Comments on: Germany Moves To Ban Violent Videogames

By: Cady

Cady — Mon, 18 Jan 2010 12:58:28 +0000

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.

By: varun

varun — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 15:07:07 +0000

noooooooooooooooooooooooooo…does this mean no COD,GTA,HALO ETC ETC(for germany)

By: adam

adam — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 23:05:20 +0000

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about a country where cities pass anti-smoking laws and then protestors say it’s their right to smoke and get it repealed.

By: Andrew Dunn

Andrew Dunn — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 09:06:18 +0000

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.

By: flo

flo — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 23:40:23 +0000

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.

By: Down Rodeo

Down Rodeo — Wed, 10 Jun 2009 18:31:14 +0000

“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.

By: Kong

Kong — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 18:38:45 +0000

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.

By: A-Scale

A-Scale — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 17:33:08 +0000

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.

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.

By: britain

britain — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 07:31:26 +0000

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

By: psyk

psyk — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 05:26:17 +0000

“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.

By: Wisq

Wisq — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 03:58:39 +0000

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?

By: A-Scale

A-Scale — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 00:44:08 +0000

@LactoseTheIntolerant

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).

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.