By Jim Rossignol on June 7th, 2009 at 3:23 pm.
Game Politics reports that Germany’s sixteen Interior Ministers have asked the Bundestag to ban the production and distribution of violent video games. This would mean violent videogames could not be purchased at retail or online in Germany, and that companies like CryTek would have to leave the country to continue production of their games. (That, or come up with creative solutions. Perhaps replace all the guns with vomiting cats? Would flicked elastic bands work, or do they come under violence?) Some more thoughts on this beyond the jump.
The move by Germany’s central government seems to have been inspired by the media reaction to recent school shooting in Winnenden, Germany, in which a seventeen year old killed sixteen people. It emerged that the perpetrator played Far Cry 2 and CounterStrike, as well as table tennis. He was also an unhappy teenage boy. Needless to say, fatuous conclusions were drawn.
It’s perhaps worth noting there has never actually been any evidence to show that violence in videogames increases the likelihood for gamers to go on a rampage with deadly firearms.
Nightmarish censorship implications aside, the potential outright banning of violent games certainly suggests that this could be a fascinating social experiment: will there be any less violence in Germany as a result of violent videogames being banned? Will peace and love break out among alienated teenagers who are denied gory entertainments? Or will creating yet another taboo simply make the experience of playing violent videogames even more transgressive, and therefore even more exciting? Hard to know, eh? Yeah, it really is.
Then again, perhaps there won’t be any correlation at all, and Germany will be left looking for something else to blame when another bunch of people get their lives taken away. And, you know, MAYBE THERE’S ANOTHER FACTOR INFLUENCING THESE SHOOTINGS.
07/06/2009 at 15:30 MA6200 says:
This is a shame – obviously table tennis is the real problem here.
07/06/2009 at 15:30 fugo says:
TABLE TENNIS IS TURNING OUR KIDS INTO PSYCHOPATHS! BAN TABLE TENNIS!
07/06/2009 at 15:31 teo says:
just wait until they try to impose it on everyone else through the EU
07/06/2009 at 15:36 Theory says:
What’s happened in Greece? Are games (of all electronic kinds) still banned there?
07/06/2009 at 15:45 PC Monster says:
Charlie Brooker for Prime Minister!
I say we ban knee-jerking politicians hoping for easy popularity based on emotive issues. God forbid we let piffling little things like ‘facts’ get in the way of a good old-fashioned witch-hunt.
07/06/2009 at 15:47 Bigfoot_King says:
They get from tax from the violent game business anyway so banning games will make them worse off and this can be a bit vauge such as plants vs zombies has violence yet we don’t see it has a violent game. People will find ways around the rules
07/06/2009 at 15:47 LactoseTheIntolerant says:
Hasn’t there already been censorship of violent games in Germany for some time now? That was working a treat.
Also: oh my sweet merciful bear. I want to weep. To weep and to rage.
07/06/2009 at 15:50 German says:
Actually all of the recent pupils that ran amok got their guns from rifle clubs/shooting ranges. Unfortunately our polititians like these clubs, otherwise they would be prohibited. This would make it much harder for pupils to get guns.
Anyway, most Germans already buy their games in the UK or Austria due to the stupid censorship in Germany. I’m 24 years old and my government wants to tell me what to play.
Now I’ll go and take part in the european election. At least I know which party I wont vote for ;D.
07/06/2009 at 15:51 Christian says:
Well..politicians here in Germany (as well in most other (European?) countries) tend to always demand to ban things. After all, it’s election year (not only European Parliament, but also we’re voting who will be the next Bundeskanzler).
The discussion about banning violent videogames is restarted with each killing spree, and the discussions about it are mostly more about publicity than about the real facts and causes or the victims.
The latest thing was a proposed law to ban paintball, because it was thought to lead to some sort of para-militaristic training for future killing-sprees. Or something.
The discussions would be quite funny in fact, if the matter wasn’t so serious. And the people leading those discussions in public are mostly so furiously incompetent that it really hurts sometimes.
It really is a shame for german developers though, seeing the economic cr
yisis and all.Enough ranting, tl;dr: Let’s ban table-tennis already!!
[edit]
Yes, German above me there is right: most adults buy their games from play of cdwow. Except for Steam-games, we still can’t buy Unreal-Tournament over here.
And: Yes, go and vote if you’re in Europe and haven’t done so. Who doesn’t vote isn’t allowed to complain afterwards. :D
07/06/2009 at 15:51 qrter says:
Before clicking that link I was almost sure it was going to be that Newswipe clip. Nice.
07/06/2009 at 15:53 Piispa says:
Won’t somebody think of the children?!
07/06/2009 at 15:53 Dubbill says:
That Newswipe piece is so upsetting. Gets me every time :(
07/06/2009 at 15:53 derFeef says:
Were there violant videogames in the 1940´s already ?
07/06/2009 at 16:00 cliffski says:
This ban is silly, and I oppose it. However, I also strongly oppose some of the over-the-top sadistic shit shovelware games like ‘manhunt’ that companies churn out, knowing they can easily trick the mass gaming media to blindly support them.
I *do* think violent games affect people, just like violent TV, movies and other culture does. Anyone who thinks otherwise should read up on the studies of the psychological effects of advertising (I recommend ‘the advertised mind), specifically the way the amigdala processes emotional responses before our conscious mind kicks in. We might *know* its just a game, but the automatic emotional responses in our brains are influenced before we even get to think about it.
I’d also strongly recommend this:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2003/jun/14/weekend7.weekend2
This is about bhutan. Effectively, this is a huge country-wide experiment in what happens when you introduce TV to a country. It’s pretty scary stuff, and highly relevant to the topic of what effect this might have.
07/06/2009 at 16:04 l1ddl3monkey says:
What will they ban after this ban has absolutely no effect on reducing the number of gun rampages in their country?
Wouldn’t…oh I dunno…banning GUNS be a far more fucking sensible starting place for reducing GUN RAMPAGES? Oh – but then that might give the impression that Germany thinks guns are bad. And guns are one of their main exports and biggest industries.
07/06/2009 at 16:09 Piispa says:
Of course everything effects us, from the tits on a car ad to an over-the-top exploding of the car on a Schwarzenegger movie.
The question is do I lose my free will when I see them titties and immediately rush to a cars dealer to buy one for myself to blow it up on the next day, or could it possibly be that a kid that does those things is already troubled and insane even without those influences? Do we really want to set our standards of living by a few insane people or should we seek to treat them otherwise?
07/06/2009 at 16:09 LewieP says:
I guess that will stop all potential school shooters from being able to access any violent games then. Because they won’t be able to get them online anywhere else.
Edit: If my government told me I can no longer buy Half life 3, you can be damn sure I would find some way of getting it, legally or otherwise. Preferably listening to RATM.
07/06/2009 at 16:11 DarkFenix says:
Yeah it’s pretty ironic, Germany, one of the biggest manufacturers and exporters of guns in the world, is moving to ban violent videogames, effectively naming them the source of violent crime.
07/06/2009 at 16:13 Zaij says:
In other news, video game piracy in Germany skyrockets 45000%
07/06/2009 at 16:14 LewieP says:
I guess that will stop all potential school shooters from being able to access any violent games then. Because they won’t be able to get them online anywhere else.
07/06/2009 at 16:16 Smurfy says:
It’s cool cuz the German government is mad.
07/06/2009 at 16:20 RC-1290'Dreadnought' says:
“We HAVE to do SOMETHING! Let’s make sure on one can get firearms!” -”No! That’s way too difficult, let’s ban videogames, that’ll work”. -”Okay, that’s settled. Next week we’re discussing the ban on Supersoakers and cowboy versus indian roleplaying”
I’m sure the whole violent videogame problem will go into the history books as “The tragedy that was started by something called Pong”.
Seriously now, if we’ve learned anything, it is that banning something will just make people turn to shadier ways.
07/06/2009 at 16:20 Fat says:
This will just increase the amount of pirating in Germany.
07/06/2009 at 16:27 Psychopomp says:
You know, I am outraged…
But Jim brought up an interesting point.
If this *does* go through, it could be the definitive proof we need that games don’t turn us into psychopathic killers.
07/06/2009 at 16:31 wat says:
l1ddl3monkey:
Nah, this isn’t about the german armament industry (politicians would prefer if you didn’t mention Germany’s leading role as an arms exporter at all), this is about private gun ownership. Even though it isn’t widely known internationally, there are about 10 million legal privately owned firearms in Germany (one for every 8 Germans). The german gun lobby might not be highly visible, but it does have significant political influence (mostly through “Schützenvereine”, lit.: “marksmen club”).
And that’s why you ban games first, but keep firearms legal: Because there’s no organized movement backing games.
07/06/2009 at 16:40 tmp says:
It’s interesting. People love to point out twisted “moral code” when it comes to games on the US side of the pond — “ripping heads off barehanded is perfectly fine, but gods forbid there’s a flash of naked tit somewhere in the process” … well, here someone takes opposite stance for a change, says the violence is in fact worse than the naked tit, and attempts to address it in some way.
07/06/2009 at 16:41 panik says:
violent video games make little johnny nazi
07/06/2009 at 16:44 German says:
To further describe the situation as it is now in Germany:
1.
If a game is considered to be too violent it will get an 18+ rating, which in theory should be enough to keep it out of the hands of children.
2.
If the game is considered to be way to violent it is prohibited. This means it may not be advertised or sold openly in Germany. You can still buy these games if you are 18+, but they are not openly displayed in shops. You can also legally import them from other countries.
3.
Due to the second point many games that are being sold Germany have been cut by the developers because they want to sell their games in stores and of course advertise for them.
In my opinion this should be sufficiant. For example alcohol may also not be sold to teenagers. This regulation is also not working, but whatever. Nobody suggested to prohibit alcohol. You just need higher fines for people that sell 18+ games to children.
07/06/2009 at 16:49 Real Horrorshow says:
This is bad.
07/06/2009 at 16:50 c-Row says:
I guess their basic idea is that by banning violent video games they only enrage what they think of as typical gamer, e.g. someone who isn’t legally allowed to vote yet anyway and from whom they won’t have to fear any repercussions. That way they don’t hurt their voting results and show the public that they “do something to deal with the problem”.
Oh well, more Play.com orders then…
Oh, and about their argument that playing Counterstrike made the amok runner a better shooter – if it takes him 60+ bullets to kill sixteen people, weapon training in CS can’t be that good after all.
07/06/2009 at 16:51 Some Guy says:
its the food additives that are the problem, there was no violendce before them(not).
07/06/2009 at 16:53 Max says:
In all honesty, Germany still hasn’t managed to learn from World War II.
They went from one extreme to the other when neither is ideal. Don’t they realize that the rest of the free world thinks they’re overreacting?
07/06/2009 at 16:56 wat says:
German: Not that it matters, because kids still get access to the games – simply by trading them in the local schoolyard.
That’s how I got Duke Nukem 3D when I was 12, and this tradition will certainly continued. By the way, Duke3D is one of those games that you cannot even mention in Germany.
Ubiquitous broadband internet, mobile phones with memory card slots and MP3 players with storage in the three-digit gigabyte range certainly won’t make this any harder.
07/06/2009 at 16:59 Funky Badger says:
I think Britain’s a decent comparison when it comes to looking at number of school gun amoks per capita – there’s been one in my lifetime (and he wasn’t a pupil).
That’s quite low.
There seems to be one per year or so in Germany (and more over the last fice years or so).
Assuming the same amount of violent videogames in both societies (actully there are less in Germany as pointed out above) – this suggests some other factor(s) are at work.
Like, umm, the huge amount of guns in circulation?
07/06/2009 at 17:00 Dave says:
@ Max: it wouldn’t surprise me if lawmakers elsewhere in the world used a German ban on violent games as one more flawed argument that they should too.
07/06/2009 at 17:04 Hoernchen says:
Obviously the government is trying to increase piracy by a few thousand percent.
07/06/2009 at 17:05 Dingo says:
“And that’s why you ban games first, but keep firearms legal: Because there’s no organized movement backing games.”
Just wait. If they really ban things like Mass Effect or Fallout there will be a movement for sure.
And yes, this ban will prevent nobody from obtaining such games. Stuff like Manhunt is pretty sick but has nothing to do with your average scifi shooter. Also there is much sicker shit on video for everybody’s renting pleasure…
Look at Japan. They even have such weird shit as rape games. Does that make Japan a nation of rapists???
07/06/2009 at 17:06 ChaosSmurf says:
Better ban violent movies and books too bro! etc.
07/06/2009 at 17:09 German says:
@Wat: I know, I also played Doom and games like that when i still went to school. Bans wont keep these games out of the hands of children. Back then we didn’t even need the internet to get these games. Thanks to the internet it’s much easier today.
What enrages me is that by prohibiting these games they piss of adults even more than children. I’m old enough, but if the government really prohibits violent games this will have serious consequences for online communities (who might become illegal if they support violent games), companies hosting gameservers in Germany, modders, distribution platforms like steam, etc.
07/06/2009 at 17:13 Sparvy says:
Internet historians: Im just curious after someone mentioned Pong up there, which game was the first to feature blood of any kind? Would be interested to see where that started.
07/06/2009 at 17:15 Gap Gen says:
Watching The Thick of It recently, it’s not encouraging to watch the news afterwards. It kinda does confirm a lot of what it says, e.g. ill-considered policies made by dishonest or lazy politicians.
07/06/2009 at 17:19 Mesic says:
The only thing that can cure germany is an even worse holocaust in another country.
07/06/2009 at 17:19 ArtyArt says:
Max, who exactly are you talking about? This whole debate is held by vote-hungry politicians (and TV stations, possibly to avoid being targeted themselves), so count me in as part of the “rest of the free world” while I’m sitting right in the middle of the country that hasn’t learned from WW2…
Germany already has the most restrictive laws concerning violent videogames possible (apart from banning them altogether, I guess). S[n/t]uff like Manhunt isn’t even sold here at all, and even Valve are doing their worst to censor many games that are being downloaded from a German IP… can it get any more absurd?
Piracy rates will skyrocket. How convenient that software piracy gets increased attention from publishers and their lawyers here, so if CompanyofDutyHonor32 isn’t allowed to get sold anymore, at least they can find themselves some poor teenagers they can sue. Oh well…
07/06/2009 at 17:24 Chemix says:
-Guns are tools
-Knives are tools
-General Objects of almost any nature with decent durability can be used as tools
-Video Games are entertainment
-Culture is the basis for popular morality
The only way to make sure that people can’t hurt one another is to lock them all up in straight jackets and strap them down, because when you take away the gun, you take away the knives, you take away the blunt objects, you take away the pencils, you take away just about everything that doesn’t disintegrate on contact, the body is still an effective means of harming someone else.
The real question is, why? Why do people kill other people? I have a tendency to relate it to culture, where the value of life amounts to a sum of cash value (think about the monetary “values” that people are assigned by income, specifically the rich when mentioned on television) and physical ability, rather than the sum of their past and future emotions and the actions caused by them. We take death lightly, because we see it often, we feel that it impedes progress to linger on it, and because life comes down the a systematic series of labor times in exchange for a reduction in constant debt with the occasional vacation. When it comes down to a life that revolves around paying bills, life becomes a monetary value, which is most insignificant to someone who doesn’t really care about money, a psychopath.
07/06/2009 at 17:24 malkav11 says:
The thing is, while it’s obviously a terrible idea that will screw over the gamers of Germany, in this day and age it would also be quite ineffective in actually keeping said violent videogames out of people’s hands. It’s not like they can prevent you from pirating them unless they start imposing China-style country-wide internet filters and maybe some nice low download caps to go along with.
07/06/2009 at 17:34 James T says:
Can they ban her harelip?
07/06/2009 at 17:36 Novotny says:
Well, as long as they’re consistent about it, I don’t see the problem. They just need to ban any other mediums with violence in them too, like films and books. And the digital media that can carry them, like internets.
So yes: if they ban books, films, television and the internets – and a variety of sports – I think it should work just fine
07/06/2009 at 17:40 wat says:
malkav11: You are correct, but that kind of thinking is quite dangerous.
Germany has been implementing a draconian system of laws with selective enforcement over the past few years.
Under these laws (new copyright law, new cybersecurity law, new anti-pornography laws, now the new censorship law and this ban of games) almost anybody who uses the Internet for anything could be considered guilty of some crime.
For example, under the new cybersecurity law, owning a tool that can be used for computer crime is a crime on it’s own. Now how do you define such a tool? Well, you simply don’t. However, the way the law is written even a browser could be considered such a tool (Which is kinda funny/sad, as the German Minister of Justice publicly admitted that she doesn’t even know what this “browser” is).
So, does that mean that the German government wants to prosecute all Internet users? Of course not. In fact when a few German IT security experts tried to turn themselves in (because each of them had a huge library of dual-use security tools), the cops weren’t interested at all.
So, what’s the method behind this madness? Easy, it’s selective enforcement, and from a government standpoint it works like this:
1. Introduce laws that are so badly written (imprecise, lacking definitions, etc.) that almost anybody is a criminal.
2. Do not enforce any of these laws
3. Once you encounter somebody you really can’t stand, you hit him with one of the laws from point 1.
Even if your case sucks, the guy’s hardware (including any complex electronic device, from MP3 players to TV sets) will still be confiscated. He won’t see the stuff for years. Forensic identification takes time, you know. (Rumors that people who got their hardware back noticed that their system had been used as office systems in the meantime are of course greatly exaggerated).
Call me a cynic, but what a convenient way to make annoying people shut up.
tl;dr: An unenforceable law is always a bad law, as it enables selective enforcement.
07/06/2009 at 17:42 Thirith says:
@Novotny: while I don’t agree with their decision, I think it’s not too farfetched to think that there might be a difference between media where you’re a passive observer of violence and media where you are the one being violent, albeit in virtual form.
P.S.: I wish that those on my side of this argument (i.e. no blanket ban of violent games) wouldn’t resort to the same facile arguments as those in favour of banning games, i.e. stuff along the lines of “I played Doom when I was 8 and I never went on a murdering rampage!!!!1!1″
07/06/2009 at 17:45 po says:
Video games are in no way the cause of this kind of act, although they may give ideas to someone who has been driven to the point of being suicidal, but quite frankly if your actions (or inaction) drives a person to suicide, you can’t blame that suicidal person, when they realise that having no regard for your own life, things like the law become meaningless, and you decide that justice can only be delivered by your own hands, instead of just going off somewhere quiet and hanging yourself.
If you want to end these school killing sprees, you should end the practically institutionalised abuse of people, just because they’re different (team sports at school being a prime example).
07/06/2009 at 17:51 Benjamin Ferrari says:
Dear Friends from Germany,
You are always welcome to come by on a visit . Our stores are open 6 days a week. We are prepared to satisfy all your gaming needs, and we have lots of cool ideas on how to spend your money.
– Your Austrian Neighbors.
PS: Feel free to take one of our nazi parties with you if you leave, at no additional costs. We have far more of them than we need.
PPS: Oh dear, I see your video game ban is already in effect: http://imgur.com/cjz0F.jpg .
07/06/2009 at 17:52 hahaha says:
I sadly had to read this news last week in my german newspaper as well. My reply: Relax – it’s certainly not really going too happen before the election and afterwards there is no need because the votes were casted.
07/06/2009 at 17:59 Heliocentric says:
Germany, you are doing it wrong, what is the common factor with all crime? I can think of 2, people and laws. So either ban laws or ban people. But no, the law makers don’t make games and but they make laws and they might make people.
07/06/2009 at 18:06 Sagan says:
This is kind of a response to John’s point in this post about enforcing of age ratings. The point that if age ratings are enforced, we can make whichever game we want, and nobody can complain about it. I think this is disproven, because age ratings are enforced here in Germany. Turns out, that politicians still need to appear as if they are doing something about a problem, even if the problem is over 18 years old. So they go crazy and propose the complete banning of most games. (I still support enforcing age ratings, but for other reasons)
As for this story: I still hope that this won’t actually come through. So far they have only decided that they are going to do this. They still have to write the necessary laws and get them through whatever process it is that laws go through. Hopefully somewhere along the way there will be a public outcry. In all the news stories I have read about this, there weren’t even comments by the games industry yet.
07/06/2009 at 18:06 Blast Hardcheese says:
Gratz Germany- You’re now dumber than us.
I’m sure our last President is still handing out backrubs for whoever the leader of Germany is now.
It’s well known that making things illegal just turns people into criminals and gives it an element of mystique for children. It’s why outright banning guns in the US would never work, because criminals would still have guns.
Take away video games, and kids STILL HAVE GUNS. You don’t need a video game to load a gun, so where do they get this moon logic that a better educated public on gun control isn’t the answer?
In fact the only reason we have any real amount of school shootings here is because of lax gun control, which I’m sure worked real well for the parents of the little monsters.
Oh wait, culture of victimhood. They’re not to blame, it was video games. Right. Moving on!
The gun makes killing easy. You don’t need the emotional drain or physical effort with killing someone with your hands (yes, I am paraphrasing from Batman: The Dark Knight). In all honesty action movies do far more of putting the gun on this pedestal of invincibility that children take to. Most kids think they can’t be harmed because of action movies, etc.
Really the fix is just better control of gun sales (no sales to minors you idiots what the hell is wrong with you), better education on firearm safety (you can shoot a target if you can hold a gun but does a kid make the connection between target practice and shooting people? It’d be up to the parents to teach this lesson), and better gun control at home (separate ammo from the gun, keep ammo in a safe, use a trigger lock, etc).
People that do murders like this are often narcissistic. They’re getting exactly what they want when coverage goes this far. It basically commemorates the event when they ban something. Why don’t they just name the Bill to ban video games after the little bastard?
07/06/2009 at 18:08 Some Guy says:
Now there’ll only be sex left in games
07/06/2009 at 18:24 Novotny says:
Thirith, you are of course right, however I would strongly argue that a Rambo film does more to glamourise one-man armies than your average violent video game.
In fact, whilst I play these games, I now find those kind of films pretty gross, with the slow-mo footage of people taking multiple bullets to the torso etc. Having said that, Fallout 3 does it too.
Anyways, our debating it is pretty pointless, I’m sure we’re all more or less in agreement.
07/06/2009 at 18:25 Psychopomp says:
You know, I can’t help but imagine that the german government is run by a group of /b/tards, and they are merely trolling the entire country.
07/06/2009 at 18:26 Darth Nader says:
So, who’s up for German Goo Girls – the RPG?
07/06/2009 at 18:35 armlesscorps says:
I agree strongly with the first 2 posts.
07/06/2009 at 18:36 armlesscorps says:
I hope this isnt shown on Respond! Opinion Away!
07/06/2009 at 18:38 Larington says:
They’ll need to ban all the websites that allow you to download these games as well then, we all know this will only drive the gamers underground or to alternative distribution sources.
If they really wanted to do more than political posturing, they would be promising to pledge more resources to the mental health care system… They’ll have far more success treating the 0.17% (or is it 0.017) that is ‘at risk’ than they will have by punishing the majority for the actions of a very small minority.
07/06/2009 at 18:42 cjlr says:
That is just so god-damn retarded.
But look on the bright side. This happens to EVERY new media. Let’s take a time machine… rap, tv, rock and roll, comic books, movies, jazz… The antiquated old blowhards in charge when it arrives mainstream just can’t deal with it, so it takes a generation before the last pathetic vestiges of censorship-in-everything-but-name to fade out. Freedom of expression my ass. A new zeitgeist takes over only when its opponents die of old age.
Picture this: there’s a new entertainment craze sweeping the country. All the kids are doing it. It’s wild, its sexually charged, it’s aggressive… Can you guess what it is? Congratulations, that’s right: the waltz! Those crazy teenagers, wearing only three layers of underwear and dancing crazy foreign dances together. Because you might actually dance with the same partner throughout, and, god forbid, you’re looking at each other the whole time. And such unseemly rhythms!
Public fornication, the proliferation of mass violence, and the downfall of decent society were the inevitable consequences. Wait, what?
07/06/2009 at 18:42 Tom says:
This makes me want to scream and cry and bash my head against the table in sheer frustration at the idiocy and ignorance of humanity
ARRRRRRGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH
07/06/2009 at 18:44 Bhazor says:
This is my opinion on this issue.
For additional credibility it will be expressed through a Scottish guys face.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KnqLyYeyOCs
07/06/2009 at 18:44 K says:
I don’t know. Have you played Wolfenstein? I think Hitler got some pretty big ideas from that. He even looked like the end boss.
07/06/2009 at 18:45 Calabi says:
I’m didnt even realise it was possible for democratic governments to be as dictatorial as this anymore.
Have they even weighed the consequences the economic and else wise causes it may effect.
But still it will be interesting to see what happens.
07/06/2009 at 18:45 N'79 says:
And the worst part? That president who outright SUPPORTED such moves has been quite recently RE-ELECTED.
In other words:German gamers are screwed for another 5 years (if not even forever.)
07/06/2009 at 18:46 The Hammer says:
That Newswipe clip continues to amaze me. Excellent television.
07/06/2009 at 18:48 Inglorion says:
Disgraceful. Fucking fascists.
07/06/2009 at 18:48 Heliocentric says:
With german development of violent haulted we could actually end up with decent sex games being developed.
07/06/2009 at 18:52 Gorgeras says:
Anyone remember the old joke about Tetris causing children to drop bricks from bridges?
07/06/2009 at 18:57 boatorious says:
The problem is that politicians (and many others) think we are just one law away from utopia. If we just take one more liberty from the people then everything will be perfect.
07/06/2009 at 19:09 waffles says:
I would be annoyed by this if i wasn’t amused that its in Germany.
Poland must be having a ball with this.
07/06/2009 at 19:22 Naurgul says:
Theory, about Greece: That law was kinda enforced for a few months and then was completely forgotten. As far as I know, on paper, all videogames are banned in Greece even now. But in practice, nobody cares.
07/06/2009 at 19:27 Heliocentric says:
Poland will only think this is funny until the censorship division of the german millitary expresses germany’s need for breathing room from games.
07/06/2009 at 19:45 Sabre says:
Can we petition the Bundestag to ban Germany’s Interior Ministers?
07/06/2009 at 19:45 Andrew Dunn says:
Newswipe and videoGaiden clips to illustrate the issue? Good work RPS and commenters.
07/06/2009 at 19:45 MetalCircus says:
Banning of vidya gaems? Mmmm, I smell an increase in piracy somewhere over Germany…
07/06/2009 at 19:54 James G says:
@Naurgul
My understanding was that regulations at the European level had resulted in the law being suspended. (This all from the last time I researched computer and video game censorship in Europe, back when Germany was trying this move again.)
07/06/2009 at 19:55 lumpi says:
First: This won’t go through. It’s not the first time ministers “demand” a law during election time. That doesn’t mean it will pass. Even the ban on the more niche group of paintball players didn’t go through.
Second: @cliffski: I do not believe in this kind of mixing up cause and effect. I read the fascinating article as I read every opinion on this subject, but I don’t believe it is accurate.
Every time a more modern civilization clashed with a traditional one, the latter was destroyed in a violent nightmare. For centuries, this is what we have seen. In Bhutan, the introduction of television was a clash of cultures in general, not a clash of technology (or TV programming). You can (temporally) deny the existence of violence and corruption in a small, mountainous enclave. But if you introduce its people to it in a burst of information overload… well, no wonder this ended in a disaster.
07/06/2009 at 20:01 undead dolphin hacker says:
Ban unhappy teenage boys imo.
07/06/2009 at 20:13 Hypocee says:
Finally. It’s about time they stopped beating around the bush. No more delays for negotiating with their de facto censorship board or palette-shifting enemies into ‘aliens’ or ‘zombies’, and I’m sure the ban will be about as effective as a chocolate saucepan; win-win. I’m sure the awesome indies working there have a grasp on the idea of pseudonyms.
07/06/2009 at 20:17 Bear says:
Personally, I blame oxygen for violent behavior. ALL DEATHS OCCUR AFTER SOMEONE BREATHED OXYGEN. BAN IT NOW !!!
@Lactose
Also: oh my sweet merciful bear. I want to weep. To weep and to rage.
I love you too ;)
07/06/2009 at 20:22 Sagan says:
Alright I have decided: This is just indirect campaigning.
There are elections in Germany in September. And their proposal is to make this a law before that. Which is obviously completely unrealistic. Had they said that this should be done sometimes next year, I would have been concerned. But before the elections? Not a chance. They just want to look like they are doing something after that school shooting. But even they aren’t taking this serious if they don’t even take the time they would need.
After the elections, this will be completely forgotten.
07/06/2009 at 20:27 Naurgul says:
James G, I’m not sure if that’s the whole story. I distinctly remember hearing about Greece paying fines to European courts because of that law. If it was officially suspended there surely would be no reason for the EU to do that, right?
07/06/2009 at 20:28 Ziv says:
at least this time he played normal games. you usually hear- “he played second life and quake 3 and that’s turned him into a mass murderer, not the drug abuse or the other kids that humiliated him – it was second life that killed those children.”
NOT!
07/06/2009 at 20:31 Ban says:
Newswipe FTW!
07/06/2009 at 20:36 Rei Onryou says:
Look at number of games players in Germany. Look at number of violent incidents that have occurred by games players. The % of gamers that are violent would be insignificant.
Look at number of available guns/houses with guns/gun owners. Look at number of firearm incidences. The % of firearm incidents would be far higher. Coincidence? Of course!
In conclusion, ban table-tennis.
07/06/2009 at 20:39 MetalCircus says:
My fingers make me press buttons on the keyboard and virtual men die
I say we should ban our own fingers, lest we destroy planet earth with them.
07/06/2009 at 20:45 Beastman says:
If this *does* go through, it could be the definitive proof we need that games don’t turn us into psychopathic killers.
Not really. As of now, there’s already no proof whatsoever that video games do make people violent, but that doesn’t prevent the people in charge from constantly talking as though it’s been proved that they do.
Even if Germany does ban all violent video games and it does nothing, they (and other countries) will just slightly change their tune to insinuate that video games were just part of a larger problem. But they’re still bad and need to stay banned, natch.
07/06/2009 at 20:46 ToSt says:
Maybe it should be pointed out that this isn’t the first time the state interior ministers suggest banning of violent video games in Germany (I think they did it in 2004(?) and 2005(?), too).
It won’t actually happen. The only reason for this are the elections this fall.
Still, this is problematic because it causes uncertainty for businesses and distracts from the real causes of these shootings (whatever they may be).
07/06/2009 at 20:49 clive dunn says:
BAN EVERYTHING
BAN ME
BAN YOU
BAN THE BACON IN MY FRIDGE
BAN MY COCK
BAN MY EYES
BAN WORDS
BAN STUFF
JUST FUCKING BAN IT!
BAN BANS!
……………
07/06/2009 at 21:00 wat says:
ToSt: Problem is that this time, it’s *all* Interior Ministers at the state level *and* at the federal level. Now, we don’t know how much support this thing really has internally, but if it is really supported by all the Ministers in question, then there is a very real probability that this will actually happen.
The fact that the “Grand Coalition” holds an absolute majority in both parliaments will see to that, because it enables them to pass new laws within a week or so. Often they cannot easily use that power because of internal dissent, but in this case it seems that there were no objections amongst the ministers. And in Germany, 90% of representatives sit in the back row and just vote as they are told by the party (a phenomenon called “party discipline”), so a handful of people agreeing could be sufficient to push this through.
And I’m sure having an actual law before the election makes these people look better than merely promising a law, especially if it’s about something that you can bash very easily.
07/06/2009 at 21:01 MedO says:
N’79: The president is not elected directly by the people but by the Bundesversammlung, which consists of the members of the Bundestag and additional represantatives of the different states. Also, he has a lot less influence than presidents of most other countries, even though he is formally the head of state.
To be blunt, my opinion of the problem is that our representatives are too old, and many of them are out of touch with the culture of our generation (and thus, to no small degree, with reality.) The average age of the members of our two biggest parties is around 55.
It probably doesn’t help that older politicians are likely to have a lot more experience in pushing their opinion.
07/06/2009 at 21:01 Tei says:
In 200 years, this will look like this:
There are violent books!… BURN THE BOOKS!.
It look to me already like this.
07/06/2009 at 21:14 dhex says:
“Anyone who thinks otherwise should read up on the studies of the psychological effects of advertising (I recommend ‘the advertised mind), specifically the way the amigdala processes emotional responses before our conscious mind kicks in.”
sorry for the aside, but…
this is something of an aside, but the advertised mind is perhaps not the best book to base thoughts about advertising on. it’s great if you’re a consultant – i’ve come across a few who were namedropping that between all sorts of “viral” proposals – but patently useless otherwise.
if you’re a consultant, it’s amazing because it makes it seem like you engage in pure magic. a throwback to the early web 1.0 days when rushkoff was a corporate lecturer (his current hairshirting is interesting as an exercise in flying from reason as a form of contrition) and everyone was sprinkling presentations with nlp droppings.
there are things you can “scientize” for fun and profit, and things where research actually helps. hell, no one can actually give you a demonstrable model for ROI on advertising or PR efforts because some things resist being turned into numbers.
people like that book because it feeds their prejudices (advertising is evil/powerful) or because it feeds their wallet (i’ll make your advertising evil/powerful) but like all marketing fads, should be considered in the same light one would approach phrenology with.
edit: similar faddishness arose from the self-serving dreck of “lovemarks”.
07/06/2009 at 21:22 Dracko says:
lol guns are evil
07/06/2009 at 21:27 Lack_26 says:
It may not be just video games but the pace of society in general, there was an article I read the other day
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/scienceandtechnology/technology/twitter/5429167/24-hour-news-streams-and-constant-Twitter-updates-causing-brain-overload.html
I think this probably has some reference, especially to do with our general lack of empathy. I mean we hear about another 1000 dead in so and so place, and most of us genuinely don’t care.
07/06/2009 at 21:34 EyeMessiah says:
I want to second Helio’s suggestion re. banning people. I think that will help A LOT.
Re. playing computer games really having a physiological effect. Of course it does. Good games are indeed exciting. They might make me want to leap out of my chair and ninja kick one of my co-workers out of a nearby window. That isn’t the issue though. There are all sorts of things that might make me think about ninja kicking someone out of a window. Even if you banned them all I would almost certainly stumble upon the idea simply by an effort of imagination.
The core of the issue isn’t whether or not you could prevent me from thinking about violence by depriving me of violent stimulation. Its whether or not I am able to moderate my behaviour in such a way that I don’t actually ever cross that line. Most people don’t find this hard at all.
Most gamers are capable of literally gorging themselves on incredible ultraviolence without ever actually getting into a violent exchange with another human being.
A tiny, tiny minority of people for a variety of reasons aren’t able to manage their behaviour in this way. I suspect that even in the absence of video games, rock and roll music, pornography, beauty product advertising, drugs, radical literature and starbucks these same people would still manage to dream up some pretty fucked up shit ALL ON THEIR OWN, and then fail to prevent them selves from actually going out and doing it.
I mean what about that guy who pulled the tails of all those cats? I don’t think I played that game.
Well, if he had been sticking them on the end of shot-guns then I would have known what he had been playing…
07/06/2009 at 21:45 greenb says:
The Federal govt. og Germany is also trying to establish a so-called anti-pedoporn law. It would force ISPs to have their DNSes redirect people to a STOP sign (and be protocolled) when they try to access sites that are on a list compiled in secrecy by a federal police agency (that can pull the records of all IPs/customers who tried to access a listed site). The utter Naziness of this would be hilarious if they weren’t serious.
It might be an overly easy conclusion to make, but a lot of things suggest to me that many German politicians just have no clue. First, that law is secret, checks-and-balances free censorship, and second, any actual USER of the internet (some politicians, esp. the Federal Minister of the Interior Mr Schäuble, have been dubbed “internet printer-outers” by bloggers) can just use a non-ISP DNS. Victims of pedophilia have formed an alliance against this, because as their spokesman so fittingly put it, it’s just what happens in dysfunctional abusive families: the problem isn’t adressed, everyone just looks away. Some remarks even suggest they’re somewhat proud of their cluelessness (one Mr Wiefelspütz springs to mind).
Now that the coalition in power are trying to enforce censorship on a medium some have called an art form, I’m really worried. Younger people feeling misunderstood by politicians might turn to more extreme political views, and perhaps more worringly, some politicians will think they’re right if this goes through. When most (truly) scientific literature on a given topic is cautious to establish any correlation and a law that doesn’t listen to any of it still goes through, we’re in bad shape. It used to be “cool” to mock the oh-so-stupid Americans and their brainless President, but I fear Germany might be headed for worse.
The fact that the Ministers for the Interior are using the deaths of trainee teachers and 15-year-old schoolgirls to support their goals is just the bat guano cherry on a bovine excrement sundae.
07/06/2009 at 21:46 Novotny says:
‘bovine excrement sundae’
oh thanks im hungry now
07/06/2009 at 21:54 Mister Adequate says:
Yeah, friend of mine in Germany said a local competition was already called off by local political types, she was pretty mad.
I sincerely doubt this will have any effect beyond a massive spike in Germans pirating things.
07/06/2009 at 22:05 Tworak says:
You want to ban extreme violence in games? GO FOR IT!
You want to take away my TF2? FUUUCK YOOUUUUU!!!
07/06/2009 at 22:07 cjlr says:
Either a massive spike in pirating, or a massive spike in cross-border Austrian shops…
07/06/2009 at 22:16 subedii says:
Crytek in particular has had a hard time of it in Germany. They were actually raided in their homes by armed police officers a few years back. For those interested in reading up on that, and a bit of the background, one of the devs made a posting about the raid here. It makes for a pretty interesting (if disturbing read), and helps to cast a little light on the issues at work here:
http://www.quartertothree.com/game-talk/showthread.php?t=31767
http://www.gamepolitics.com/2006/12/15/crytek-developer-offers-frightening-account-of-german-game-crackdown
EDIT: This post was made all the way back in 2006, and if Germany’s actually managing to push this legislation through, I can only imagine it’s gotten worse for them over time.
07/06/2009 at 22:22 Carra says:
I see a few problems with this:
-> What’s a violent video game? Pretty much all games have some sort of violence factor. Heck, even chess is about killing your opponents.
-> Import. I’m living in Belgium but I’m importing quite a bit form the UK (play.com), mostly for their cheaper prices. If my games were censored I’d just stop buying locally. Or from one of the digital distribution media. Or if these fail you force people to download the pirated version…
-> No direct connection between killing and playing video games has been found. There are other more things to forbid which have a direct connection. Why not completely forbid the selling of guns? People might still go on a clubbing or stabbing rage but they won’t be able to kill as easily. But I suppose it’s easier to blame games. There’s a bigger stigma on games then on weapons…
07/06/2009 at 22:27 Some Guy says:
Now only sex will be left in video games
07/06/2009 at 22:50 Gap Gen says:
“Now only sex will be left in video games”
The phrase “grinding” takes on a whole new disturbing meaning.
07/06/2009 at 22:57 clive dunn says:
They did an experiment in the Amazon with a newly discovered tribe where they gave them videogames and then observed the changes in behaviour.
Half the tribe became very aggressive and charged into the jungle to kill and mutilate whatever crossed their path, the other half surfed on Ebay for a cheap Geforce Gtx295.
07/06/2009 at 23:44 Xercies says:
Games are the new whipping boy it seems, 20 years ago it was Horror movies that was the big taboo and made your children killers. Its no different then Britain baning most Horror movies, it lasted for about 10 years and pretty much no one talked of it since except horror fans when they are trying to get back copies. i see the same thing happening here to be honest.
Also i have no care about money does that make me a psychopath. I think Brad Pitt said it best in 12 Monkeys when he was talking about that kind of thing.
08/06/2009 at 00:03 Chemix says:
If that comment, Xercies, was referencing my post; no, not caring about money doesn’t make you a psychopath, it doesn’t make you anything, a psychopath actively attempts to create pain/ suffering/ or other moral negatives on specific individuals or random ones. Sociopathy is a mental state of apathy towards morality good or bad, or a general lack of empathy, as opposed to an extreme sense of antipathy found in psychos, so money would matter to a sociopath, but not a psychopath.
When you reduce the value of life down to a material value however, you are lowering the general bar and inviting sociopathy and psychopathy to become more prevalent as these states aren’t as noticeable in such a society, like today, not that it was so much better yesterday, it’s been like this… for a long time now, TV and Internet just provide a wider point of access to the materialization that could previously be semi-negated by raising your children well enough, not that TV and the Internet are bad, it’s simply that the television has become the replacement for dad, and the console is mom now, in many homes.
08/06/2009 at 00:09 MetalCircus says:
We all need to watch a Clockwork Orange for this kind of stuff. You can force people to do good deeds, but if they don’t truly feel as though they are good people inside then you still have a killer on your hand. In the film, Alex is brainwashed and psychologically conditioned against performing violent actions, and it doesn’t make him better, instead it drives him to near suicide as he realizes his internal desire for violence cannot be quenched as he starts to throw up and feel like he wants to end it all at the slightist hint of anger.
Banning games or not, people will still want to play them. And you’ll still have murderers on your hands and it’s not about video games.
People have to want to be good and that comes from parenting and social surroundings etc. Sure you get short term thrills from Call of Duty etc but really, it isn’t enough for most normal people to want to pick up a machine gun and brutally slaughter a russian villiage full of people. It’s a bit of excitement, an adrenaline rush that you’d get from watching movies, or hey, snowboarding or sky diving or something (although the russhes you get from the latter are palpably more intense ¬_¬)
PS, I love the choice of image that acompanies this article. Haha :D
08/06/2009 at 00:18 TWOD says:
The Germans are going about this all wrong, the only common factor in all these school shootings is that they happen in schools! Thus if they want a final solution to this problem they should instead ban schools.
08/06/2009 at 00:24 Melf_Himself says:
The only thing this will do is dramatically increase the piracy rate in Germany. For this move to work they’d have to ban P2P downloads as well (good luck).
08/06/2009 at 00:28 scundoo says:
Then Ban in Greece is directed against electronic gambling.
The law could be taken as including internet cafes, but it isn’t enforced. I don’t see why people are posting their uninformed nonsense without even using Google first to get their facts straight.
Chemix: No, a gun is not a tool, it’s a weapon (especially assault rifles).
08/06/2009 at 00:32 Ascale says:
Shocking that these ministers are most interested in getting the bill passed before election time. More fodder to appease the ignorant masses. Anything to win votes.
As to those who recommend taking even more rights (specifically qua guns) as a means to stop these incidents, you disgust me even more.
08/06/2009 at 00:50 Okami says:
Awesome news. I’ll lose my job if this law passes.
08/06/2009 at 01:05 Bah says:
I wonder what will happen to the german realms in World of Warcraft. Pointing them out specifically as it is the only MMO i can think of that has set aside servers just for the germans.
08/06/2009 at 01:16 Legionary says:
>”It would force ISPs to have their DNSes redirect people to a STOP sign (and be protocolled) when they try to access sites that are on a list compiled in secrecy by a federal police agency (that can pull the records of all IPs/customers who tried to access a listed site).”
We already have that in the UK. It’s voluntary but actually nearly all major ISPs are signed up to it. There’s a secret list maintained by the Internet Watch Foundation of sites that ‘may’ contain illegal materials. Yes, ‘may’ contain. They’re not an official body, so they can’t judge whether a particular piece of content is illegal or not. Remember that album cover on Wikipedia being blacklisted? That was the IWF adding *encyclopaedia entries* to its secret list, how’s that for scary? Oh and by the way, it doesn’t even tell you that the content you’re trying to view is censored, instead it returns a 404 as though the content didn’t exist. Very 1984, don’t you think? Bad things are ungood, now they are unthings.
Video games censorship is inevitable. Politicians everywhere know the power of a moralistic bandwagon and they’ll jump on it with great enthusiasm. Despite a complete lack of evidence, violent and sexually mature video games are going to be systematically targeted and eradicated to score cheap political points.
I find it all very depressing, and in fact it’s exactly the sort of thing that makes me want to machinegun the entire world. I won’t – probably – but maybe they should consider banning bans to avoid murderous rampages.
08/06/2009 at 01:23 LactoseTheIntolerant says:
@Ascale:
“As to those who recommend taking even more rights (specifically qua guns) as a means to stop these incidents, you disgust me even more.”
Why’s that? People aren’t getting annoyed specifically at the taking away of a right; rather, the fact that it’s a groundless knee-jerk reaction that is neither addressing the roots of violent crime nor likely to do anything to cut down on it. Guns, on the other hand.. To say that to own a gun guarantees or even makes likely the chance of the owner commiting a murder would be ridiculous. However I don’t see how you could argue that making guns much more difficult to acquire wouldn’t reduce the frequency of shootings (and in kind the frequency of murders/violent crime overall overall; someone mentioned earlier the difference between attacking someone with a gun and with, say, a knife).
08/06/2009 at 01:38 luphisto says:
piracy in germany will become a massive problem if that law passes
08/06/2009 at 01:44 OJ 287 says:
I think part of the problem is the legislators’ age and their perceptions of the German people. They were the generation tasked with wiping away militarism and suppressing the ideologies of the Nazis and thats had a lasting effect on them. Because they dont understand the youth they project their fears of their parents’ generation onto their children.
Theyre products of their time but at some point they have to realize that most Germans in 2009 dont need to be thought controlled and have their eyes shielded in case they see a gun, knife or even a swastika.
08/06/2009 at 01:57 armlesscorps says:
maybe they think hitler wouldnt have got in to power if people hadnt been playing return to castle wolfenstein
08/06/2009 at 02:17 Jazmeister says:
On the one hand, I think it’d be interesting if they did use it as a kind of experiment; if violence did fade away completely then, sure, i’ll give up my shooters and war games. Small price to pay for peace when I can sink a million hours into Harvest Moon or The Sims anyway, right? If the violence stays the same, will they bring it back, though?
On the other hand, probably one of my best gaming buddies is a German, living in Germany. He’s a phenomenal sniper, and I’d hate to face another hour of 2fort without him.
I say ban violent videogames in a smaller country for about six months. They’ll probably all kill eachother, then we can build the floating gamer city above the poppy fields there.
08/06/2009 at 02:57 jackflash says:
it seems fairly obvious that people will simply pirate what they can no longer buy.
08/06/2009 at 03:12 Unlucky Irish says:
Ok a few points need to be made; first of all this ban is being proposed by elected officials, so as much as gamers don’t like it it does have a mandate from the people. If you don’t like it or you think the system is broken, vote next time.
Second; comparing the proposed ban to National Socialism is painfully ignorant. One is a knee-jerk restriction on a niche medium while the other was a regime that actively hunted down and killed dissidents and ethnic minorities. Keep this distinction in mind, it will make you look more intelligent.
Thirdly; burning books and banning video games is not the same thing. Books have a cultural weight and a deep psychological meaning in modern culture and it is only books that are particularly meaningful that get burned in the first place. Video games, as much as I love them, haven’t yet reached this stage as a medium. Doesn’t mean you should ban them; it’s just that the comparison doesn’t work.
Lastly; complaining that a government program preventing the viewing of paedophilic material is overly authoritarian, makes you look suspicious. I suggest keeping future observations along these lines to your self and the rest of your “Ring”.
Video games don’t cause school shootings or drive people to commit violent acts; if they did then such acts would be leveled against a more “video game-esque” enemy such as the police or military (rather than little Helga who laughed at you when you said you liked her). However, I find it hard to blame people when the search of a solution to such a traumatic event, misguided tho they may be.
Neither would banning guns work either if we are to be honest. I mean take Britain, the country operates under strict gun control laws (especially since Dunblane) yet still the most violent society in Europe. If someone wants to kill someone else then their is very little you can do to stop them, it’s just something modern society is just going to have to come to terms with.
08/06/2009 at 03:19 MD says:
Well said.
It seems that the done thing within the gaming scene is to blindly dismiss the possibility that violent games could be having a negative psychological (and indirectly, social) impact, waving the ‘no evidence’ flag — despite the act that while of course nobody has proved that games are turning us into murderers, there is a wealth of psychological research to support the argument that exposure to violent media can increase the likelihood of violent behaviour; the question of how much more significant games are relative to other forms due to their interactive nature may still be open, but the apparent success of the US military in breaking their soldiers’ natural reluctance to kill by using more realistic, human-like targets in training certainly makes me uneasy — or inanely pointing out that ‘I play games and am yet to commit murder’, or ‘games do not magically override my free will’, etc.
It’s not clear how great an impact violent games have on human psychology and behaviour, or how the susceptibility to such effects varies across the population. But it seems disingenuous to treat the benign nature of extreme interactive violence as an unchallenged fact, or even to suggest that ‘normal people will never be affected, it’s only the nutjobs who would be set off by something else anyway’, which seems to be a widely-held ‘moderate’ position on the issue. Those who disagree with the implications of psychological research showing a link between exposure to violence and increased aggression, or participation in simulated violence and a weakening of the natural barriers to commiting violent acts, need to explain their own reasoning! It’s not enough to simply cherry-pick a few uber-conservative moral campaigners or misguided lawmakers and tear them to shreds as a symbol of the entire opposing argument. That’d be like them finding the most sickeningly offensive violent-rape-and-murder-game somewhere on the depths of the internet, and holding it up as evidence that all gamers are appallingly depraved.
None of that is to suggest that the obvious next step is to go around banning everything. But it’s worth actually engaging with the issue and discussing the validity and effectiveness of various approaches, rather than dismissing the possibility that we have a social problem on our hands.
08/06/2009 at 04:01 Shnyker says:
I don’t have time to read all these comments, but I hope someone sees mine. Germany is jumping at nothing, even if it passes it won’t work. Also banning guns, yes it lowers shootings, but you then obtain England’s new problem of stabbings. And also, on the sex vs. violence debate, I don’t think either in a video game are truly damaging any more than in movies or books. The whole attack on gaming is stupid in so many ways I find it hard to count. Oh, and I appreciate how this is probably one of the highest comment counts on any RPS news article.
08/06/2009 at 04:20 Jonathan says:
“Max says:
In all honesty, Germany still hasn’t managed to learn from World War II.
They went from one extreme to the other when neither is ideal. Don’t they realize that the rest of the free world thinks they’re overreacting?”
Yep. For those that know a little about postwar speech restrictions in former Axis countries, this is both a bit Orwellian and yet not too surprising. Germany has for a long time made it illegal to sell any items with WWII axis markings. This includes things like model tanks and toy soldiers. It’s both scary and hilarious. In another enforcement of a counter-reactionary law attempting to wipe away the sins of the past, Austria has an anti-Holocaust denial law carrying up to 20 years of jail time. British historian David Irving, who once incorrectly questioned many aspects of the holocaust, was recently arrested and jailed in Austria for speeches he made in 1989. Speeches. Which he later retracted and corrected with further research published in his thorough documentations of Nazi concentration camps.
The fact is many European governments simply don’t place as much value on the concept of free speech as do the UK (implicitly) and the US (explicitly in the first amendment and implicitly in other areas of the Constitution). Germany’s attempt to ban violent media is perfectly in-line with their attitude toward individual speech rights over the past half century. Don’t think it’s just a particular party or person.
08/06/2009 at 04:22 Charlie says:
I tell ya, it’s this fluridation in our water systems!
08/06/2009 at 04:33 Jonathan says:
“MD says:
It seems that the done thing within the gaming scene is to blindly dismiss the possibility that violent games could be having a negative psychological (and indirectly, social) impact, waving the ‘no evidence’ flag…”
Yes, I hate it when people blindly claim that “video games have NO effect on me.” Come on, every single thing you see and hear from birth to death has some effect; it’s all stored somewhere and each of those tiny shards of memory makes up pieces of the person you are. Now, how readily you can access that data, and how big an impact it has on you, that’s debateable. Undeniably the research (and our own intuition based on experience) tells us that children are more influenced by interactive media than adults. So it ultimately -ideally- comes down to parents and guardians taking on the adult responsibility of being the unpopular meanie and telling kids NO! you can’t play Death Race 2000. The sad thing is that many parents abrogate this resposibility in favor of taking the easy way out and making the child temporarily happy. This is what concerns me.
08/06/2009 at 05:08 Shawn says:
This will almost all but KILL the PC gaming market in Germany, which is arguably the biggest hotbed of PC Gaming in Europe. Not only is this ridiculous, it’s fucking scary to see Government get so out of control.
08/06/2009 at 05:27 woppin says:
Has anyone considered Quake Live? It’s browser based, and yet it’s a violent game. Are the German government going to implement a blacklist to prevent their citizens from playing that?
What about 1066? That’s pretty violent (also awesome) What are they going to do about people playing flash games with violent content?
08/06/2009 at 05:54 Chemix says:
In reference to Scundoo, a weapon is a tool, a tool that can be used to defend, to attack, to provoke, and to generate fear. It is made specifically for these purposes. My main issue with the banning of guns is that it lowers the level of power the populace has in comparison to it’s government, which tends to make it more wary of provoking it’s people
08/06/2009 at 07:01 c-Row says:
@ Unlucky Irish
The problem is that we are only supposed to vote every four years. Whatever ideas prosper from politicians’ out-of-touch-with-21st-century-reality minds in the meantime is next to impossible to interfere with.
It’s not about banning paedophilic material from the internet – I guess we all could live without that. The problem is that
1) the filter can easily be circumvented (a court demonstration took a mere 30 seconds to do so) and is therefore pretty useless
2) it doesn’t really deal with the problem because the sites are still online and whoever wants to visit them is still able to do so (see 1)
3) there is no control committee for which sites are banned and what for other than the federal police themselves
08/06/2009 at 07:17 the affront says:
“Lastly; complaining that a government program preventing the viewing of paedophilic material is overly authoritarian, makes you look suspicious. I suggest keeping future observations along these lines to your self and the rest of your “Ring”.”
Actually, it doesn’t, if you’re not living in your own little black and white world and/or are able to think a little farther about all its ramifications and its background.
The way it is planned or at least patently possible to be realized, text of law permitting, is that clicking on one random link you obviously don’t have a goddamn clue about or are maliciously misinformed about its destination puts you under “reasonable suspicion” per the IP logging on said “stop” pages. Meaning you could very, very easily be wrongly implicated and persecuted as a pedophiliac for nothing else but standard internet browsing.
Do YOU want to be limited to only click on links that you know to be 100% trustworthy? Seeing as this is the internet you can bet your ass there will be idiots posting tinyurl links to blacklisted pages everywhere once some of those blacklisted pages become known. Also what about hacked pages redirecting you to such a page? Have fun getting your house raided and your electronics confiscated for a few years for stupid shit like that. Also have fun looking your neighbors/employer in the eye after getting wrongfully raided for clicking on a link.
I really can’t remember any law post-nazi Germany so well suited to arbitrary, unjustified social destruction of lives.
Not to mention that all this won’t do jack shit to any serious consumer of sick shit like that, as there are enough ways to circumvent a stupid ISP based redirect.
08/06/2009 at 08:04 Jim Rossignol says:
“there is a wealth of psychological research to support the argument that exposure to violent media can increase the likelihood of violent behaviour”
No, there are one or two dubious studies, usually funded by organisations who want that to be the case. To my knowledge there has *never* been a worthwhile study into this subject. It’s easy to assume otherwise. Note that Cliffski cites a study into advertising, not videogames.
Videogames, as a subject for methodical scientific study, have been sorely neglected.
08/06/2009 at 09:00 The Fanciest of Pants says:
An outrageous idea, but I don’t think it’s likely that any government would deny themselves millions and millions of earth dollars in taxes when it really came down to it.
Case in point; Ciggarretes, more is made by government taxation(in the U.S., Australia and much of Europe at least) then is made by the tobacco companies producing them. Sure they’ve been cracking down on WHERE you can smoke, but a total ban will just never happen, too much money would be lost.
08/06/2009 at 09:02 Tomaz says:
Imagine if video games were around when Hitler was young. He would have been really nasty then…
08/06/2009 at 09:04 megaman says:
It’s sad how my own government achieves to disappoint me, again and again. It’s also sad that the amount of Trolls posting in this topic is higher than I anticipated (i.e., higher than the average plus the outlash that was to be expected). Maybe some of you should come over for a visit. There’s less of virtually everything some of you imagine is going on here: less nazis, less weapons, less military, less bavarians, less sauerkraut. It’s actually a nice place to live, although the current development in politics makes me worry.
08/06/2009 at 09:24 ymrar says:
There has always been something that takes the blame for violence, drugs etc. Rock’n roll, movies, TV, games and lastly teh Intanet. Politicians are just grasping votes with this, turning peoples eyes from the real social problems. Be it in Bhutan, Germany or any other country, the problems already lie in people’s unhappiness.
08/06/2009 at 09:33 mihor_fego says:
Since I’m Greek, I should inform you that the ban was on all public venues that used to have arcade games, not for factors involving the games’ content but the many cases where slot-machine type games were tweaked into extremely narrow winning percentages. The ban was extended to all internet cafes to not offer clients a chance to play any such casino-type games or bet online. The government has already decided to lift the ban on arcade games.
Here there has been little to none actual effect other than all game arcades closing down. As for video games, anyone can buy 18+ rated games here no matter how old. It’s the same as with all age-related constrictions: teens can buy cigarettes, rent explicit movies or drink alcohol. The laws exist but are never really enforced.
As for the German government’s decision, I find it rather fascist. Implying that the authorities can decide that not having a chance to play “violent games” is best for you even if you are an adult is preposterous. What then for such movies and/or literature? Should they also be banned? Should then a documentary on nazi violence against Jews and minorities during WW2 also be banned?
I’ve grown as part of a generation that was brought up with video games that were just beginning to have the technology to depict violence. We played Doom and Mortal Kombat for the gore, we were watching splatter movies such as Braindead and witnessed the first gulf war live on our TV sets. Does anyone really believe the scenes we knew were part of a game or movie had more impact on us than watching bombers incinerate civilian-filled shelters?
This decision of the German government comes as a shock, even after the attempts of the EU to spy on network traffic and subsequently shut down internet connections for copyright infringement (see HADOPI).
I am genuinely worried that our human rights in the “Western” world are lessened as increasingly conservative governments are emerging under any political guise. The above mentioned game-related matters are almost trivial when private information rights are at stake or there’s the patriot act I in the US. It seems we are devolving into a more authoritarian society compared to a couple of decades ago…
08/06/2009 at 09:40 ymrar says:
@mihor Well put. The “blaming game” is also a nice way to steer conversation away from real problems. People debate if they should ban alcohol, games and whatnot, and government and corporations can carry on doing what ever shady law they need.
08/06/2009 at 09:53 mihor_fego says:
Think of the violence adolescents come to terms with in rural areas or most of those of previous generations faced: the slaughter of animals. Youngsters were encouraged to behead poultry and slice the throats of goats. Then watch the poor animals suffer as they were dying, perhaps even skin them. I can’t think of anything more traumatizing for a child’s mind.
Yeah, the same people that mostly felt OK with such scenes are worried that shooting a pixelated opponent is harmful to youth. Could it get any more pretentious?
08/06/2009 at 09:55 MD says:
It’s certainly considered an open question by many, and obviously my “wealth of evidence” could be another man’s load of rubbish. But suggesting that there is ‘no evidence’ to support the claim that violent media can increase aggression is simply false, and while I’m sure that some of the relevant studies have indeed been flawed, there have certainly been more than “one or two” and it is a stretch to suggest that they are all worthless. This will be a long, quote-heavy post, and I apologise for that, but it’d be hard for me to respond usefully at this point without a fair bit of quoting and referencing. Most people will (understandably) skip the entire post, but for those who are somewhat interested, feel free to ignore everything bar the links and bolded quotations.
The US Surgeon General’s 2001 report on youth violence summarises (and references by author and date) quite a few studies into the effects of violence in the media — mostly TV and film, though other media are mentioned — on aggressive thining and behaviour, and states that:
(emphasis added)
The same report, this time on long-term studies of media violence and real-world aggression:
The report is a bit over eight years old, so it doesn’t have much to say about videogames — and certainly nothing conclusive — but they do rate a mention:
Some other links:
The Role of Media Violence in Violent Behavior — Annual Review of Public Health, Vol. 27, April 2006.
Longitudinal Relations Between Children’s Exposure to TV Violence and
Their Aggressive and Violent Behavior in Young Adulthood: 1977–1992 — Developmental Psychology 2003, Vol. 39, No. 2.
TV Violence and Brainmapping in Children — Psychiatric Times. Vol. 18 No. 10.
A few more academic articles, which I’ve grouped together because a ‘Craig A. Anderson’ seems to have been partially behind all of them. I don’t know anything about him, but bear in mind that even if you consider him likely to be ‘biased’, two of these articles were published in a journal “with a citation ranking/impact factor placing it in the top ten psychology journals worldwide“, and the other in one of its sister publications. url=http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118998785/abstract?CRETRY=1&SRETRY=0 , url=http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/118661681/abstract , url=http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/120831032/abstract
I’ll stop there, but obviously that was not an exhaustive list.
Again, I’m not claiming that a professional consensus on the effects of media violence exists. But I don’t think that your claim (that the studies indicating a relationship between media and real-world violence are few and dubious) is realistic.
08/06/2009 at 10:00 MD says:
Sorry about the typos and inconsistent formatting, the edit function doesn’t seem to be loading properly. Also I need some dinner.
08/06/2009 at 10:04 mihor_fego says:
The thing is: does graphically depicted violence effects youth MORE than images of real-world violence or social violence? Doesn’t social rejection from peers or discrimination against minorities effect a teenager’s angst and chance of a violent outburst more? Doesn’t poverty or financial inequalities lead youth into criminal behavior? Doesn’t lack of proper education cause ALL of the above?
The point is: to educate youth properly into using their minds for critical thinking instead of restricting their activities or input of information is the ONLY solution.
08/06/2009 at 10:09 Jayteh says:
Did you know Hitler played Counter-Strike
08/06/2009 at 10:32 zombiehunter says:
@mihor_fego
“As for the German government’s decision, I find it rather fascist.”
Oh my, oh my… This is one of the reasons why i don’t tell people i’m from Germany when i’m out of country. Just like you americans tend to tell ppl u’re from canada ^^
Besides, this has not been decided, it was only a proposal by some politicians. They tried this several times before and didn’t make it.
There is however allready quite some censorship here in Germany. For instance i had to import Left 4 Dead from the UK to get an uncensored Version. Although the German version is marked 18+ the zombies can’t be dismembered!
@Benjamin Ferrari
“Your Austrian Neighbors.
PS: Feel free to take one of our nazi parties with you”
I still think it’s hillarious and one of the biggest and most awesome achievements of the Austrians that they made Hitler a German and Beethoven an Austrian ;=)
Personally i don’t care much if the gov. decides not to sell ‘violent’ games in good ol’ Germany anymore. If they wanna lose those taxes, go ahead! There’ll always be a way to get ‘em games if you know how.
@l1ddl3monkey
“Wouldn’t…oh I dunno…banning GUNS be a far more fucking sensible starting place for reducing GUN RAMPAGES? Oh – but then that might give the impression that Germany thinks guns are bad. And guns are one of their main exports and biggest industries.”
Just to inform you: Gun-ownership is prohibited in Germany except for Hunters and so called ‘competetive sport-shooters’ with a license wich is not that easy to obtain.
Automatic rifles and Guns are completely prohibited except for special police force and army.
The main export commoditys of Germany are still Cars, big machines, electronics, mechanics and cemicals.
Germany is not just Heckler&Koch and Sauer. And afaik these are the only gun manufacturers in Germany.
But their main buys are indeed the USA, thats right ^^
This whole discussion about prohibition of violent Games or Guns is a political joke to get attention now before the upcoming elections.
In Germany, in 2007 – of the 82million inhabitants 167 people where killed by gunshots
(couldn’t find the 2008 statistic right now.)
Whats those figures in the US? i’d like to compare :)
best regards
08/06/2009 at 10:46 Black Mamba says:
At least someone else saw the Charle Brooker piece and real reason these nutters go on rampages unfortunately the media will never ever own up to its part to sensationalizing their rampages.
The only thing which may stop this bill going through is the public face of job losses as it will decimate the German developer market so other parts of the government may see what a huge mistake it is and try to block it hopefully.
08/06/2009 at 11:21 Archonsod says:
Whatever happened to the days when politicians understood the law was there for punishment and rehabilitation rather than getting foolish notions about prevention?
08/06/2009 at 11:45 Risingson says:
I can’t believe it. Are you people really judging a WHOLE country by this decision? Are you really making inapropiate jokes about WW2 to feel superior to german people?
This is a bad decision, censorship is troublesome and uses to achieve exactly the opposite. HOWEVER. I agree that reckless violence, like the one hosted in Manhunt 2, is simply something that cannot be sold as entertaiment. And comparing this to real life images in news is an hypocritical argument which destroys itself just after saying it, for being biased, because it ignores the moral that is always carried in those kind of news (which kind, btw? wars?), and because it implies something I never liked: if they do that, why can’t we. I always take an example of a spanish song with those kind of arguments: don’t say that anything is sad, because even sadder is life of ponys in the circus.
08/06/2009 at 11:55 The Fanciest of Pants says:
Eesh, re-reading much of this thread has revealed what a trollercoaster it really is.
Nuke it from orbit, I say(the thread that is).
08/06/2009 at 12:10 Jayteh says:
@zombiehunter
why do you assume everyone is American on the internet if they don’t agree with your views?
08/06/2009 at 12:48 mihor_fego says:
@ zombiehunter
By any means, I did not use the word “fascist” in context with this being a reference to Germany. The movement after all was an Italian one and later became a universal term to describe authoritarian governments or politics.
I have friends that grew in Germany as immigrant’s children and from their accounts legislature concerning human rights was a lot better there compared to here, as was less racism. In no way does any past define what a nation is today.
Actually, all European nations have a long history to not be proud of. European imperialism and domestic or colonial oppression go a long way back. Even us Europeans that are easily judgmental of the US foreign politics should not forget this past of ours.
No individual today could be accountable or should feel uncomfortable of such mentions. I strongly oppose the concept that these political references should be a taboo though.
Especially for Germany, being one of the leading nations guiding the EU towards more unison, I think no one could hold such misconceptions true. I agree with one thing though: it’s true that the whole world easily makes of past Germany a “villain” in games and movies, while other European empires of the past had a similar record of atrocities towards their colonies. It’s just that Germany had the maturity as a nation to criticize the Nazi regime while other nations never openly admitted their past deeds. So, making a game of the Hindu fighting off the British, Algerians fighting against French or Simon Bolivar against the Spanish is unheard of…
08/06/2009 at 12:58 zombiehunter says:
@Jayteh
i didn’t state in any way that the lot of you is american did i? Neither did i imply that those opposing my views are.
actually i tried to give my point of view from the country that is issued in this thread and gave a refference to the country with the most weapon related violence not in war state.
Yes, those screaming nazi nazi whenever they hear that i’m german are in 85% of the cases americans, thats just a fact i came across in my life. and the funny thing is, wich i tried to point out, that they are at least as narrow minded as those they accuse of beeing whatever.
But maybe i’m just a racist german that thinks every english speking and reading person must be a stupid american fool. wanted to hear that? good, now have fun with that statement and back to topic. ;)
kind regards
08/06/2009 at 13:11 Spliter says:
I do believe that games might make one more violent however they’re never the trigger and they make more violent only under certain conditions. I would like to know more about the people that start shooting like how many friends they’ve got, if he’s got a father and mother, if so how is are his parents treating him? Why was he playing games at age 17 which received a rating of 18+??
The problem is not with people playing games, the problem is with parents not paying attention to what their children do. We don’t need banning games, we need to inform people what they are buying. 90% of our personality comes from our parents, our schools and friends.
Most people lead a satisfying life, where their parents neither spoil them too much nor treat them like garbage. And those people are barely affected by violence in games.
I hope the politicians realize that they must focus on the family values and not reacting when it’s already too late.
08/06/2009 at 13:44 dmitry says:
Love the photo accompanying the article.
08/06/2009 at 13:52 Jamisia says:
The wording of the law must be vague. That alone renders the law probably impotent.
Thanks to downloading & the EU (free traffic etc.) it is ineffective from day one.
Last but not least: virtual theft has been legally recognized as theft. If you kill someone, player or game monster, in the game, it is killing. If you’ve been killed in PvP, you should be able to file murder in the 1st degree. If you can’t, the normal laws apparently do no apply and any sane person would see that the personality of the gamer determines the murderer (or not) in RL. The violence in the game would then be similar to cartoon violence and that certainly doesn’t t make people violent.
You can really have fun with the law on this one.
08/06/2009 at 13:57 lumpi says:
Might I also add that there is a huge difference between adults (or teenagers, even) playing violent video games and 8-year olds doing it? This is one of the few cases where extensive ad campaigns (“What does YOUR child play?”) might actually work. I guess many adults are baffled that “children’s toys” are violent… conveniently ignoring the 18+ stickers, no matter how big ( http://www.thq-games.com/resources/packshots/packshotsFront/c70121611859fefd875a36d4d31f7bad.jpg !!! ).
08/06/2009 at 14:02 EyeMessiah says:
@MD: You are of course quite right to point out that there is some evidence that suggests a deterministic causal relationship between consumption of violent media and some sorts of violent behavior.
Its worth bearing in mind though that even if we put aside the question of the quality of research and the lack of a settled consensus, although the claims made by researchers are typically astoundingly general – what is actually meant is often very nuanced and specific, and often imho not really relevant in terms of relatively crude public policy debate (which is what we are talking about if we are talking about changes to legislation).
Anyone who is interested should really take a moment to read the experimental setups involved in these kinds of studies.
The above linked is the abstract for one of the Anderson & Carnegie studies. Its worth reading through the setup for at least Experiment 3 to get a feel for what these sorts of studies define as violent behavior or tenancies. Although its quite a clever experiment I think its clear that when researchers say that there is a sense in which playing violent video games causes violent behavior, they don’t mean that its clear that doing so significantly increases, or indeed causaly determines your chances of shooting up your local school.
08/06/2009 at 14:31 eyemessiah says:
Apologies for the broken link.
This one works.
Also I’m not trying to say “all bets are off because social psychology is a crock of shit!” (thats another discussion all together), rather I’m trying to point out that the gulf between what we mean when we are talking about video games causing violent behaivour and what researchers mean when they say they have demonstrated that there is a relationship between video games and violent behaivour is large enough that the two don’t nescessarily marry up in a sensible way.
08/06/2009 at 14:39 Bloodrite says:
now that we’r at it, lets ban tom and jerry too, it’s a violent cartoon! :o
Ban disney, hanababara and all the others for violence
08/06/2009 at 15:02 dhex says:
“Videogames, as a subject for methodical scientific study, have been sorely neglected.”
there’s actually been a few neat ones concerning hand/eye coordination in younger surgeons, mostly along the lines of creating more realistic simulators for robotic and microinvasive surgeries, or as a way of preventing skill atrophy in older surgical specialists.
08/06/2009 at 15:08 Jim Rossignol says:
Yeah, there’s been some interesting stuff re visual processing too. But detailed examination of brain physiology, long term exposure, study of aggregate behaviour patterns, it’s all still untouched – not least because there are so many variables.
I wasn’t joking about the Germany as interesting experiment, by the way, I’d love to see it make a difference. The thing is, I don’t think games have anything to do with these kinds of violent episodes, and censorship is nothing more than empty posturing against a set of problems that are too complex for legislators to take seriously.
08/06/2009 at 15:32 Tei says:
Cinderella is a tale about necrofilia. Little Red Riding Hood is a tale about die eaten by wolfs.
Infantilization is a cruel thing, Is bad enough wen we do it to childrens. Is worst wen you do it to a whole society.
The cry of “Think of the childrens” is a crywolf, but it works for politicians that have nothing to do productive, so try calling to guts instead. And since our whole society is infantilized, is a call that always work. Everywhere and everything is asked with “who think of the childrens”. Even some politicians to the others. I think of the childrens, I think the childrens will grown, and these evil politicians are building a bad world for these childrens. I say NO to infantilization, and nanny states. Maybe “Manhunt 2″ is horrible violent, and maybe “The Texas Chain Saw Massacre” too, and “The Diamond Age or, A Young Lady’s Illustrated Primer”. If you ban Manhunt 2, you sould ban Texas Chain Massacre and The Diamond Age. I don’t see why we have to ban
08/06/2009 at 15:42 zombiehunter says:
o_O
necrophilia in cinderella? boy i should read more childrens books it seems… where is that about beein attracted to corpses? must have missed that as a child ^^
08/06/2009 at 15:42 Sagan says:
@MD: That’s actually quite interesting. Somehow you rarely read about actual scientific data about stuff like this on the internet. However this isn’t about the effect on children. There are already laws here in Germany that prevent children from playing violent games. This is about a complete ban.
@zombiehunter: No, this has been decided. The 16 interior ministers decided, that they are going to tighten the gun laws and that they are going to ban all killergames. And those are the people that are responsible for changes like that.
Of course what they decided is completely unreasonable. So they will end up not doing anything.
08/06/2009 at 15:59 zombiehunter says:
sorry sagan but:
It may have been decided by the 16 interior ministers yes, but it still has to pass the bundestag and bundesrat to become a law through that games can be prohibited.
And i don’t think that’ll happen, especially not before the elections. simple and pure preelection panic
and still i dunno where in cinderella is necrophilia o_O
08/06/2009 at 16:30 Dominic White says:
Am I the only one who ‘hears’ Tei’s posts in a thick eastern european accent?
It’s the only way to make “Cinderella is a tale about necrofilia. Little Red Riding Hood is a tale about die eaten by wolfs.” make any sense, really.
08/06/2009 at 16:49 dhex says:
But detailed examination of brain physiology, long term exposure, study of aggregate behaviour patterns, it’s all still untouched – not least because there are so many variables.
of course. it’s something of a silly proposition, as game playing in the population goes up but rates for violent crime fluctuate and are generally trending downward. many of the “violent images and aggression” studies tend to focus on a short window of time right after seeing, say, tapes of car crashes or what have you.
the thrust behind this for the population is at least understandable, if not noble, in terms of wanting to prevent decidedly rare but spectacularly violent outbreaks with children and young adults. but as we’ve seen with columbine, most of the conventional wisdom – and the consultants and experts who push it – tends to be wrong.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2009-04-13-columbine-myths_N.htm
invariably, like any other crisis, there’s then an opportunity for peddlers of all stripe to line up at the trough of both public attention and potential public funds that generally follows. so we can blame it on doom or gun laws or black trenchcoats (remember the trenchcoat bans that followed? or “she said yes”?) or acne medication or violent music, etc, because the real alternative is to say “sometimes awful shit happens, and all you can do to prevent it is either catch ‘em beforehand or shoot them real soon afterwards.”
no one is going to get elected on a platform like that, much less get a block grant or a book deal.
08/06/2009 at 17:18 Taillefer says:
(Maybe narcophilia?)
08/06/2009 at 23:57 OJ 287 says:
Those studies into violent games are for children. Who shouldnt be playing them.
The real issue is allowing kids to play adult only games.
09/06/2009 at 01:44 A-Scale says:
@LactoseTheIntolerant
Violence is a lot like a sieve. If you plug one hole, more water will come out of the others. Those who wish to commit violence will do so whether it be done with guns, knives, bats, fists, fertilizer bombs, etc. Restricting guns may reduce gun crime (but not much, as most guns used in crimes are gotten illegally anyway), but it will also increase many other types of crime, as the 2.5 million times guns are used defensively per year in the U.S. will result in the innocent being done more harm than if they had a gun in those situations.
http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcdguse.html
Further, I’d far prefer to be shot than stabbed. Guns are a far less precise weapon (particularly Saturday night specials in the hands of hoodies) than a knife at close range. Further, a knife slash is probably more likely to hit a vital vein than an errant bullet, which pierces a straight hole through.
Lastly, a few incidents of morons shooting up schools a year (even if it was hundreds of incidents) would not warrant restricting the basic human right of gun ownership. Guns are the only means by which a populace can still retain true control of the right to rule, as only then are they capable of taking power back from the government. The people of England are subjects, not citizens. I pray that Americans shall always be citizens.
09/06/2009 at 04:58 Wisq says:
Apologies if this has already been pointed out, but …
Okay, so the main arguments against banning guns outright are one, “we can’t enforce that” (and/or “we already do that”), and two, “people will find other ways to get guns and/or kill each other”.
Does it not seem a little awkward to claim that you will be more effective at banning a particular type of software? That’s like giving everyone an infinite object duplication machine and then trying to ban a particular physical object.
And for the second, does it not seem likely that people will find other ways to get these games and/or other forms of entertainment that give them the same sort of satisfaction?
09/06/2009 at 06:26 psyk says:
“Further, I’d far prefer to be shot than stabbed. Guns are a far less precise weapon (particularly Saturday night specials in the hands of hoodies) than a knife at close range. Further, a knife slash is probably more likely to hit a vital vein than an errant bullet, which pierces a straight hole through.”
Depends on what ammo there using a hollow point is going to cause some serious trauma.
“as only then are they capable of taking power back from the government.”
Oh dear, I would love for the citizens of America to try and overthrow the government with the guns they have, unless you guys get the army and airforce on your side before hand you will get destroyed.
09/06/2009 at 08:31 britain says:
that is so stupid banning games will just make more rampages i no that if the government banned my gaylo 3 i would murder every one of those sons of bitches in that crazy house. if that bitch ass mother fucking government took away my fucking games i would march up there and break all of there necks with my bare nerdy hands and yell which one of you bitch ass mother fucking cock faces wants some of this and i would push up my glasses and laugh as i watched those fat ass pussies hide behind their chairs. excuse my french
09/06/2009 at 18:33 A-Scale says:
A band of redneck bible bashing militiamen were able to defeat the best army/navy in the world once before (Revolutionary War), I don’t see why we couldn’t do it again.
09/06/2009 at 19:38 Kong says:
That would be too good news to be true.
No more crappy German translated games in our Austrian stores. Just like in the good old days, when all computer games were in English language.
But no – it will not happen. We will not be so lucky.
10/06/2009 at 19:31 Down Rodeo says:
“the basic human right of gun ownership”
A-scale, I’ve seen your comments here before, and seriously, this is the one that scares me the most. Are you so paranoid or worried that you’re going to be attacked that you need a gun? Or that governments are automatically bad? Either way it does not suggest you have a great trust of other people. And your suggestion that violence is like a sieve: I really don’t think so. This also suggests that you have a very dim view of the decency of other human beings. I’d count myself as being fairly cynical most days but I don’t think I have quite descended to your level.
As far as personal protection is concerned I read a statistic in either a Michael Moore book or an Al Franken book that said a large proportion of privately-owned guns in America were used against their owners by an intruder. I’m sorry I cannot be more accurate but it was rather a while ago that I read the statistic in question and the two authors named cover the same territory, even if Mr Moore does annoy me considerably. I also have no time to look it up.
At least banning guns would seriously cut down on the number of accidental deaths. But that’s not what this thread’s about; I just felt that I couldn’t let that statement go by without some kind of notice. Seriously, you and people like you scare me.
11/06/2009 at 00:40 flo says:
well. I’ll always remember this year as the year I finally lost all faith in my country’s politicians. The amount of misinformation and propaganda they’ve been spewing makes me want to break something (virtually) every time I read some more or think of it.
Just to make some points clear for some commenters:
- Germany has already one of the toughest gun laws in the world, as far as I know.
- iirc, there has not been “one amok run per year”. yes there has been more than one in germany in recent history, but not one per year. if britain had less than that, as far as I know, it’s certainly not because of tighter gun controls, inherently less violent people, or people playing less video games.
11/06/2009 at 10:06 Andrew Dunn says:
A band of redneck bible bashing militiamen were able to defeat the best army/navy in the world once before (Revolutionary War), I don’t see why we couldn’t do it again.
Because you’d be on the home turf of the enemy and they have the material advantage (hugely) and can bring it to bear very easily and supply is much easier and communication is instant.
But good luck.
12/06/2009 at 00:05 adam says:
I lived in Germany for 3 years. This is old news that was in the papers awhile back.
It’ll never happen. We’re talking about a country where cities pass anti-smoking laws and then protestors say it’s their right to smoke and get it repealed.
27/10/2009 at 16:07 varun says:
noooooooooooooooooooooooooo…does this mean no COD,GTA,HALO ETC ETC(for germany)
18/01/2010 at 12:58 Cady says:
Good morning. To be willing to die for an idea is to set a rather high price on conjecture. Help me! There is an urgent need for sites: Earn a nursing degree. I found only this – nursing degree courses. Nurse degree, may 2009 other best nurse works sociology. Nurse degree, online patients who required with a testing matter to complete their career to a degree by dehumanizing tuition stream. With respect :mad:, Cady from Mali.