, is with Government intervention.

So to even bring it UP, will allow the LEFT to make that connection.... JUST LIKE I AM...

Tomorows Lefty Headline... Even the NRA wants Censorship...

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:27 PM (lZBBB)

91 @75

No the point is the left and the media claim Americans exercising their 2nd Amendment rights has led to a "gun culture" that creates the breading ground for violence.

It is completely decoupled from the wider culture of violence that video games, rap video and violent movies pump out to the masses.

What is more apt to warp someones mind and perceptions of the relative worth of a human being:

A) A young adult who goes with his father to a shooting range to practice shooting.

B) A young adult sitting in his room playing a violent video game wherein he shoots and kills as many humans as he possibly can in the most grotesque possible manner?


Buchanan was right, LaPierre is right.


Fuck Drew!

Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 03:27 PM (RrD4h)

92
The left doesn't want to ban guns either.

They just want to talk about it. That's all. A discussion.

"This country needs to have an open discussion about violence in video games".

You just caused a run on Gamestop.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:28 PM (TULs6)

93 I do agree though that the media shares most of the blame for our culture's sorry state.

The difference is, I don't think the government should do anything about it. I really don't know how you regulate it, and conservatives being moral police is not going to sell to anyone, including most fellow conservatives. This is something engaged parents need to step up to the plate on, government bureaucrats aren't going to shield your kids from the toxic world.

We didn't have shootings like this 30 years ago because our culture and values were much stronger, despite the fact that gun laws were essentially non existant. Getting a gun was easier than buying a beer.

The NRA is smart to point the finger at both the media and our policies regarding the mentally unstable.

Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 03:28 PM (kQLBd)

94 After wasting too much time watching Ted last night, I followed it up with Inglorious Bastards.

That movie too was a waste of time, but Tarantino has a tremendous pension for VIOLENCE and soulless, emotionless, conscious free death and destruction.

Nah....no way that influences weak and feeble minds. Nope. Not possible.

Posted by: © Sponge at December 21, 2012 03:28 PM (UK9cE)

95 >>YES YES "But I play HALO regularly and haven't shot up any schoolrooms!"

This kinda reminds me of Chris Rock. "You're not *supposed* to! What, you want a cookie?"

Posted by: uterus cannon at December 21, 2012 03:29 PM (3ZtZW)

96 There's no political context in which video games need be discussed. It's the same thing with birth control. Rick Santorum doesn't want to ban it, he just wants to 'talk about it' is all. Just like with this.

Except everyone thinks he really wants to ban it, because why else talk about it?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:26 PM (TULs6)

and where is the leap going to occur? in the mfm. they can have the discussion of banning guns or banning games and everyone can watch them fall all over themselves arguing over banning one thing or another.

some times instead of seeing if you can prove how smart you are it is better to stuff a sock in it and toe the line.

Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 03:29 PM (Z9EHQ)

97 Something I say a lot: Government and society are not the same thing.

If Mr. LaPierre wants to say "we as a society have devalued life through a culture of violence, and need to take a good look at ourselves" he's certainly within his rights to do so. I might even agree with him.

Once he says "government needs to make society better by passing laws meant to change the culture" I have a problem. I didn't hear that today.

Not going to lie, I wanted to hear about how the NRA will resist any efforts by the gun-grabbers. Maybe attempting to change the narrative and make lefty heads explode is part of the strategy. (I said maybe, I don't know.)

That said... the feds have no business in providing school security. Do we really need a TSA for schools?

Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 03:29 PM (WDCYi)

98 I like that the NRA turned the blame game right back on the media and called them out for producing violent movies and video games.

Why not? This is trench warfare. Those fucks want a scapegoat? Let see how it feels.

Fuck 'em.

Good on the NRA for taking zero shit from these gun grabbing ghouls. The best defense is a good offense.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:29 PM (HzhBE)

99 Entropy: "You think statists are pro-first ammendment?"

Yes and no, but the Statists most in question is the MFM punditocracy. They are Progressive to the core and presumably represent "free speech". Now we know it's a lie because their approved speech is selective, but that is their pose and most of the public accepts it (wrongfully). By attacking their position of free speech (that they must publicly advocate for appearance's sake), you can force them to defend "their" turf. They'll be outrageously outraged that someone pointed out that maybe their contributions have a more malevolent impact on society. The response is that they'll need to give ground to the NRA lest they appear even more hypocritical than they already are.

So they aren't pro-1st but they need to appear so. LaPierre just accuses them of equal or more complicity in contemporary violence to force them to rhetorically defend Rights.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 21, 2012 03:30 PM (eHIJJ)

100 There have been cops around for the last 50-some years who are doing nothing all day, and they could very well be school cops. Also, the disgusting and violent video games are just that--disgusting and violent. Admit it! Grow up!

Posted by: AgathaPagatha at December 21, 2012 03:30 PM (YEim0)

101 Once again... the ONLY way to reign in violent Video games and Movies, is with Government intervention.

So to even bring it UP, will allow the LEFT to make that connection.... JUST LIKE I AM...

Tomorows Lefty Headline... Even the NRA wants Censorship...
Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:27 PM (lZBBB)

mfm is going to lie either way. he read a statement and put it online if mfm wants to misrepresent the truth they will as they always do. he said what he said and did not make any calls for censorship.

Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 03:31 PM (Z9EHQ)

102 That goddamn Elvis Presley, sexualizing music and leading to this.

Posted by: SFGoth at December 21, 2012 03:31 PM (dZ756)

103 The media wanted to have a "national conversation" about gun violence, so let them have one--and their role in it.














Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:31 PM (HzhBE)

104 I like that the NRA turned the blame game right back on the media and called them out for producing violent movies and video games.

Why not? This is trench warfare. Those fucks want a scapegoat? Let see how it feels.

Fuck 'em.

Good on the NRA for taking zero shit from these gun grabbing ghouls. The best defense is a good offense.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:29 PM (HzhBE)

yep.

Posted by: yankeefifth at December 21, 2012 03:32 PM (Z9EHQ)

105 The Koala Bear eats shoots and leaves.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 03:33 PM (NIZHJ)

106
The media wanted to have a "national conversation" about gun violence, so let them have one--and their role in it.

Warden, they just want to talk about the role it plays in our society. They don't want to ban it.

Are you done laughing yet?

OK have you guessed what most people are going to think when you decide to have a "discussion" about therole violence in video games or birth control plays in 'society'?

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:34 PM (TULs6)

107 <i>Also, the disgusting and violent video games are just that--disgusting and violent. Admit it!</i>

Sure, I admit it. They're also entertaining as all hell for some of us. I don't want to play freaking Pokeman. I don't even want to play sports games all the time. Gimme God of War, Fallout, Borderlands and Lollipop Chainsaw.

Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 03:35 PM (WDCYi)

108 My monkey could have reasoned out LaPierre's statement better than DrewM. Monkey for coblogger!

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 03:35 PM (m2CN7)

109 A press conference involves speaking to the press not necessarily letting them jack the message with their stupid ass questions. Presstitutes are supposed to be impartial and not in the tank for the Jug-eared fuck who flunked out of college.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 03:36 PM (NIZHJ)

110 98
I like that the NRA turned the blame game right back on the media and
called them out for producing violent movies and video games.

Why not? This is trench warfare. Those fucks want a scapegoat? Let see how it feels.

Fuck 'em.

Good on the NRA for taking zero shit from these gun grabbing ghouls. The best defense is a good offense.



Posted by: Warden

I completely agree.
Obviously the NRA is not going to push censorship, this is a media strategy, and it's damn effective because people are not focusing on the tool anymore. As the saying goes, if guns cause crimes, mine must all be defective.

A shooting like this SHOULD be no different than if some maniac drove his car down the sidewalk and hit a bunch of people. The car would be irrelevant to why it happened.

Some conservatives need to understand that getting what we want in terms of public policy means we have to "play the game" and this is an effective PR strategy.

Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 03:37 PM (kQLBd)

111 Someone can admit to the effect violent entertainment has on immature or undeveloped psyches without calling for them to be banned.You just attempt to deal with the consequences that freedom sometimes brings.

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 03:38 PM (m2CN7)

112 Entropy,

No one called for a ban on video games. All the NRA did was say, "Maybe you fuckos ought to take a good look at yourselves before trying to put this on us."

Plus the attacked Obama. They went after everyone that fucked with them.

100% win. All day long.

The GOP should take some lessons from it.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:38 PM (HzhBE)

113
79 Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:13 PM (K4wCe)


Problem is that to be Liable, you have to proove Causation...

Ergo, its not just that someone played a game then shot up someplace, you have to proove it caused it...

Or, do you want to create a Legal Structure where you do NOT have to proove that? Where EVERYTHING is responsible for everything?

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:22 PM (lZBBB)

-----------

Aren't we already there?

Lawyers sue for Liability...for everything...already.
Except for things that are labeled 'entertainment'.

When sociopathic behavior is featured and promoted as some sort of accomplishment...and then someone watches it and goes out and reinacts it in real life...
That seems like Causation to me.

Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:39 PM (K4wCe)

114
No one called for a ban on video games.

I'm not calling for a ban on guns. I just want to talk about it, that's all. No ban - just discussion about roles in society.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:39 PM (TULs6)

115
That seems like Causation to me.

Raindances then.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:41 PM (TULs6)

116 Besides, fuck the media's 1st amendment "right" to produce this crap. The Founders never imagined violent first person video games when they wrote the Bill of Rights.*

*Isn't that their argument against your 2nd amendment right to own a semi automatic rifle?


Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:41 PM (HzhBE)

117 Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:39 PM (K4wCe)
liability is usually based on what a reasonable person would be expected to do.

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 03:41 PM (m2CN7)

118 [I'm not calling for a ban on guns. I just want to talk about it, that's all. No ban - just discussion about roles in society.]

You may not be, but Obama is.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:42 PM (HzhBE)

119 If we need to complain about all the violence in movies, tv and video games, shouldn't we also notice most of those depictions involve guns?

Aren't we just desensitizing kids to the inherent power of fire arms?

I don't see this as a road the the NRA wants to go down.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 03:42 PM (6cEN2)

120 You know what I think we need more of? Infighting!
.
I don't really think that, I'm just a "shit on your allies" bandwagon-jumper.

Posted by: Merovign, Dark Lord of the Sith's mobile at December 21, 2012 03:42 PM (i3Zbv)

121 YES YES "But I play HALO regularly and haven't shot up any schoolrooms!"

Good. Good for you. And you're sure everyone is like you?


In fact, you could make the argument that HALO, etc. is exactly how kids like the Newtown shooter form their fantasies.

I've argued that the real problem is atheism. These kids don't believe in a "scorekeeper in the sky" so why not just blow people away? What negative consequence is there?

Of course, such kids are deranged and we don't organize our society around deranged people but so it is with guns.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:42 PM (T0NGe)

122
Someone can admit to the effect violent entertainment has on immature or undeveloped psyches without calling for them to be banned.You just attempt to deal with the consequences that freedom sometimes brings.

Intellectually, sure.

In a political context, when you hear someone say they want to talk about the negative effects of guns in our society, what do you think they want?

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:42 PM (TULs6)

123 It's not video games and it's not guns. It's a country educated one way or the other that there's no real right and wrong.

BUT we have to start the conversation somehow. LaPierre was right in, at least,introducing another symptom in this nation's sickness.

Posted by: Soona at December 21, 2012 03:42 PM (fQaiK)

124 In September, the U.S. Consulate is attacked and liberals vow to limit the 1st Amendment.

In December, a school is attacked and liberals vow to limit the 2nd Amendment.

2013 will be a bitch.

Posted by: Adirondack Patriot at December 21, 2012 03:43 PM (iAUf+)

125 Except everyone thinks he really wants to ban it, because why else talk about it?

You know why there is almost no smoking in movies these days?

There wasn't a law, Hollywood just decided what it didn't like.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:43 PM (T0NGe)

126
These kids don't believe in a "scorekeeper in the sky" so why not just blow people away?

Um, maybe they have empathy?

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:43 PM (TULs6)

127 It's a good strategy for slowing down the rush to pass something. Time is the NRA's ally. By making a rational case for the consideration of multiple scapegoats he makes it easier to fracture his opposition. Sun Tzu would have applauded.

Posted by: Gristle Encased Head at December 21, 2012 03:43 PM (+lsX1)

128 Jesus, I hope some of you never play poker with real money. La Pierre is attempting to derail a lockstep narrative and change the terms of the debate. If censorship of films and games actually comes up, the pushback from the left will be instant and massively hypocritical.

Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 03:43 PM (6H6FZ)

129 I'm the mother of a now 22 yo man, a 16 yo almost man, and a 12 yo boy. The 2 older ones have played Halo, Nazi Zombies (is that right?), those kind of first person shooter games. The oldest played Halo at the national tournament level. At various times during their adolescence, we had to limit game playing time because we could see the adrenalin rush high they got would begin transferring over into real life: shortened temper, increased aggressiveness toward siblings, etc. Neither of my game-playing boys were "unstable" or medicated for emotional issues or had conflicted parental relationships, etc. But if we saw behavior in "normal, healthy" teen-age boys impacted by a moderate dose of gaming, what does unrestricted violent games and movies do to the brain of someone teetering on the edge of problems?
It isn't something to dismiss out of hand.

Posted by: muzjik at December 21, 2012 03:44 PM (NA0Dq)

130 Aren't we just desensitizing kids to the inherent power of fire arms?

I don't see this as a road the the NRA wants to go down.


I disagree wholeheartedly. The NRA wants the correlation between guns and proper use to be as close as possible. Irresponsible gun use gives gun ownership a bad name.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:44 PM (T0NGe)

131 The next time a video game shoots up a kindergarten we can have this discussion. The gunman was also wearing shoes. Ban those.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 03:44 PM (NIZHJ)

132 Warden, you're either missing my point or evading it.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:45 PM (TULs6)

133 [La Pierre is attempting to derail a lockstep narrative and change the
terms of the debate. If censorship of films and games actually comes up,
the pushback from the left will be instant and massively hypocritical.]

Bingo.

He's just giving back what they're giving him.

It's simple game theory. An eye for an eye.


Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:45 PM (HzhBE)

134 You left out "Grow up!" Why don't you grow up! Put down the Xbox. Read a book once in a while for cryin out loud.

Posted by: AgathaPagatha at December 21, 2012 03:45 PM (YEim0)

135 In September, the U.S. Consulate is attacked and liberals vow to limit the 1st Amendment.



In December, a school is attacked and liberals vow to limit the 2nd Amendment.



2013 will be a bitch.


Sequestration. Got an extra bed in the house.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:45 PM (T0NGe)

136 @119

Again you doofus clown, the left and the media claim Americans exercising their
2nd Amendment rights has led to a "gun culture" that creates the
breading ground for violence.

It is completely decoupled from the
wider culture of violence that video games, rap video and violent
movies pump out to the masses.

What is more apt to warp someones mind and perceptions of the relative worth of a human being:

A) A young adult who goes with his father to a shooting range to practice shooting.

B)
A young adult sitting in his room playing a violent video game wherein
he shoots and kills as many humans as he possibly can in the most
grotesque possible manner?



Buchanan was right, LaPierre is right.

WE WANT THE CONVERSATION, BRING IT ON!

Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 03:45 PM (RrD4h)

137 These kids don't believe in a "scorekeeper in the sky" so why not just blow people away?

Um, maybe they have empathy?


Why should they? They're sociopaths.

Besides, empathy isn't as ingrained as you might think. If it were, we couldn't have surgeons.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:46 PM (T0NGe)

138 Entropy,

Obama and others called for gun control. Period. Not just a "conversation." Actual gun control.

The NRA did not call for a ban on violent media.

What's your point?

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:46 PM (HzhBE)

139
what does unrestricted violent games and movies do to the brain of someone teetering on the edge of problems?

The same thing doorknobs do. Make them go crazy. (hence why we call them 'crazy').

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:46 PM (TULs6)

140 But regarding something like video games, I don't know what the laws are, and I consider myself to be a civil libertarian, but I'm a civil libertarian for ADULTS.

I'd have no problem with some sort of rule where certain violent games you have to be over 18 to purchase.

Considering we have the same rules if you want to buy say a Playboy magazine, I don't think it will kill us to have something like that. If anything, you could argue society would be safer letting 14 year old boys look at pictures of naked women than playing realistic shoot em ups all day.

I'm sure kids will still get their hands on violent video games, but at least parents would be a little more involved if they were forced to actually purchase the game for their kid.

Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 03:47 PM (kQLBd)

141 Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:44 PM (T0NGe)

So seeing guns used in a fictional setting contributes to people acting in violent ways but maximizing access to real guns leads to responsible behavior?

This will be a hard sell to people who aren't already fully committed to agreeing with you.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 03:47 PM (6cEN2)

142 @124

Then quartering of soldiers is next up if they're going in order.

Can they quarter some of those hawt Israeli female soldiers at my place?

Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 03:47 PM (WDCYi)

143 In a political context, when you hear someone say they want to talk about the negative effects of guns in our society, what do you think they want?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:42 PM (TULs6)

Though both sides are guilty to varying degrees, I would say it depends who is saying it. Someone from the Right or from the Left ?

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 03:48 PM (m2CN7)

144 It's the crazy that is the problem.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 03:48 PM (NIZHJ)

145
Warden,

My point is, when you hear people talk about 'just discussion', what do YOU generally think they're doing?

It's got shitall to do with Obama. When you hear this language employed toward other targets like guns, what do you figure the angle to be?

If someone wants to'have an open discussion' about the 'negative effects' of guns/video games/birth control on 'society', half of everyone is going to assume the speaker actually wants to ban them and is trying to weasle his way toward it.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:48 PM (TULs6)

146 Entropy,

I'm fine with it. It's a shot across the bow.

I bet most parents would be good for restricting access to violent media for children under 18.

And that prospect is one that scares the shit out of Big Media.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:50 PM (HzhBE)

147 Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 03:45 PM (RrD4h)

So there was this time when a bunch of high-profile NFL/NBA players were shooting guns outside of night clubs and I saw an ESPN "report" on guns and sports.

The feature of their article was a baseball player who had a shooting range on his property and it showed him using yellow goggles and protective earmuffs.

Yeah, 'cause when they come downtown at 1am with their earmuffs and yellow goggles, you know shit's gonna get real.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:50 PM (T0NGe)

148 Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 03:45 PM (RrD4h)

So when the NRA says only criminals are responsible for their actions, not third parties like responsible gun owners or the NRA, what they mean is only some 3rd parties aren't to blame.

Why it's almost like that's a self-serving argument designed to deflect attention away from them an onto other people who aren't doing anything illegal.

How noble.


Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 03:50 PM (6cEN2)

149 134 You left out "Grow up!" Why don't you grow up! Put down the Xbox. Read a book once in a while for cryin out loud.
Posted by: AgathaPagatha at December 21, 2012 03:45 PM (YEim0)

Get bent. I'm a taxpaying adult who works, reads a lot, plays hockey, and likes his video games.

Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 03:50 PM (WDCYi)

150
This is literally the Rick Santorum Birth Control Argument with some window dressing.

Rick Santorum does not want to ban birth control. He just thinks it's very important we talk and talk about how horrible it is.

And you know damn well as I do, whether he actually wants to or not (maybe he doesn't) half the country thinks he wants to ban birth control.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:50 PM (TULs6)

151 I like what LaPierre said because it will make the Hollywood one-percenters sweat. Put the pressure on them to remove guns and violence from all of their movies. Not that I really want that to happen, I just want that argument to be as visible as the gun control argument.

It's a two-fer. Raise their taxes and take away their market.

Posted by: Marmo at December 21, 2012 03:51 PM (QW+AD)

152 [Why it's almost like that's a self-serving argument
designed to deflect attention away from them an onto other people who
aren't doing anything illegal.

How noble.




Posted by: DrewM.]

It's politics. Why are you being such a purist?

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:51 PM (HzhBE)

153 So seeing guns used in a fictional setting contributes to people acting
in violent ways but maximizing access to real guns leads to responsible
behavior?


Sorry, but House of the Dead is a whole different animal to holding a real heavy gun in your hand.

This will be a hard sell to people who aren't already fully committed to agreeing with you

I'm used to it. People who disagree with me tend to be very stupid.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:52 PM (T0NGe)

154 I took this to be LaPierre's resignation speech. He pretty much came out against everything his membership stands for and he really obviates the need to even own guns if we are going to go in for this sort of nanny-statism.

No way this guy should be allowed to keep his job and there is no way in hell he speaks for me or most of his membership.

I understand he is hoping to turn the tables and change the optics and I get that it is a swipe at the left who dominates the media and culture. So what? It still violates all of our principles as a free people.

Dumbass!

Posted by: Voluble at December 21, 2012 03:52 PM (qYvEa)

155 Maybethey should makeallthe shooting video games where the good guys are killing the bad guys.Turn the brainwashing around.

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 03:52 PM (m2CN7)

156 "How’s that [TSA] working out for you?" I think it's working well. We haven't had another 9-11 scale attack, and I give the TSA part of the credit for that.

Why do people keep slamming the TSA? Most of the complaints seem to be petty resentment by travelers over the inconvenience of being searched and questioned by people they perceive to be lower class than themselves.

Air travel is stressful for a lot of people, and some of them lash out cattily at every little stupid slight or glitch they think they've endured. There was a reality show years ago (forget the name of the show) about how airline personnel have to deal with the thoughtless self-centered entitled-attitude shit-stirrers that help make travel hellish for everybody. The TSA has to deal with those whiners and adult-babies, while doing an important job. Then the whiners go on to fill the sensationalist media with their sob-stories.

Face it, there has to be airport security, because we live in a world full of jihadis and assorted nutbags who want to kill us in flight. Travelers ought to man-up, and blame the bad guys for the inconvenience, instead of blaming the good guys! If air travel isn't secured by a force like the TSA, then how does it get done?

Posted by: gp at December 21, 2012 03:52 PM (mk9aG)

157 Have you ever once seen a serial killer not wearing shoes?

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 03:53 PM (NIZHJ)

158 Entropy,

I get your libertarian concerns. I do.

I just don't give a shit anymore. I care more about my 2nd amendment right to own a high capacity magazine than the media's so-called right to market violent games and movies to kids.

If it works, I'll take the tradeoff.

I think this works.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:53 PM (HzhBE)

159
117Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:39 PM (K4wCe)


liability is usually based on what a reasonable person would be expected to do.

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 03:41 PM (m2CN7)

-----------------------

It depends on the product.

With Drugs, there are lawsuits over the 'side effects'.
Not everyone experiences those side effects...but some people do.

Drugs are pulled off the market for the side effects that happen to a few.

Why can't that happen with 'Entertainment Products' as well?

It's the messaging that I am talking about.
Glorifying sociopathic behavior...results in more of it.

We can still have lots of gratuitous violence...just show a good reason for it.
As in, showing it as a way to defeat bad guys and evil.

Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:53 PM (K4wCe)

160
I bet most parents would be good for restricting access to violent media for children under 18.

And that prospect is one that scares the shit out of Big Media.


Um... yeah. Not just Big Media. Not just Libertarians and Big Media.

Libertarians, Big Media, 60% of independents and 80% of everyone under the age of 30 and 100% of everyone under the age of 18.

Why don't we just ban movies. That's gotta be a winner. You know Hollywood HATES it so it must be a good idea.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:53 PM (TULs6)

161 Wait a second:

Has it been proven that that Lanza fuck murdered a bunch of innocent people because of video games and movies?

Or is it just old people scared of young people and the moving picture box?

Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 03:54 PM (88Ldu)

162
Drugs are pulled off the market for the side effects that happen to a few.

Why can't that happen with 'Entertainment Products' as well?


Because some people can actually distinguish between correlation and causation.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:54 PM (TULs6)

163
Or is it just old people scared of young people and the moving picture box?

Now that's some winning optics, right there. 2014 here we come.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:55 PM (TULs6)

164 Entropy,

We treat kids differently than adults. That ship has sailed. You play with the rules in front of you, not fantasy ones.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:55 PM (HzhBE)

165 I'm starting to feel like Bill Murray in Meatballs - 'It Just Doesn't Matter!'

No matter what is said, the MFM can turn it into anything. For a recent example, Churches not wanting to PAY for birth control, after being shoved into the MFM transmogrifier becomes 'Repubs want to stop ACCESS TO birth control.'
LaPierre could say anything, but It. Just. Doesn't. Matter. NRA is bad, guns are bad, Hollywood is great!

Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at December 21, 2012 03:55 PM (UU0OF)

166 Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:39 PM (K4wCe)

Then you just put the liability on every History book that has any war in it... because teh winnahs got stuff...

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:56 PM (lZBBB)

167 It's all that racist Quentin Tarantino's fault.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 03:56 PM (NIZHJ)

168 "As for the NRA’s main idea, cops in every school, it’s an incredible waste of resources."

Yes, it is. And when the left argues back that point, then offer up volunteer trained and armed teachers, administrators, and parents as an alternative. What are they going to do, argue that a Victoria Soto isn't as motivated or brave as any cop could be?

Posted by: Socratease at December 21, 2012 03:56 PM (iVBDH)

169
If it works, I'll take the tradeoff.

That's not how it works.

You don't gain any security from trading liberty.

You will not get more secure second ammendment rights by compromising the first. You will end up with the worst of both.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:57 PM (TULs6)

170
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:51 PM (HzhBE)
I'm not being a purist. I'm not committed to the defense of the NRA. I'm not a member and I don't think they are anything but a bunch of shills.It's like the Catholic Church and the contraception mandate. They don't mind ObamaCare, they just don't want to be impacted by it.The NRA doesn't care about freedom per se, they care about pushing their agenda. Fine. That's what they get paid for. It's also why I'm comfortable for calling them out for being as hackish as their opponents are.I'm not interested in protecting the 2nd Amendment that calls the 1st into question. That's what they are trying to do and it's bullshit.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 03:57 PM (6cEN2)

171 The easiest thing is to take down the stupid "Gun-free school" sign and replace it with a "Responsible, trained people in school have a gun."

I don't own any guns. But I'm really glad that criminals think that I might.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:58 PM (T0NGe)

172
We treat kids differently than adults. That ship has sailed. You play with the rules in front of you, not fantasy ones.

So you're totally over that whole parental rights and parental responsibility thing?

The ship we're on now is regulating how you raise your kids?

And you figure you'll win that one???

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 03:58 PM (TULs6)

173
[You don't gain any security from trading liberty]

It's all theoretical. You threaten my liberty? I'll threaten yours.

Video games aren't going to be banned.

But making some noise about media responsibility? That's a winner in my book. Shove that self righteous bullshit right back in their faces.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:58 PM (HzhBE)

174 From the anti-censorship hysteria here it should be obvious La Pierre has made his point. Gamesmanship. It wins.

Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 03:58 PM (6H6FZ)

175 Posted by: gp at December 21, 2012 03:52 PM (mk9aG)

uh.... TSA has not found a SINGLE bomb... yet they keep tightening restrictions.

"Those who choose saftey, over Freedom, will end with neither"
Benjamin Franklin

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 03:58 PM (lZBBB)

176 It's also why I'm comfortable for calling them out for being as hackish as their opponents are.

And that is why you lose.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:59 PM (T0NGe)

177 Yeah, it sucks having to use the left's tools against them. Should we be above it? Depends if you want to win. It's like when Clarance Thomas called the Democrat Senators a "high-tech lynch mob." It was playing the race card big time, just like they do. And it worked.

Posted by: Socratease at December 21, 2012 03:59 PM (iVBDH)

178
"It's politics. Why are you being such a purist?"

Drew obviously broke out the Jergens and rubbed the little "l" on his libertarian until it turned into a big "L". Then it splattered all over his post.

Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 03:59 PM (4I3Uo)

179 [So you're totally over that whole parental rights and parental responsibility thing? ]

You can't sell alcohol and cigarettes to minors. Has the world ended?

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:59 PM (HzhBE)

180
161 Wait a second:

Has it been proven that that Lanza fuck murdered a bunch of innocent people because of video games and movies?

Or is it just old people scared of young people and the moving picture box?

Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 03:54 PM (88Ldu)

-------------

This guy lived in his mom's basement.
It has been confirmed, that he spent most of his time, playing violent video games.

It's kind of hard to not connect some dots there, in how this affected him.

Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 03:59 PM (K4wCe)

181 You can't sell alcohol and cigarettes to minors. Has the world ended?


Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:59 PM (HzhBE)


Yet every teenager can get Cigarettes, and Liquor.... so your point?

Posted by: Romeo13 at December 21, 2012 04:00 PM (lZBBB)

182
"How’s that [TSA] working out for you?" I think it's working well. We haven't had another 9-11 scale attack, and I give the TSA part of the credit for that.

There is nothing to say, except I am the god of hellfire and I bring you to burn.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:00 PM (TULs6)

183 Armed security wouldn't cost a dime. Fire every semi-retarded coach Sandusky on the faculty and replace him with a cop. None of the coaches at one of my schools could have passed the GED. Why carry all that dead weight.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 04:01 PM (NIZHJ)

184 I just don't give a shit anymore. I care more about my 2nd amendment
right to own a high capacity magazine than the media's so-called right
to market violent games and movies to kids.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 03:53 PM (HzhBE)


Fuck that Warden. This is my exact point. You're willing to trade the freedom of others (people who make the games and enjoy them) for your own.

I've never owned a gun but I'm wiling to respect, defend and advocate for your rights. You're not willing to do the same for mine.

Fuck it then. Let the liberals come grab your guns. Why should I or anyone else who doesn't own a gun give a shit?

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:01 PM (6cEN2)

185 @148

Your irreducible imbecility knows no bounds.

Of course the criminal is solely to blame, but the leftists are attacking the 2nd Amendment and claim it's concomitant "gun culture" is responsible for the epidemic of violence, that is completley decoupled from the wider culture.

All LaPierre is saying, "FUCK YOU BUDDY GET YOUR OWN HOUSE IN ORDER BEFORE YOU COME AT US!"

Also, you happen to be dick!

Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 04:01 PM (RrD4h)

186 Since you don't mind the violence in the video games I say they start putting in nudity and rape. That shouldn't effect anyone either. Where is the line some of you libertarians draw or is there one?

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 04:02 PM (m2CN7)

187 It's laughable there's people really upset that their precious video games are going to get banned. You're not going to be able to ban anything short of child porn in this country.

What the discussion might to do is not allow a 12 year old to buy an ultra violent video game whenever they want, similar to how he can't go into an R-rated movie or a buy a Hustler magazine.

Now if you're 12, I can understand being really worried about LaPierre's speech, but otherwise, it's absurd to scream about censorship when it comes to children. Is there anyone that really believes a kid should be able to consume any sort of media they want without any laws? I don't even think an ACLU lawyer would try to argue that.

Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 04:02 PM (kQLBd)

188 Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 03:59 PM (T0NGe)

You are conflating supporting constitutional rights with supporting a particular advocacy group. They aren't the same thing.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:02 PM (6cEN2)

189
It's all theoretical. You threaten my liberty? I'll threaten yours.

Problem here is they threatened your liberty, so you turned around started threatening mine to get back at them.

Unless your goal is to swell the ranks of 'them' by drawing in a bunch of non-combatants I think you may be doing it wrong.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:03 PM (TULs6)

190 God help us. I'm going shooting.

Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 04:03 PM (6H6FZ)

191 Take that liberals! If you don't back off, we'll piss off the libertarians! That'll show you.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:03 PM (TULs6)

192 This guy lived in his mom's basement.
It has been confirmed, that he spent most of his time, playing violent video games.

It's kind of hard to not connect some dots there, in how this affected him.


Now I will point out here that he was unhinged. Most people can tell the difference, even if they are dulled a little bit by the experience.

So he filled the void with something and his experience with video games probably was a huge factor in what he decided to do. Maybe if he'd seen cowboy movies, he'd've been stymied because his mom didn't own a horse, I don't know.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 04:03 PM (T0NGe)

193 [Fuck that Warden. This is my exact point. You're willing to trade the
freedom of others (people who make the games and enjoy them) for your
own.]

Fuck that. You're willing to let someone else's taxes get jacked up to save your own ass.

This is a fun game.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 04:04 PM (HzhBE)

194 So, the position of the leftist media is that media can be used to change social views of gay marriage by presenting positive images of gays, but realistic images of violence have no effect whatsoever?

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 21, 2012 04:04 PM (azHfB)

195 Oh, some journalist was mad on Twitter because LaPiere took no questions and just read a statement. I guess he's fine with SCOAMF doing just that for 4 fucking years though.

Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at December 21, 2012 04:04 PM (UU0OF)

196 And to be honest, Drew, I don't think the 1st amendment covers your inalienable right to sell violence to kids.

That's more my point.


Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 04:05 PM (HzhBE)

197 Delurking here.

As others have pointed out LaPierre is working to diffuse the messaging, not calling for a ban on video games nor will a ban be even remotely likely. Your copy of Halo and my copy of Fallout are safer than my magazines or semi autos my an order of magnitude. He knows that and we all know that. Let's see if it works and how it plays out. Just imagine how "effective" he would have been spending 20 minutes talking about the founders, BOR, meaning of militia in the 18th century vs 21st, definition of arms vs ordnance and full of references to Federalist 46...

He is correct however. These killing were rare before the mass media age. Even the first of note, the clock tower shooter Whitman had a big old brain tumor and himself, in moments of clarity, knew he was wrong. The VT shooter by comparison sent NBC a video News Release to run after the shooting -- which they did, of course. But freedom is not clean and neat and that goes for the 1st, 2nd or 4th. The good with the bad and occasional evil or live as a drone in a controlled society.

Myself, I like using the booze gambit as well. Point out to the facebook posting drone how his drinking puts more innocents in the ground each year though just DUI related deaths alone. "Why do you love children killed by guns more than those killed by a receptionist after a few too many jello shots at happy hour?" It even opens up the prohibition discussion where you can talk about how bans themselves simply don't work. I just completely shut down a big rolling rant with that one.

Now, I'll crack a Sierra Nevada "Torpedo" and start up a new game of Fallout (I know it's dated but not much else exciting em these days except for Skyrim) perhaps playing as a slave trader this time.

Posted by: Keith at December 21, 2012 04:05 PM (NYPPE)

198
Since you don't mind the violence in the video games I say they start putting in nudity and rape. That shouldn't effect anyone either. Where is the line some of you libertarians draw or is there one?

There isn't one.

Nudity is fine. Don't like it, don't buy it, don't let your kid play it.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:05 PM (TULs6)

199 @194


AND THIS MY FRIENDS IS THE THREAD WINNA!!!

Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 04:05 PM (RrD4h)

200 Drew ... Drew ... Drew....

LaPierre is using asymmetric warfare. It has been widely reported that the Newton shooter spent hours, many, many hours playing video games. One day we'll know the titles of the the games he played.

The MSM went ballistic (so to speak) as LaPierre was speaking. Hollywood is out front calling for gun bans because big money is on the line. Video game tie-ins with movies and TV are lucrative for the studios. Hollywood and the popular culture control the message, and the NRA is jamming the frequency (Kenneth).

Posted by: mrp at December 21, 2012 04:06 PM (HjPtV)

201
Oh, some journalist was mad on Twitter because LaPiere took no questions and just read a statement.

I like that.

Boehner did that too. Everyone should start doing that all the time.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:06 PM (TULs6)

202 Fuck that. You're willing to let someone else's taxes get jacked up to save your own ass.

This is a fun game.
Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 04:04 PM (HzhBE)

It might be fun but you're not particularly good at it.

Where did I say I was willing to let someone else's taxes go up? And how would it save my own ass?

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:06 PM (6cEN2)

203
Oh, and anyone who thinks that violent media and video game immersion can't possibly result in a desensitization to violence and killing needs to read "On Combat" by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman.

The military has been using similar methods to create infantrymen for years. The difference there is that they can do it within a controlled structure - not an open society. No, I am not advocating a ban, Drew.

Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 04:07 PM (4I3Uo)

204 I just don't see getting worked up over a little rhetoric about violent media.

No one is going to ban violent movies and games for adults.

It's a tactic.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 04:07 PM (HzhBE)

205 There isn't one.Nudity is fine. Don't like it, don't buy it, don't let your kid play it.
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:05 PM (TULs6)

What about simulated rape since simulated murder is cool?

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 04:08 PM (m2CN7)

206 You are conflating supporting constitutional rights with supporting a particular advocacy group. They aren't the same thing.

You're filing their briefs for them. LaPierre didn't say anything about censorship, but you jumped to it.

Look how much pressure Hollywood gets now: smoking, "no animals were hurt" (it's more than just not hurting animals, its about calling in animal rights groups to monitor the set).

Sorry, I can't get worked up at a reducto ad absurdum argument.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 04:08 PM (T0NGe)

207 I'm sure that Pres**ent Obama will reach out to the NBPP to have them disarm first, as a show of trust.

Posted by: Hank Johnson at December 21, 2012 04:09 PM (e8kgV)

208 The press is the enemy. No one should ever answer their questions at a press conference. They aren't supposed to be the star of the show, just the ass holes who read the copy. Crucify them.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 04:09 PM (NIZHJ)

209 >>Problem here is they threatened your liberty, so you turned around started threatening mine to get back at them.Not to go all "Can't we all just get along?" but they threatened OUR liberty. All of ours.

Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 04:09 PM (WDCYi)

210
I just don't see getting worked up over a little rhetoric about violent media.

No one is going to ban violent movies and games for adults.

It's a tactic.


And it's having it's desired effect. What else was it suppose to do, besides piss off gamers and gin up game-haters?

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:10 PM (TULs6)

211 To recap what has been said since I asked my question:
By glorifying violence and gay marriage the media is making kids into homosexual mass-murderers?

So yeah, old people are scared of young people and the moving picture box. Got it.

Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 04:10 PM (88Ldu)

212 Where did I say I was willing to let someone else's taxes go up? And how would it save my own ass?
Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:06 PM (6cEN2)

Even my monkey knows he was talking about Plan B.

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 04:10 PM (m2CN7)

213
What about simulated rape since simulated murder is cool?

Many Japanese games already do that.

I'm not really into it but no, I don't think it should be banned or stopped. If they want to make a rape game, they can make a rape game. I won't buy it.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:11 PM (TULs6)

214 Entropy,

Gamers aren't the entire electorate.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 04:11 PM (HzhBE)

215 Drew,

I thought you were on about the "purists" who won't compromise on tax increases.

If I have that one wrong, I apologize and withdraw said snark.

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 04:12 PM (HzhBE)

216
194So, the position of the leftist media is that media can be used to change social views of gay marriage by presenting positive images of gays, but realistic images of violence have no effect whatsoever?

Posted by: Gregory of Yardale at December 21, 2012 04:04 PM (azHfB)

----------

This.

I have been trying to make the same point.

If the Media/Entertainment industry is not capable of influencing people...then they have been wasting their time stuffing all those Leftist themes into their work.
Right?

And they should refund all that money for Advertising...because people cannot be influenced by what they see on tv.

Posted by: wheatie at December 21, 2012 04:12 PM (K4wCe)

217
So yeah, old people are scared of young people and the moving picture box. Got it.

Winning optics with the low info voters, right there.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:12 PM (TULs6)

218 I don't see that as a call to ban games, it's a call for the media to get off their ass and find other causes of gun violence than the mere ownership of guns.

You can't control violence in a soup of violence-soaked games, videos, and cable channels by blaming the gun. That's beyond stupid.

Posted by: Mr. Whipple at December 21, 2012 04:13 PM (fklmM)

219
Let's ban Dungeon and Dragons. That one hasn't been hit in a while, it might feel fresh again.

Wait, sorry... I mean I want to have a discussion about the effects of Dungeons and Dragons on society.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:13 PM (TULs6)

220 Sock off.

Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 04:13 PM (fklmM)

221 Bet this thing doesn't make gun manufacturers happy as there is quite a bit of licensing that they are getting by having their guns in games and movies

Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 04:15 PM (tw6Ar)

222
Gamers aren't the entire electorate.

Are you saying you think game-haters are a winning electoral coalition? Go for it, I guess.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:15 PM (TULs6)

223 I have yet to run anyone through with a broadsword.

Those pederast news readers in the tight dungarees are to blame for all of this.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 04:15 PM (NIZHJ)

224
Really. Let's attack the one part of the culture complex we're winning.

Gun culture. We need to get these guns out of video games and off TV so that kids don't grow up thinking that owning a gun is cool.

That will help us protect 2nd ammendmen... WAIT A FUCKING MINUTE...

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:16 PM (TULs6)

225 LaPierre rocked. Anyone can nitpick all they want, but he did throw it all back into the laps of the lefties and the media, exactly where it should be. Cloward-Piven them to their demise, just as they have done to our country. His aim was spot on.

Good on him!

Posted by: RondinellaMamma at December 21, 2012 04:16 PM (53riN)

226
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:15 PM (TULs6)

too many stupid people who still seem to think gaming is for the young folk

Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 04:16 PM (tw6Ar)

227 Entropy,

54% think video games create violence. 69% at least somewhat concerned about the level of violence in video games.

http://tinyurl.com/c4kejr3

Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 04:17 PM (HzhBE)

228
Oh, we got those liberals good.

Now the liberals are scared because they know if they piss us off again, we'll stab ourselves in the eye. That'll learn em!

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:17 PM (TULs6)

229 We did run some asshole who didn't know what E-Mail was 4 years ago.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 04:18 PM (NIZHJ)

230 Couldn't disagree with you more about the cost of cops in schools, Drew. How much do we spend to fireproof schools that never catch fire?

Posted by: packsoldier at December 21, 2012 04:19 PM (cyCEf)

231 Oh polynikes, I have no expectation of you ever being right. Stay golden.

http://minx.cc/?post=335779

Yes, Plan B was a good idea from a GOP perspective but I don't care about that....

From a "Let It Burn" perspective, it's a terrible idea. Anything that
plays into the myth that all we need is a little tweak in revenue and
some relatively minor spending cuts to pull us out of our entitlement
and spending death spiral, is simply a band aid that will only make the
inevitable reckoning that much worse.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:19 PM (6cEN2)

232 We did run some asshole who didn't know what E-Mail was 4 years ago.

No. McCain did know exactly what email is. He didn't use it because his shoulders don't work.

Yet another "I can see Russia from my house".

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 04:20 PM (T0NGe)

233 How much do we spend to fireproof schools that never catch fire?

Negative. We spend money pulling out asbestos.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 04:21 PM (T0NGe)

234 If banning or censoring video games was a winning proposition with a majority of the electorate, liberals would have already jumped on it.

They love censoring shit.

Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 04:21 PM (88Ldu)

235 LaPierre should have just said 'Mr. Lanza was not a member of the NRA, he did, however, watch MSNBC.'
Then just walk away.

Posted by: Schwalbe: The Me-262© at December 21, 2012 04:21 PM (UU0OF)

236
We need to get these guns out of video games and off TV so that kids don't grow up thinking that owning a gun is cool.

'Cuz 2nd ammendment.

(Brought to you by the people who think Plan B could have passed the senate if not for Justin Amash).

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:22 PM (TULs6)

237 Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 04:17 PM (HzhBE)

So if gun ownership starts polling badly, we should let the gun grabbers win?

This is the problem with rights, you have to defend them even when you don't like them.

The Constitution says the same thing about video games as it does high capacity magazines....nothing. It's the principle of the rights that have to be defended.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:22 PM (6cEN2)

238
Yet another "I can see Russia from my house".

Heh! And they say the bullshit coming out of the movin' pitcher box has no effect on people's perceptions.

Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 04:23 PM (4I3Uo)

239 Yep. Just read the transcript. Not one call to ban video games. So much for that.

[ here ---> http://home.nra.org/pdf/Transcript_PDF.pdf ]

This was a carefully worded pushback against a corrupt media, followed by a rational, powerful argument for guns, in general, and a call to have armed personnel in schools, just like we do surrounding the SCOAMF and Mrs. SCOAMF.

It was also a notice of action being taken.

So all in all, damn fine job.

Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 04:24 PM (fklmM)

240 Posted by: packsoldier at December 21, 2012 04:19 PM (cyCEf)

I didn't say I opposed cops in schools (quite the opposite in fact) I said I opposed a federal mandate and blank check to do it.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:24 PM (6cEN2)

241 Let the gamers whine, you can't please everyone.

Anyone who's concerned about REAL threats to our liberty understands that they really are coming for our guns. They're not going to take Halo away.

When you have actual Governor's like Cuomo talking about door to door roundups, that's where the focus of serious libertarians needs to be.

And if there was an actual bill to ban violent video games for adults? I'll be fighting alongside fellow libertarians for that as well.

But right now, the NRA is about the only hope we have, and I'm sick of this attitude of the "perfect being the enemy of the good".

And for what it's worth, I think anyone who says the media has zero effect on our children is being intellectually dishonest. Something tells me if this kid grew up in the 80's and played Super Mario Bros all day, this wouldn't have happened.

Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 04:25 PM (kQLBd)

242 La Pierre should have just freaked out and mowed down the press corpse.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 04:25 PM (NIZHJ)

243 >>press corpse

What you did there. I see it.

Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 04:26 PM (WDCYi)

244
Something tells me if this kid grew up in the 80's and played Super Mario Bros all day, this wouldn't have happened.

That's because you're immune to reason or evidence.

Sandy Hook was 27 dead? HALO totally caused the record school shooting of 28 people in like 1938 or something. If only Super Mario had been more popular before Lincoln came along...

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:27 PM (TULs6)

245 I think everyone is getting it wrong.

WLP and the NRA are framing the debate in a way that can be used against the Left. There are ratings on TV, movies and video games, but they are largely ignored by the public. Now the Right can point to these ratings and say "Why is a child of x years old (playing a game|watching a (movie|tv show)) that's rated ((T|M|AO)|(TV-MA)|(PG-13|R)) when the level of violence is something that they cannot process correctly in their developing minds?"

The NRA can also say "There are Fire Protection systems in place in schools that are there to limit the damage from fire, so why shouldn't we have a system in place to protect the students from something that acts and spreads far faster than fire does?" If the naysayers are against this, then the argument can be flipped into "You don't care about the safety of the children." like what the Left has been doing to the Right for years.

Posted by: Smokey Behr at December 21, 2012 04:28 PM (QyeW7)

246 >>Something tells me if this kid grew up in the 80's and played Super Mario Bros all day, this wouldn't have happened.
Remember the wave of violence from Contra, Jackal, and Bionic Commando?

The horror.

Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 04:28 PM (WDCYi)

247 Butters: "La Pierre should have just freaked out and mowed down the press corpse."

...while saying, "My gun does my talking now. Free Speech!"

I denounce myself. Probably.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at December 21, 2012 04:29 PM (eHIJJ)

248
[So if gun ownership starts polling badly, we should let the gun
grabbers win?]

No, I was responding to the claim that it was a bad POLITICAL argument.


Posted by: Warden at December 21, 2012 04:29 PM (HzhBE)

249 Although I'm happy to see a call for armed guards at schools, the fact is, too many small schools wouldn't get any sort of real protection there. Think TSA, not Sheriff Taylor.

What we need is an end to gun-free zones. Teachers who carry concealed is a far better idea than relying on some nice old guy with a bullett in his shirt pocket (because you know they won't let him have a high-cap mag).

Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 04:29 PM (fklmM)

250
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:27 PM (TULs6)

Jeffery Miller was a Dennis the Menace fanboy

Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 04:30 PM (tw6Ar)

251
Now the Right can point to these ratings and say "Why is a child of x years old (playing a game|watching a (movie|tv show)) that's rated ((T|M|AO)|(TV-MA)|(PG-13|R)) when the level of violence is something that they cannot process correctly in their developing minds?"

Um.... exactly?

Was the point to make me hate republicans more completely? It just might work.

You think this is winning, go for it. 2014: Revenge of the Geriatric.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:30 PM (TULs6)

252 Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 04:24 PM (fklmM)

He said media companies bring "criminal cruelty" into homes and that media companies "act as silent enablers, if not complicit co-conspirators."

People who are co-conspirators to a "criminal" act generally wind up in jail.

Maybe LaPierre was being cute but the implication of what he said was clear.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:30 PM (6cEN2)

253
Jeffery Miller was a Dennis the Menace fanboy

Society made him do it.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:31 PM (TULs6)

254 Entropy anyone who would not restrict simulated rape entertainment should be hated by Republicans not the otherway around so complete your hate.

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 04:32 PM (m2CN7)

255 27

maybe it took 20 minutes for their SWAT team to assemble and enter
the premises, but there had to have been patrol cars sent their
immediately...and then they just hung out outside and waited


Posted by: soothsayer in a barrel going over the cliff at December 21, 2012 03:01 PM (ptD6d)
http://tinyurl.com/bo34ona-The recordings begin at 9:35 a.m. with a dispatcher calmly reporting a 911 call about “somebody shooting in the building...-“I will need two ambulances,” one dispatcher says five minutes after the initial report.-Three minutes later came the first hint of casualties, a person in Room 1 with a “wound to a foot.”It sounds like they immediately made entry and began searching the building. After the initial gunfire (which, according to the article continued for at least 2 minutes after the 911 call) it appears that Lanza shot himself at 9:49 while police were in the building.A small rural department may have only had a handful of cops on duty to search what appears to be a decent sized building.
This is something that concerns me. Back a few years ago, there were reports of "probes" of schools and school buses by unknown middle eastern males. Many of these occurred in rural areas where police response will be slower due to geography and numbers.

Posted by: elliot at December 21, 2012 04:32 PM (blkVM)

256 Other than gun owners, is there a larger group of people in the U.S. more accustomed to concerned busy bodies constantly advocating an abridgment to their rights than gamers?

I think a better use of public relations power would be building relations between gamers and gunners, not pitting them against each other.

Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 04:32 PM (88Ldu)

257
Maybe LaPierre was being cute but the implication of what he said was clear.


Sounds just like the "Big Gun" accusations I'm seeing from wannabe gun grabbers everywhere.

Posted by: ConservativeMonster at December 21, 2012 04:32 PM (xHaTb)

258 And look at it more closely, it wasn't just games: he was pointing out the ridiculous level of hypocrisy over guns by a media in love with, and fully engaged in promoting a violence-soaked culture.

So no, it was not about the video games.

Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 04:33 PM (fklmM)

259 Bah. Not sure why the formatting is Fucked up.

Posted by: elliot at December 21, 2012 04:33 PM (blkVM)

260 It's funny that almost everyone seems focused on the media stuff, there was plenty of other crap from the statement.


Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:33 PM (6cEN2)

261 Teachers who carry concealed is a far better idea than relying on some
nice old guy with a bullett in his shirt pocket (because you know they
won't let him have a high-cap mag).


Better, you don't even have to arm teachers. Just allow for the possibility. That's all. Johnny Antihero won't live out his little Matrix fantasy if it'll be over in 2 minutes.

And it is abundantly true that they seek out the vulnerable.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 04:34 PM (T0NGe)

262 >>Other than gun owners, is there a larger group of people in the U.S. more accustomed to concerned busy bodies constantly advocating an abridgment to their rights than gamers?

Fast food consumers?

Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 04:34 PM (WDCYi)

263 Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 04:34 PM
(WDCYi)

don't forget smokers

Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 04:35 PM (tw6Ar)

264
Entropy ... should be hated by Republicans not the otherway around

So totally winning my vote there.

I bet you still have the audacity to bitch if I don't vote for Jeb Bush in 4 years.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:35 PM (TULs6)

265 >>Fast food consumers?

I can confirm there is some significant overlap here.

Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 04:36 PM (88Ldu)

266 "He said media companies bring "criminal cruelty" into homes and that media companies "act as silent enablers, if not complicit co-conspirators."

People who are co-conspirators to a "criminal" act generally wind up in jail.

Maybe LaPierre was being cute but the implication of what he said was clear."


Posted by: Drew M at December 21, 2012 04:30 PM (6cEN2)

Yes it was: it's the media who need to take a good hard look at themselves, and not law-abiding citizens. That's the implication.

Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 04:36 PM (fklmM)

267 Fapers?

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 04:36 PM (NIZHJ)

268 @260

There was NOTHING OBJECTIONABLE about his full statement.

You are a clown!

Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 04:37 PM (RrD4h)

269 I bet you still have the audacity to bitch if I don't vote for Jeb Bush in 4 years.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:35 PM (TULs6)

BUT HE'S MR ELECTABLE

Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 04:37 PM (tw6Ar)

270 The Tea Party would never run a Bush anyway.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 04:38 PM (NIZHJ)

271 Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:35 PM (TULs6)

I will never try to win the vote for someone withthat particular viewpoint. Talk about abandoning principleif I did.

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 04:39 PM (m2CN7)

272 >>I can confirm there is some significant overlap here.

Hell, tomorrow for my friends and I is going to be gun shopping, a trip to Five Guys, a trip to the range (weather permitting) then some Borderlands 2.

Posted by: LibertarianJim (Team #letitburn) at December 21, 2012 04:40 PM (WDCYi)

273 re: "Many Japanese games already do that."

And they have 1/15th as much rape (per capita) as the U.S. does. Because...

The reason you'll get nowhere with this, Entropy--or any of you, with any of this--is because you're hitting one of the "reflex areas" of conservative anti-Americanism. Japanese rape games don't make Japanese rapists, e.g., but American shooting games do make American shooters, because the Japanese...aren't Americans. They're not so depraved, malleable, weak, etc., as "we" are, as "our culture" makes "us." Just like the Mexicans aren't as lazy, entitled, etc., as "we" are, as "our culture" makes "us."

Anti-Americanism is very big these days at the ol' HQ, especially since it got on the Romney train. But I'm sure that's a coincidence and has nothing to do with why Americans told him to STFU and GTFO.

Posted by: oblig. at December 21, 2012 04:40 PM (cePv8)

274 Remember the wave of violence from Contra, Jackal, and Bionic Commando?



The horror.

Posted by: LibertarianJim

Yea, and it was about as realistic as a kid playing with green plastic soldiers in the backyard.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying realistic games should be banned, but to say "they have no effect on impressionable minds" is dishonest.

They do, and in the same way we have rules that a young kid shouldn't have access to hard core pornography because it can warp them. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if certain young kids were exposed to porn for hours on end every day that they would later be involved in some sort of sexual crime later in life.

Do I think that means games or porn should be banned? No, but I do think it's fair to make sure only adults are consuming adult content. That's hardly a big change in public policy.

Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 04:40 PM (kQLBd)

275 I'm only focusing on the media part Drew, because that was why he mentioned video games, and that's what has most people burned here. My point is that it was a larger argument than video games, so people who are having a fit ove the games aspect are dialed in way too deep.

NRA folks aren't exactly known for being major gamers, anyway. I'd wager the majority are over forty years of age, and hate most of what they see on TV. LaPierre can't be expected to try and woo the kids by playing cool. He's too damn old for that. So the gamers get lumped in with the porno and sicko stuff out there. And frankly, he's got a point (as some gamers have copped to).

Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 04:40 PM (fklmM)

276 Bottom line, DrewM, your principled argument is not working.

Not.

You can make it all day long, it's just not working.

LaPierre's now been Alinskied by ThinkProgress and that whole thing will not be pretty. He'll be lucky if he only gets swatted.

This changes the debate. Maybe in a bad way but the media doesn't want to talk about its own use of guns in the real world.

And here's the other thing: Wayne LaPierre is a private citizen (albeit a public figure). Andrew Cuomo is an elected official.

Again, I keep pointing out smoking in movies. I don't see anybody up in arms that Hollywood was pressured to take smoking out of the movies.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 04:41 PM (T0NGe)

277
Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 04:37 PM (RrD4h)
I have some bad news for you....I don't give a shit what you think.
Have a nice weekend.

Posted by: DrewM. at December 21, 2012 04:41 PM (6cEN2)

278
I will never try to win the vote for someone withthat particular viewpoint. Talk about abandoning principleif I did.

So you want to ban any mention of it in books too, Mr. Holier?

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:41 PM (TULs6)

279 Guy sees Godfather baseball bat scene. Emulates it. Lib blames the American Baseball League.

Posted by: Whatev at December 21, 2012 04:42 PM (2t6Gz)

280 If you don't believe that constant exposure to pointless violence has no impact on this society...I don't know what to say. And I emphasize the word "pointless". Violence is fine for young minds IF it is coupled with clear cut "good guys" violently dispatching clear cut "bad guys"....think Bonanza. Real life? Not always, certainly, but kids will be dealing with real life soon enough. I'm not calling for a ban on pointlessly violent games, movies, etc., but neither was Wayne LaPierre. However, your damned right high-profile people need to be calling attention to this crap.

Ok, so what? Pass a law banning violence on tv unless its a clear case of bad guys vs good guys? See what Im sayin?

Violence on tv is a reflection of our degraded culture, not the cause of anything. Older people get disgusted by it and turn the channel. Younger people lap it up.

Posted by: ElKomandante at December 21, 2012 04:42 PM (snQ/r)

281 I can't believe President Romney has let it come to this.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 04:42 PM (NIZHJ)

282 @277

Cool beans twat face!

Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 04:42 PM (RrD4h)

283
Video games are a medium for stories.

If you tried to ban depictions of rape in books or movies, it would be a clear 1st ammendment violation.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:42 PM (TULs6)

284 Posted by: oblig. at December 21, 2012 04:40 PM (cePv

so you have no problem with simulated rape games either. Sad.

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 04:43 PM (m2CN7)

285 Keep this in mind, the intended audience of this event just voted to re-elect Barack Obama to a second term...
Let that sink in for a moment.
Logically-sound, philosophically-solid, and time-tested arguments don't work with a population that is reacting emotionally to a tragic event. The heart is leading the debate about this whole situation, which is neither a surprise nor unprecedented. Let's face it, a lot of our fellow citizens are lazy idiots who can't think coherently. They understand emotion and simple statements so (alas) one has to address them at this level.
Its like talking to a an adolescent whose significant other just left him/her for someone else.
This is what the Progressive Era has let to, God help us!

Posted by: exurbanDoug at December 21, 2012 04:44 PM (TGQA1)

286 260 DrewM.

'It's funny that almost everyone seems focused on the media stuff, there was plenty of other crap from the statement."


The Media is the largest problem. Few of them possess sufficient education to adequately analyze what they see, are told to say, and say, and the remainder ...

LaPierre is finally getting around to fighting back, and fighting back in a way that causes both the Left and the Media much damage.

See, for example, comments 194 and 235 above.

The Left and the Media have been playing this way for decades; it's time that they are on the receiving end.

My rant at 65: "Kindergarten Killers" "Splatterdays"

Again, why haven't the news media, or any of the various Liberal, anti-violence coalitions, been screaming bloody murder about this?

It's because they don't have to. We don't throw their crap back in their face(s).

LaPierre is doing this, and very many people will hear him, and start getting his message.

Making the Media own up to their biases , misreporting, propaganda, etc. is the first step.


Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 04:44 PM (MgGyQ)

287 Screw you guys, I'm playing Skyrim.

Posted by: Butters at December 21, 2012 04:44 PM (NIZHJ)

288
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:42 PM (TULs6)

but videogames are icky and dem young whippersnappers need to be protected

Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 04:45 PM (tw6Ar)

289 So you want to ban any mention of it in books too, Mr. Holier?
Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:41 PM (TULs6)

Yeahrelaying a descripiton as a literary functionand playing a video game simulating rape over and over again are the same thing. Keep reaching spike.

Posted by: polynikes at December 21, 2012 04:45 PM (m2CN7)

290 In the late nineties, my parents were convinced violent videogames would turn me into Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold on meth. I distinctly remember the local Walmart clerks refusing to sell me M-rated games on multiple occasions. Just like the people at the ticket booth wouldnt sell me a ticket to Striptease.

I still managed to play M-rated games and see plenty of R-rated boobies.

So short of bans, how are people recommending we keep kids from consuming adult content?

Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 04:46 PM (88Ldu)

291 >>Lib blames the American Baseball League.

DAMN STRAIGHT.

Posted by: The National League at December 21, 2012 04:46 PM (WDCYi)

292 Japanese rape games don't make Japanese rapists, e.g.,

Interestingly, Japan complains about a major problem with train molesters (not nearly in the same category as rape, but it would tend to reinforce the idea that Japanese men are desensitized to women and their objectification).

but American shooting games do make American shooters, because the Japanese...aren't Americans.

I think you're engaging in projection.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 04:47 PM (T0NGe)

293 I still managed to play M-rated games and see plenty of R-rated boobies.

Everything isn't always about you.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 04:47 PM (T0NGe)

294 My rant at 65: "Kindergarten Killers" "Splatterdays"



Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 04:44 PM (MgGyQ)

Because Kindergarten Killer is a crappy freeware game in the sea of countless crappy freeware games. Horror movie marathons are a tradition

Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 04:48 PM (tw6Ar)

295 291 >>Lib blames the American Baseball League.

DAMN STRAIGHT.
Posted by: The National League at December 21, 2012 04:46 PM (WDCYi)


Fucking DH.

Posted by: Rob McNeece at December 21, 2012 04:48 PM (YesJa)

296
Yeahrelaying a descripiton as a literary functionand playing a video game simulating rape over and over again are the same thing.

Yup, pretty much.

How do you know it serves a "literary function"? How do you know it's not a dime-store Harlequin novel for people who get off on rape fantasy to fap to?

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:48 PM (TULs6)

297 I just want to make something very clear: games like Call of Duty and Black Ops make kids join our military. How do I know? Because once upon a time, when I saw Marines in COD take out terrorists, I wanted to be a part of that. Black Ops has Americans who take out communists. Then you enlist and you realize you spend more time cleaning buildings and wiping floors than you do shooting. All you conservatives should be praising these games-they are often the only place where young people get a positive image of America (Grand Theft Auto aside). And for what it's worth, the worst massacre in US history thus far occured in 1929...a little before GTAs time.

Posted by: Danny at December 21, 2012 04:49 PM (e4tc1)

298 NRA membership rolls are rising rapidly at a record-setting pace, increasing by 8,000 new NRA members per day since the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting. According to Fox News, both the number of individual contributions to the NRA and their average amount have risen significantly in the period following the massacre in Newtown, Connecticut. Unlike many who are using the school shooting as a political club, the National Rifle Association (NRA) has been staying quiet out of respect for the Newtown victims.

Posted by: Charlton Heston at December 21, 2012 04:49 PM (e8kgV)

299 And since you are patriotic Americans, I think we could all agree that kids joining the military is a positive thing

Posted by: Danny at December 21, 2012 04:50 PM (e4tc1)

300 Pass a law banning violence on tv unless its a clear case of bad guys vs good guys?

What law bans or curtails smoking in movies?

I'll wait.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 04:51 PM (T0NGe)

301 And since you're a troll, bye.

Posted by: Rob McNeece at December 21, 2012 04:51 PM (YesJa)

302
Here's the point.

Yesterday, I was bitching about gun control and defending the NRA.

Today, I am bitching about the NRA and defending video games.

So... You fucked up. Way to go.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:52 PM (TULs6)

303 Amishdude,

Thats true.

I am a gun owner, gamer, and father so I feel interested in the topics being discussed in this thread.

I was asking a question about restricting access to adult content, maybe you have something to add in that regard?

Specifically, how society accomplish that? If not bans then how?

Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 04:52 PM (88Ldu)

304 Here's a cat I wish some intrepid Congresscritter would put amongst the
press pigeons: They don't have Auroras and Newtowns in countries with
media controls.

Posted by: PersonFromPorlock at December 21, 2012 04:53 PM (2VCZA)

305
I was asking a question about restricting access to adult content, maybe you have something to add in that regard?

Specifically, how society accomplish that? If not bans then how?


Society should accomplish it? Takes a village?

To be clear: You're not asking me how you can stop your children from playing the video games you don't like... you're asking how society can do it for you?

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:54 PM (TULs6)

306 294 The Dude

Is this "crappy freeware game" an okay member "in the sea of countless crappy freeware games"?

Should it not at least be relegated to the restricted "porn" area?

See the point made at comment 194, by G of Y, and related points before and after.

Maybe this stuff really is protected speech, or somesuch, but is it really innocuous? Is it really okay for young children and teenagers, whose brains are not mature, and whose social skills and behavioral controls are still very impressionable?

Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 04:54 PM (MgGyQ)

307 Not you Entropy, I think you and I are on the same page here.

Amishdude seemed a little irritated that there are controls in place aimed at keeping adult content out of kids' hands and yet kids like me got around them all the time.

I was wondering what he and people like him think should be actually be done about it.

Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 04:55 PM (88Ldu)

308 What is with all this "ban" bullshit? Did someone just invent a claim that There Must Be Bans was started up somewhere, just to stir the pot? Because no such thing was stated by LaPierre. You had to get it somewhere, I guess, but it wasn't from him.

Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 04:56 PM (fklmM)

309 No one has actually mentioned guns in many posts now and then only tangentially. That's how deflection works to derail the narrative.

Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 04:58 PM (6H6FZ)

310 Specifically, how society accomplish that? If not bans then how?

Again, LaPierre is a private citizen.

Shaming works. It works wonders. No law prevents a major studio from producing a porn movie yet none of them do.

There is virtually no smoking in movies and yet no law.

Spielberg himself took guns out of ET. People actually didn't want him to, but he felt his own obligations to do so.

I don't want to "do something". The only common sense thing to do is take down those ridiculous targets that say "Gun-free school zone".

Otherwise, this is a rhetoric game and puts the Left on the defensive. Because I think it is a perfect argument that somebody like the Newtown shooter, being very mentally disturbed, would be influenced by video games to the point that it would warp his reality. It's reducto ad absurdum.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 04:59 PM (T0NGe)

311 To those that are up in arms about video games being scrutinized, rather than dancing around the subject, how about an honest answer?

Do you think a minor (say 12 years old) should be able to purchase any and all video games than any game developer makes?

I mean, we don't do that with DVD's. A kid can't legally go into an adult store and buy a X-rated DVD. Should they be able to buy an X-Rated video game?

What's funny is, I'm not a SoCon in the least and I can't stand moralizing politicians, but I've never had a problem with regulating content with respect to children. I'm actually flabbergasted there's people out there like this. My guess is, they don't have children.

Posted by: McAdams at December 21, 2012 05:00 PM (kQLBd)

312
No one has actually mentioned guns in many posts now and then only tangentially. That's how deflection works to derail the narrative.

Yeah, except it didn't deflect the liberals it was an own goal.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 05:00 PM (TULs6)

313 Amishdude seemed a little irritated that there are controls in place
aimed at keeping adult content out of kids' hands and yet kids like me
got around them all the time.


No, I got irritated at the fact that your entire argument was based on yourself.

It isn't all about you. You aren't an avatar for the rest of the world.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 05:00 PM (T0NGe)

314 Yesterday, I was bitching about gun control and defending the NRA.

And how'd that work out for them? How's it working now?

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 05:02 PM (T0NGe)

315
And how'd that work out for them? How's it working now?

Seriously? You have like a score card?

15 anti gun laws were passed yesterday, 12 today??

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 05:03 PM (TULs6)

316 264

I bet you still have the audacity to bitch if I don't vote for Jeb Bush in 4 years.


Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 04:35 PM (TULs6)

Are you saying that you're not aroused by the prospect of Jeb Bush for president? Clearly, you're a purist. A purging purist who purges.
Anyway, as a long-time gamer, NRA member, and scary black rifle owner, I've no problem with LaPierre's statements. It seemed clear to me that he was merely using the rules of leftists against them rather than seriously propose a banning of violent video games and movies.

Posted by: Sandra Fluke's solid gold diaphragm at December 21, 2012 05:03 PM (9SwFX)

317 "Yeah, except it didn't deflect the liberals it was an own goal."

It wasn't meant for them. It was meant for the media who are orchestrating the public discussion. This isn't a debate. This is theater. The media will now attack him for bringing up school security and media influence instead of what they want to talk about--evil guns.

Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 05:04 PM (6H6FZ)

318 Amishdude,

Okay, I but that.

Course, we are talking about Hollywood, the media, and Obama voters/supporters. I'm not sure how effective a shame campaign will be.

I think that connecting video games to child murderers is going to drive gamers to support whoever promises them that their games aren't getting banned.

So maybe the NRA could emphasize the whole "not calling for bans" thing.

Posted by: smugly at December 21, 2012 05:04 PM (88Ldu)

319 294 The Dude



Is this "crappy freeware game" an okay member "in the sea of countless crappy freeware games"?



Should it not at least be relegated to the restricted "porn" area?



See the point made at comment 194, by G of Y, and related points before and after.



Maybe this stuff really is protected speech, or somesuch, but is it
really innocuous? Is it really okay for young children and teenagers,
whose brains are not mature, and whose social skills and behavioral
controls are still very impressionable?



Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 04:54 PM (MgGyQ)

It's a crappy freeware game in a sea of over a million freeware games. Anyone can make one and anyone can make one of anything and have it hosted on a videogame portal site without much knowledge. Frankly, it wouldn't surprise me in the least if the NRA just did a simple google search on Kindergarten Killer game and found something.Should it be in a restricted area? No as unless you're specifically looking for a said random title, you won't find it and any crappy age gate isn't going to stop you from playing it. As for games in general that are on consoles and shit, there are ratings for a reason and if you can't do your own duty to pay attention of what your kids are playing then that is totally on you for not paying enough attention to your own damn children

Posted by: The Dude at December 21, 2012 05:04 PM (tw6Ar)

320 This is an immediate response tactic. Smacking the shark in the nose is not meant to be your whole game.

Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 05:08 PM (6H6FZ)

321 For what it's worth, there were been a few news reports on the attitudes of the citizens of Newtown, CT. yesterday.

It seems that more than a few of the locals there are wondering why Nancy Lanza bought guns, and a couple have not included her name in the list of deaths or in memorials.

There seems to be an unspoken / not-yet-spoken realization among the people of Newtown, CT. that guns were not the problem ...

... society, and society's failure to handle Lanza (whom society had already DETECTED), is the problem ... the failure ... their failure ...

Posted by: Arbalest at December 21, 2012 05:08 PM (MgGyQ)

322 @310


Exactly, it's the wider culture and not the 2nd Amendment.


Where did Adam Lanza get the notion to shoot up a school full of children?

It certainly was not from the NRA or from people he may have met at a shooting range.

It was the wider culture of filth and violence that is promulgated by Hollywood leftists.

Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 05:08 PM (RrD4h)

323 *Sigh* This whole "video games cause violence" nonsense has been going on for years-in fact John Stossel debunked it in his book Myths Lies and Downright Stupidity. Every source cites Grossman...I can tell you right now I went to bootcamp almost two years ago and they don't-I repeat don't-desentisize you by having you play Black Ops. You yell "Kill" after just about every command and live a bleak existence constantly screamed at by drill instructors, but you don't get desensitized through video games. Just wanted to clear that up too

Posted by: Danny at December 21, 2012 05:10 PM (e4tc1)

324
"No one has actually mentioned guns in many posts now and then only tangentially. That's how deflection works to derail the narrative. " Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 04:58 PM (6H6FZ)

How about that, huh? Wayne may as well have stepped to the podium, opened his briefcase, and released a ....SQUIRREL!!!!

Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 05:10 PM (4I3Uo)

325 I think that connecting video games to child murderers is going to drive
gamers to support whoever promises them that their games aren't getting
banned.


There's also the Good Cop/Bad Cop routine. LaPierre is going off on video games. Then General Eric Republican comes out against bans.

Look, if this gets even to the Congressional hearings stage, I'll start to concern myself. As of now, it's LaPierre fighting back against a rather unfair onslaught by a very biased media.

This is what you do when you "fight" guys. Principled stands and $2 still won't get you coffee at Starbucks.

Also, keep in mind that a lot of Dems love them some NRA endorsements to give them cover for not seeming so liberal. This is a shot across the bow and they won't like it at all.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 05:14 PM (T0NGe)

326
"You yell "Kill" after just about every command and live a bleak existence constantly screamed at by drill instructors, but you don't get desensitized through video games. Just wanted to clear that up too"

You're right, of course. The .mil doesn't just use video games.

They're called - let me see if I have this spelled correctly - "simulators". Pretty pricey ones too, iirc.

Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 05:15 PM (4I3Uo)

327
And here's another dirty little truth that the media try their best to conceal:
There exists in this country a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow industry
that sells, and sows, violence against its own people.




Leave rap music out of this.

Posted by: Jay Guevara at December 21, 2012 05:16 PM (4u2LN)

328 Where did Adam Lanza get the notion to shoot up a school full of children?

It certainly was not from the NRA or from people he may have met at a shooting range.

It was the wider culture of filth and violence that is promulgated by Hollywood leftists.


I doubt it, actually. He could have developed that from his own head. His hate and sociopathology would lead to this regardless. The Hollywood influence is clearer in the Columbine and the Batman movie shootings.

Even then, crazy doesn't have to have a reason.

Posted by: AmishDude at December 21, 2012 05:17 PM (T0NGe)

329
How about that, huh? Wayne may as well have stepped to the podium, opened his briefcase, and released a ....SQUIRREL!!!!

I would find that far preferable.

In fact, he should have told reporters that he will only answer the questions of the first person to shoot the squirrel.

Also, it should be a rabid squirrel.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 05:18 PM (TULs6)

330 NRA's press conference was terrible. Not at all helpful.

Posted by: Jacob at December 21, 2012 05:19 PM (sQxhV)

331 A rabid squirrel with herpes.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 05:19 PM (TULs6)

332
i think bringing up movies, tv and video games was a good idea.it lets these liberal bastions know they might have some skin in this game too

Posted by: kj at December 21, 2012 05:21 PM (KpDjl)

333
i think bringing up movies, tv and video games was a good idea.it lets these liberal bastions know they might have some skin in this game too

We should also threaten to socialize their healthcare. That will put the fear of god in em.

Posted by: Entropy at December 21, 2012 05:23 PM (TULs6)

334
Drew,
It's not often I disagree with you, but I think most of the contrarians here have a pretty good point. November showed us that this is the age of catering to the lowest common denominator (aka the low-infotard, aka SCOAMF voter but I repeat myself there). I think this is part and parcel of a media strategy and a fairly shrewd one at that. Why should the NRA spend time and resources when it can get clever and let Hollywood make many of the same liberty arguments for them while spending their own resources to do so? That's who most ofthe low-infotards listen to.

Posted by: I Aim to Misbehave at December 21, 2012 05:30 PM (ur55E)

335 If the media and images of violence do not have any influence, why are all the "news" organizations juxtaposing the Code Pink banners in the pictures they are running of the NRA event?


Go to all of the news sites look at what they are doing, they are using media to shape opinions and minds.

Posted by: General Woundwort at December 21, 2012 05:30 PM (RrD4h)

336 He did two things very right. He responded not with a bunch of cold dead hands fight the government rhetoric. He responded with actual doable real world solutions.
The other thing he did was a shift the conversation away from Hi cap magazines and black rifles with bayonet lugs to school security which is where the actual problem lies and he didn't give up any of our second Amendment rights doing it.

Posted by: Max Entropy at December 21, 2012 05:36 PM (/s3MZ)

337 "Even then, crazy doesn't have to have a reason."

No. Even crazy has a reason. Sometimes figuring out the reason is the hard part.

Posted by: SurferDoc at December 21, 2012 05:48 PM (6H6FZ)

338 I renewed my NRA membership today. And I have a real world way to put armed guards in every school, run by and through the local police departments, that could be done very quickly and at an acceptable cost and would provide an armed presence every school day. It's actually quite simple.

Posted by: Six at December 21, 2012 05:50 PM (gW5fI)

339 No. Even crazy has a reason.


Crazy IS the reason.

Posted by: entropy at December 21, 2012 05:51 PM (YUttk)

340 Crazy and reason don't belong in the same sentence.


Crazy is by definition, irrational.


If he has a good reason, he ain't crazy. If he's crazy, he ain't got no real reason.

Posted by: entropy at December 21, 2012 05:51 PM (YUttk)

341 The other thing LaPierre did was show that when he calls a presser, they damn well show up. And they will the next time, too, even though he took no questions at this one.

8000+ new members a day for several days will do that.

I was a little concerned that he didn't take questions, but now that I think about it, the fact that they came at his call says more than anything he actually did at the podium.

Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 05:51 PM (fklmM)

342 Jaws...."simulators" are used to train pilots for a variety of events such as bad weather and carrier landings. The only simulator we use to train USMC recruits are M-16 rifles which have an electronic laser mounted to the barrel and have a CO2 chamber to simulate recoil: colloquially called the "IZMIT". Hardly what comes to mind when one thinks of video games

Posted by: Danny at December 21, 2012 05:55 PM (e4tc1)

343
318Amishdude,

Okay, I but that.

Course, we are talking about Hollywood, the media, and Obama voters/supporters. I'm not sure how effective a shame campaign will be.

I think that connecting video games to child murderers is going to drive gamers to support whoever promises them that their games aren't getting banned.

So maybe the NRA could emphasize the whole "not calling for bans" thing.

Yes. Games and movies are not the problem. Guns are not the problem. The problem is that every once in a while somebody goes batcrap crazy and instead of taking him/herself out quietly decides they want the attention they never got in life and they pick a nice safe gun free zone to shoot up.
Out of all the things mentioned I really think he should have brought up that how the media handles these things just encourages these psychos. I've been shooting guns, playing video games, and watching TV and movies my whole life and have yet to get the urge to go shoot up a bunch of kids. Maybe drop kick a few of the more obnoxious ones but that's another story.
Shooting up a mall is like Loser American Idol. (Not that American Idol isn't already for losers but again, that's another story).

Posted by: AdamPM at December 21, 2012 05:55 PM (x61Z7)

344 Johnny "Ouch My Balls" and Jane "War on Womyn" couldn't care less about factual, analytical arguments about the meaning and importance of the 2nd Amendment to the preservation of our free Republic and as a counter to tyranny. Wayne can save that discussion for the next time he's on C-Span. If Wayne had that discussion, or tried to point out that rifles are used in only 3 percent of homicides or that the average killing involves 3 rounds or that hands and feet are as deadly as rifles according to the FBI or that the chance of actually being killed by a mad nutter is about that of being hit by lightening... the facts would have been ignored by the media as they are every time they get in the way of the progressive narrative: "We have a right to save our kids from Gun violence and guns no hunter needs!"

Low information folk want a solution, even if there isn't one. The media and the progressives (the same of course) want gun control. They have developed a narrative focused on that goal exclusively. Wayne's approach distracts from that and their ability to focus exclusively on guns. And, it gives those on the fence who want something to be done other things to ponder. In any case absolutely noting will be done relative to the 1st on this issue because the motivation is gun control not any kind of solution to the "problem." Shiny object, squirrel... let's see if it is shiny enough.

FWIW I was at a "game night" after the shooting with my wife's very liberal friends, mostly North Shore Chicago Reform Jewish school school teachers. I add the latter (my wife is Jewish btw) because as the JPFO would freely acknowledge you could hardly expect a more anti-gun demographic. But, the tide might actually have turned.

I was amazed. The tragedy was discussed on occasion through the night. Remarkably concealed carry was discussed neutrally to even favorably. There was no groundswell among these folks (admitedely a small focus group) toward more gun conrtrol. There was discussions of armed guards in schools. Discussions of mental health... Again, I was frankly amazed. but encouraged. But then the anecdotal stories about about Obama vs Romney signs I read here before the election were encouraging too.

Posted by: Keith at December 21, 2012 05:56 PM (NYPPE)

345 Guns don't kill people but movies/video games do

Posted by: SoCons at December 21, 2012 06:08 PM (fgbiK)

346 I see where he was going -

Most firearms enthusiasts are safety and education oriented. In general, they engage in constructive activities when they use their firearms and accidents are rare. They have a care of their targets and what lies beyond them and a hyper awareness of the location of potential "wild cards" on the range or hunting lease such as pets or other hunters.

On the other hand, the Hollywood types who would be the first to jump on a "for the children" gun ban, frequently make their living portraying the indiscriminate use of firearms without any acknowledgement of harm (or potential harm) to innocent bystanders. It's not unusual to see carelessness and mishandling of firearms in most Hollywood blockbusters. Some of the more violent movies, callously use innocents as hostages to hide behind. Even blowing up a Death Star, disregards the many people who were just maintenance guys that were probably impressed by the Evil Bad Dudes.

Posted by: 2nd Amendment Mother at December 21, 2012 06:14 PM (L4CWX)

347 And you thought that I was obtuse.....

Posted by: Warden Samuel Norton at December 21, 2012 06:18 PM (YmPwQ)

348 Guns don't kill people but movies/video games do
Posted by: SoCons at December 21, 2012 06:08 PM (fgbiK)

That sort of cluelessness is much more appreciated over at HuffPo.

Posted by: K-Bob at December 21, 2012 06:23 PM (fklmM)

349 > And they have 1/15th as much rape (per capita) as the U.S. does. Because...

Well, the nation of Japan has quite a few less Redguards than the United States. Could be related.

Posted by: Lemmenkainen, Freelance Warlord at December 21, 2012 06:25 PM (K1JW0)

350 "...So guns don’t kill people, video games and movies do?"

- The always wrong because he tries SO hard to be "fair and balanced" (oh, and, "controversial"), Drew.

He didn't say or imply that. He knows that our culture is fucked up beyond all repair because people like Drew have no ability to say that wrong is wrong anymore.

I mean hey, this kid shouldn't have shot up that school but he WAS a pretty good shot!

LaPierre was saying that evil PEOPLE do evil things, not the guns. And that ONE of the ways our society helps people become evil is Hollywood's propping up of all kinds of cultural garbage as normal. Our culture is in the shitter because it promotes all kinds of shit as wonderful. Rap "music"; slasher films; homosexuality; whitey is racist, but Hussein Obama who was a member of a racist black organization, is not. And on and on...

It's the evil, criminal people, NOT a gun. It's society not allowing us to try to help the insane anymore, because of their "rights", not a gun.

Parents don't raise their children anymore - the filth on TV and in video games, and in schools and colleges, do. With all the shit out there to view, coupled with the lack of parenting, it's more likely than ever that evil will show up from time to time. Taking MY guns away will never solve that.

Our culture is breeding the assholes who shoot up schools and malls, not the second amendment.

Drew will never get this. He also saw no point in opposing Sotomeyor and Kagel because it would waste valuable "political capital". His thought process is firmly rooted in nuancing things to death.

Posted by: Sweep the leg at December 21, 2012 06:28 PM (W9qYB)

351 Our culture is in the shitter. I didn't find a damn thing wrong with what he said. I enjoy the occasional slasher movie, but I am 58 years old. I didn't allow my kids to watch them until they were 16 (though they were sneaking and watching them before that). But they got my message. Mom didn't approve, probably not good for me. They enjoy them to this day and they are as normal as can be. Thankfully they never got into the video games or the filthy rap music.

Posted by: jewells45 at December 21, 2012 06:35 PM (u25eL)

352 I disagree on school security. For example how much money does the U.S. government, state government, and local government spend on security for government buildings, water treatment plants, nuclear power plants, military bases, NASA, court houses, and security details for politicians at all levels of government. For example Mayor Bloomberg gets security guards to protect him, yet American children don't?

All those targets are no different to schools. They are just likely to be attack by a deranged lunatic or jihadist. Yet we find billions to protect those.

I do agree not all the decisions need be made at the federal level. What I would push for is a mandate from the federal level that all schools must have at least two armed security guards OR allow and pay for at least two of the school staff to be armed. The federal government will leave it to the school districts and locals to find the money for the mandate. Perhaps they can find the money in all the waste at the local level, or force the teachers unions to pay for it. If locals don't have the money or don't like armed security guards, they can always go the cheaper route and allow at least two members of the school staff (with psychological evaluations, background checks, with regular training, etc ) to carry guns at school.

The NRA was right to make this argument. The vast majority of Americans (over 80% according to most polls) believe that having armed security guards or staff at schools would be the beast route to prevent things like this in the future. That has more support from the American people than all the other solutions, which would not have prevented it. The only real chance to stop things like this in the future is having someone at the school who can shoot back. It is not fool proof, nothing is, but it at least makes schools are more "hard target". Plus this is a politically winning argument that cuts into the progressives argument about banning guns.

It is either this argument, or you let the progressives have a political victory by convincing the American people that it is guns that are the problem and as we have seen the American people of late have been easily fooled.

Posted by: William Eaton at December 21, 2012 06:54 PM (rwioF)

353 Nailed it...
http://penny-arcade.com/comic/2012/12/21

Posted by: TheMadItalian at December 21, 2012 07:10 PM (77RW/)

354 Interestingly, on a PJ Media Poliwood video, they expose that the media will proudly claim that content influences the culture when it supports their agenda. Consider the following Variety article, written by Brian Lowry:

"TV Eases Way for Gay Acceptance" published May 23, 2012 expresses how TV programming casting gay lifestyles in a positive light are steering the culture toward broader acceptance of homosexuality.

But when pressed as to whether violence on TV influences culture, the media and even others not in the media industry will cry foul.

My favorite rebuttal to the "media doesn't influence culture" position comes from Bill Whittle. To paraphrase: Well, it sure is too bad all those advertisers wasted their money, if the media has no influence after all.

Posted by: The Liberty Dude at December 21, 2012 07:11 PM (iAWQF)

355 I think the LaPierre statement hit all the right notes. The MSM is complicit in glorifiying evil, abberant behavior- and then trying to shiftthe blame onto our legal and moral obligations to arm and defend ourselves against it.

Posted by: HvyMtlHntr at December 21, 2012 07:12 PM (5CL9S)

356 Once the NRAannounced that they would not take any questions, I got the distinct feeling that the reps from the NRA were going to unload most of what they had, holding back just a wee bit, to buy time to review/filter responses across thepolitical spectrum to determine direction oftheir strongest path forward, and toavoid unforseen politicalquicksand.
Interestingly, based on the first half of the comments here, the violent gaming culture was most sensitive while my gut immediately churned when the NRA rep suggested a national registry of citizens individuals with a history of mental illness...whichwill not sit well with the left [see http://tinyurl.com/bpqmapc as well as http://tinyurl.com/c8eyz95 ] as it interferes with theirlong termagenda.

Posted by: wtd at December 21, 2012 07:16 PM (y7c1A)

357 Thank gawd the NRA doesn't represent martial artists.

Posted by: Joe in MI at December 21, 2012 07:31 PM (3R8wQ)

358 203 Oh, and anyone who thinks that violent media and video game immersion can't possibly result in a desensitization to violence and killing needs to read "On Combat" by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman.

The military has been using similar methods to create infantrymen for years. The difference there is that they can do it within a controlled structure - not an open society. No, I am not advocating a ban, Drew.


Posted by: Jaws at December 21, 2012 04:07 PM

Speaking of Lt. Col. Grossman, here is an excellent article about a speech he gave: http://bit.ly/bHiib0

Active shooters in schools: The enemy is denial

Preventing juvenile mass murder in American schools is the job of police officers, school teachers, and concerned parents

“How many kids have been killed by school fire in all of North America in the past 50 years? Kids killed... school fire... North America... 50 years... How many? Zero. That’s right. Not one single kid has been killed by school fire anywhere in North America in the past half a century. Now, how many kids have been killed by school violence?”

So began an extraordinary daylong seminar presented by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman, a Pulitzer Prize nominated author, West Point psychology professor, and without a doubt the world’s foremost expert on human aggression and violence. [ . . . ]

“Why can’t we be like little Johnny Firefighter?” Grossman asked as he prowled the stage. “He’s our A+ student!”

He paused, briefly, and answered with a voice that blew through the hall like thunder, “Denial, denial, denial!”

Grossman commanded, “Look up at the ceiling! See all those sprinklers up there? They’re hard to spot — they’re painted black — but they’re there. While you’re looking, look at the material the ceiling is made of. You know that that stuff was selected because it’s fire-retardant. Hooah? Now look over there above the door — you see that fire exit sign? That’s not just any fire exit sign — that’s a ‘battery-backup-when-the-world-ends-it-will-still-be-lit’ fire exit sign. Hooah?”

Walking from the stage toward a nearby fire exit and exterior wall, Grossman slammed the palm of his hand against the wall and exclaimed, “Look at these wall boards! They were chosen because they’re what?! Fireproof or fire retardant, hooah? There is not one stinking thing in this room that will burn!”

Pointing around the room as he spoke, Grossman continued, “But you’ve still got those fire sprinklers, those fire exit signs, fire hydrants outside, and fire trucks nearby! Are these fire guys crazy? Are these fire guys paranoid? No! This fire guy is our A+ student! Because this fire guy has redundant, overlapping layers of protection, not a single kid has been killed by school fire in the last 50 years!

“But you try to prepare for violence — the thing much more likely to kill our kids in schools, the thing hundreds of times more likely to kill our kids in schools — and people think you’re paranoid. They think you’re crazy. ...They’re in denial.”

Posted by: Clyde Shelton at December 21, 2012 07:56 PM (vUK/h)

359 I'm sorry but you are wrong here. It used to be that there was an attempt to restrict violence on tv, to protect children. The whole movie rating system was yet another attempt to protect children from violence on the screen. It's not like the entertainment folks are unaware of this. We no longer have pretend violence, where a gun goes off in a Western and a guy falls down. We have extended, extremely graphic attempts to make it look like someone just had their guts blown out. Do you really think that people should be watching murders for entertainment? We'd throw a fit if folks tried to watch real murders. But somehow, even though the attempt is made to make it as realistic as possible, we are supposed to keep that emotional distance from the "pretend" violence. All the while, the First Amendment is used as a way to chip away at protections for children, in the name of allowing free speech.

Yeah, it's about time to point the finger at the "entertainment" biz. There's a few restrictions we can put on them, the same way they want to restrict access to guns and ammo. They can claim they are only serving up what the public wants, but the gun industry could say the same thing. I guarantee this is going to resonate with moms, and many have been concerned about what their children see on tv and in the movies. It's a good move by the NRA.

Posted by: notsothoreau at December 21, 2012 08:25 PM (5HBd1)

360 Do you really think that people should be watching murders for entertainment?


Look crazypants, we had deranged sickos killing children and mass shootings before we even had talkie pictures let alone TV.


You are in denial so maybe you can't accept that these things just happen.


But if you look at the historical trend, we are not in some new fangled epidemic. Crime in general has been falling for years and these mass shooting events have not increased.


Violence on TV does not turn children into psychopaths. It just doesn't. That's BS.

Posted by: entropy at December 21, 2012 09:04 PM (YUttk)

361 As usual... it's all or nothing between the sellouts of the 2 parties. No compromise. NONE. Well, Obama has the power, the Republicans have Boehner... good luck with that.

Posted by: The Chicken at December 21, 2012 09:39 PM (iroiJ)

362 LaPierres right: leave our fucking guns alone

Posted by: TexasJew at December 21, 2012 11:05 PM (lD8ju)

363 Earlier tonight, on my local talk radio station, they played a sound bite from the speech where LaPierre calls for a cop in every school. After the clip played, the smartass effeminate newsreader said "interestingly enough, there was an armed sheriffs deputy at Columbine High School, but that did not stop the murder of 16 students there". They do not get it, they will never get it, and arguing with them is pointless.

Posted by: DaveinNC at December 21, 2012 11:49 PM (/NgNT)

364 I'm with Wayne's thinking on this. If we are going to start abolishing Amendments, let's do them in order. Just as the grabbers say 2A gives us the right to a black powder musket, 1A gives them the right to a hand cranky press with the lead typeset, like Ben Franklin had. No more TV, no Movies, Hell no photographs even you can scratch wood to make images on paper. No video games. We can keep the Interwebs because they are a carrier, like a horse, but no content is protected. The people could still communicate, maybe wirelessly, because the cops would not be able to go to every house to stop it without getting a .50 cal ball. But the studios, the magazines, the modern presses, those Silicon Valley software mills? Burn, Baby, Burn.

Posted by: torrance at December 22, 2012 04:54 PM (muo5M)






Processing 0.07, elapsed 0.067 seconds.
15 queries taking 0.0179 seconds, 373 records returned.
Page size 232 kb.
Powered by Minx 0.7 alpha.

MuNuvians
MeeNuvians
Polls! Polls! Polls!
Frequently Asked Questions
The (Almost) Complete Paul Anka Integrity Kick
Top Top Tens
Greatest Hitjobs

The Ace of Spades HQ Sex-for-Money Skankathon
A D&D Guide to the Democratic Candidates
Margaret Cho: Just Not Funny
More Margaret Cho Abuse
Margaret Cho: Still Not Funny
Iraqi Prisoner Claims He Was Raped... By Woman
Wonkette Announces "Morning Zoo" Format
John Kerry's "Plan" Causes Surrender of Moqtada al-Sadr's Militia
World Muslim Leaders Apologize for Nick Berg's Beheading
Michael Moore Goes on Lunchtime Manhattan Death-Spree
Milestone: Oliver Willis Posts 400th "Fake News Article" Referencing Britney Spears
Liberal Economists Rue a "New Decade of Greed"
Artificial Insouciance: Maureen Dowd's Word Processor Revolts Against Her Numbing Imbecility
Intelligence Officials Eye Blogs for Tips
They Done Found Us Out, Cletus: Intrepid Internet Detective Figures Out Our Master Plan
Shock: Josh Marshall Almost Mentions Sarin Discovery in Iraq
Leather-Clad Biker Freaks Terrorize Australian Town
When Clinton Was President, Torture Was Cool
What Wonkette Means When She Explains What Tina Brown Means
Wonkette's Stand-Up Act
Wankette HQ Gay-Rumors Du Jour
Here's What's Bugging Me: Goose and Slider
My Own Micah Wright Style Confession of Dishonesty
Outraged "Conservatives" React to the FMA
An On-Line Impression of Dennis Miller Having Sex with a Kodiak Bear
The Story the Rightwing Media Refuses to Report!
Our Lunch with David "Glengarry Glen Ross" Mamet
The House of Love: Paul Krugman
A Michael Moore Mystery (TM)
The Dowd-O-Matic!
Liberal Consistency and Other Myths
Kepler's Laws of Liberal Media Bias
John Kerry-- The Splunge! Candidate
"Divisive" Politics & "Attacks on Patriotism" (very long)
The Donkey ("The Raven" parody)
News/Chat