The Kindergarden Killer game...

[OneMoreDemocrat]

I just watched the whole NRA press conference and when LaPierre was going on about video games, he mentioned this one and had some screens set up to show the 'gameplay'.

Looked for it online and found it. Horrific.

The game's tagline is 'Shoot the pesky kids with a shotgun'.

That our society creates and allows stuff like this to exist is a major part of the problem and needs to be addressed somehow.


****Not a post to downplay gun control****
****Not a post to downplay gun control****
****Not a post to downplay gun control****

[cali]

1. ugh. but. the Japanese widely play violent games. They don't have a problem

with school shootings. Why is that?

[AZ Progressive]

2. Too many Americans are undisciplined, immature, irresponsible, and stupid / crazy

You can't expect many Americans to take things maturely.

Japanese, on the other hand, are much more disciplined and much more responsible.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

3. Not the point...

I knew posting this would get that response unfortunately.

I am reacting ONLY to the game itself, not as it relates to the reasons behind the shootings...or Japan.

[Chan790]

17. Japan has gun-control.

[Lizzie Poppet]

20. Japan has never allowed widespread civilian possession of arms of any kind.

Owning a sword was, for much of Japan's history, punishable by death if you were not of the right social class. Japan has never had a tradition of allowing (most) people to be armed. Gun control could work there because there was never an enormous number of guns already in civilian hands there.

[Rex]

33. They forbid the ownership of guns. So it looks like gun control works!

http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/

'In part by forbidding almost all forms of firearm ownership, Japan has as few as two gun-related homicides a year.'

[Lizzie Poppet]

40. Telling people they can't have something they don't already have and probably don't want...

..usually succeeds pretty well.

[Rex]

109. You are guessing they don't want guns.

If only we did lust after guns in America. Sigh.

[white_wolf]

4. That game sounds horrible, but it must be allowed to exist.

For,what seems like the 100th time this week, you cannot ban free expression of art or ideas. No matter how awful those ideas may be. Do you think we should ban books because certain authors write about murder and death? I'm sorry that game sounds horrible and the person who made it should see a doctor, but it must be allowed to exist. It may be a sad commentary on our society that people want to make things like that, but it would be even worse if we punished them for creating it. Freedom of speech and expression is far too important to sacrifice in the name of security. Once you allow that, then you start down a slippery slope where any controversial idea is a target.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

5. Second person to read into the post what they want to see...

Interesting.

I have no interest in banning it and didn't even mention it.

I just found it horrible that it exists and I think it's an example of how callous our society has become, that killing kids in a game would be something people would play online.

[white_wolf]

42. "I have no interest in banning it and didn't even mention."

You said this in your OP: "That our society creates and allows stuff like this to exist is a major part of the problem and needs to be addressed somehow." My interpretation of the quoted sentence was that you think society should not allow these type of things to exist. The only way to do that would be with a ban.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

66. Good point...

I suppose I should have said "That our society is a place where stuff like this is created and accepted as OK is a major part of the problem with regard to our callousness toward violence". Or something.

Things like this simply wouldn't be around if we weren't as violent as we are.

[seabeyond]

71. no. because you see a wrong in the computer game, and you want to discuss why you see it as wrong,

does nOT mean that you are saying ban. that is an assumption. and if the poster feels that is what you are suggesting, he can ask.

i talk the harm in porn. people insist, demand, throw tantrums that i really mean ban. i do not. i tell them i do not. but, that is not good enough. it is either embrace porn, or ban porn.

we have got to get beyond that type of discussion.

[rustydog]

54. Exactly! It used to be if a group were offended by the actions of others, they were shunned

If a product sucked, you did not buy it. This game is popular because we as a people have become numb to gross excessive violence.
the very existence of these games suggests that the ONLY solution to any problem is to kill.

I don't have those games, I don't need those games, I will never buy those games or allow my grandchildren to play them in my house.

[nadinbrzezinski]

56. You do know those games are not meant for kids right

You also blame the studious for parents who take their kids to an NC-17 movie, right?

[OneMoreDemocrat]

74. Certainly not meant for kids...

but it's an online game.

Now, I am not a parent and I certainly hope that when I am I'm going to be more aware of things than I am now where it relates to what I would and wouldn't like my kids to see, hear, play with, etc., but apparently, it's been out there for a while and I'd not only never heard of it but am now astounded that I have.

[seabeyond]

80. unless things change,

i will tell you that it is very hard to find the info on games that allow a parent to really make a decision if it is appropriate play for certain ages.

it really lacks in info and i have had to spend way too many hours trying to get to the truth of it. then weigh, yes/no.

to say, well rating....

rating is not good on computer games from what i found. takes a lot of research.

[nadinbrzezinski]

82. The ESRB is coming to computers as well

I have no idea how they will pull that off, but right now hubby is playing a game...it is rated. It's not even made in the US, but it is rated.

To edit, to online games. (As to actual enforcement)l

[seabeyond]

58. yes rusty dog, exactly that. nt

[OneMoreDemocrat]

101. Yes indeed...

.

[Whisp]

13. I have a question. What if that game targeted Jewish people,

or specifically picked out white kids, or rich kids.
black people, or any other group.

would that still be freedom of expression and protected by you in the same way?

[OneMoreDemocrat]

15. Holy shit...

Good question.

[RomneyLies]

19. There ARE games that do that, and yes, they MUST be allowed to exist. n/t

[Whisp]

50. What are they called?

I'm just curious what the covers would market themselves like.

I love video games myself.

But I've never been attracted to the shooter ones. I avoid the gun ones, I don't even look at the trailers they just do not appeal to me. I know that many many folks do like that. My thing is medieval sorts - archers, goblins, enemies that are usually (not always like Skyrim) not human. I love Skyrim, and one big reason is that women are pretty well treated as equals there and hold any station that men can. That is a big plus for me. I've seen what some of those games treat women like, and that can't be good for anyone.

I'm not really afraid of guns because as a youngster most of my male family had guns. Target shooting, hunting, the regular stuff. I used to enjoy shooting clay pigeons with a shot gun. Was pretty good actually, without much practice. The most powerful rifle I think was a .33, I forget what they were called. Had a huge kick that could knock you over if you weren't braced and could pop your eardrums.

There was one member that was a bit over enthused about guns for a few years and had quite a collection. He just happened to be one of the more mysoginist guys in the family among all the other lesser ones. So I do sort of relate gun collectors to that, and I know that is not always true and probably unfair but it's pretty well instilled in me I guess. It's that power thing that I saw that was the attraction to this guy. It was kind of sad, actually, but yah it was the chest beating me more powerful than you. ughugh, zog cooks his meat.

I don't think video games or anything in particular is cause, like that scum LaPierre claims. But it might well be a combination of things.

[RomneyLies]

75. It's been years since I last saw them

If you troll Stormfront I'm sure you could find them.

Same types make those games as make the white supremacist music.

[Whisp]

91. ok, I will take your word!

I wouldn't go to SF if there was a lottery ticket win waiting for me there.

hah

[RomneyLies]

98. Ha!

I stumbled upon them years ago. Scared the living shit out of me. I simply could not believe they were out there.

These days, I'm happy they are there. I'm positive that the Southern Poverty Law Center uses that site to keep track of lots of haters.

It was also where I found out there were actually games and music glorifying the killing of minorities.

Lots of sick stuff.

I haven't been back to the site since.

[white_wolf]

37. Yes it would. I am well aware that my views on this are in the minority.

Both among the general public and judges, Justice Black is the only one I can think of that was a free speech absolutist, but I firmly believe that you cannot be allowed to ban ideas or expression simply because the things they advocate are horrible. Freedom of expression is too important to risk sacrificing for security.

[Whisp]

60. I don't know...

I find it a bit strange that America holds these freedoms of expressions in such high regard and yet is so far behind other countries in the very basics of taking care of each other and having a system that is more fair and not related to how rich you are. and How the prison system works (like slavery), how so many are imprisoned in the U.S. compared to other countries. All these things are trade offs for that free expression it seems? I don't know, but there has to be a connection of some sort... hmmm, you can keep it then.

Things like this just don't make sense to me, the clinging to those freedoms of speech which you don't really have anyway. I look at it like a sales pitch to the public in able to get away with a lot of bad stuff. You are being told all the time about how superior an american is to others. That everything is bigger, better in the USA. I think that is not a good thing to instill that superiority in people's minds and I think that may be related to why Americans can be so steadfast and stuck on that 'freedom' word.

The NRA spouts 2ndA all the time but they don't give a shit about your freedoms, they give a shit about gun sales.

[white_wolf]

69. Superiority? I never said that anything to imply that.

I never once said America was more free than other countries so I really don't know where you are coming from. Everything you said in your post is true, a lot of things are horribly wrong with America and I think most western European countries are better than the U.S. However, none of that has anything to do with freedom of speech and expression. Every modern democracy treats freedom of expression and speech just as seriously as the U.S. and most of them are more free than the U.S. due to lack of things like the Patriot Act. I'm sorry, but I really don't know how you got anything about America being better than the rest of the world out of my post.

[Whisp]

73. wasn't directed to you personally, just overall.

I should have made that more clear.

[white_wolf]

85. Well in that case I agree with you. America does have superiority complex.

Something needs to be done about it, but I'm not sure where to being on that one.

[nadinbrzezinski]

6. Is the game rated E? No...

It s rated M...even assuming it's a recent tittle.

Regardless, this s NRA distraction from the structural violence in our society. It's the games really, not the kids that drop and take cover every time there is a popping sound outside their windows, or the same kid who goes to bed hungry.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

8. No idea what it's rated...

but, my point is that just the fact that a game like that manifests itself in our country says an awful lot about us.

I understand that LaPierre was using it as a smokescreen...my point is that I'd never heard of it and went to see what it was and was sickened.

I'm not defending him.

[nadinbrzezinski]

9. Protect yourself

And avoid Quentin Tarantino movies or a few foreign titles, or the classic Doom mod, where you hunted sweet Barney down, yes...THAT BARNEY, THAT PURPLE DINOSAUR.

The games are a mirror to society. Serious.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

12. Um, I think we are pretty much saying the same thing...

I actually thought of you (well your posts) when I originally posted; it is in fact part of a 'mirror' showing us who we are.

Sometimes we ain't pretty and when you see examples like this it's all too clear.

[nadinbrzezinski]

24. No, you are blaming the game itself.

At least that is how I read it.

My view, we actually solve a lot f the structural violence, a lot of this will go away...and whatever remains will be all but acceptable. In fact, that game went too far.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

35. Huh...

I didn't mean it that way, in fact I'm not trying to blame anything or anyone.

I just found the idea that it even exists troubling, and that 'structural violence' is indeed the issue.

Someone else down stream said that the game is 'not as violent as SouthPark', and 'much ado about nothing', which I think is even scarier than the game itself. When the point of an activity meant as 'fun' is to shoot kids (even in a fictitious manner) and it's considered '...nothing and not even as violent as South Park', then we are more fucked that I thought.

[nadinbrzezinski]

41. Oh that we are.

The NRA went for shock factor.

But they are a large part of the problem.

If it helps, games like these, and they are issued from time to time, do extremely badly.

[seabeyond]

7. agreed. it should not even be in the realm of consideration. i understand it did not sell well.

yea.

and still, says a hell of a lot that anyone chose to create it and anyone bought it.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. Ding, ding, ding, ding

It did not sell well...cause it was disturbing. They even lost money in it.

[seabeyond]

14. some may argue raping women is disturbing yet... go figure,

games sell big time using rape of women.

not a huge ass

ding ding ding

[Kurska]

23. What games are you talking about?

Outside of incredibly niche titles like rapelay out of Japan, I can't think of a single positive depiction of rape in western games.

[nadinbrzezinski]

25. Which are those titles?

I can think of exactly one in the US...and the level was removed by the manufacturer after the outcry, rightly so.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

16. I was shocked that that kind of thing is for real...

One of those things you have to see to believe, and even then it's difficult to digest.

[Feron]

26. It was never for sale.

The game was originally uploaded to Newgrounds and is an online flash game. The crude animation should be a tipoff.

More about the game: http://www.buzzfeed.com/jwherrman/nra-blames-ten-year-old-flash-game-for-school-viol

You can play it here: http://www.flash-game.net/game/1497/kindergarten-killer.html

The object of the game is to shoot the kids before they shoot you back. I played a round and to me it's no worse than any other shoot 'em up game. If anything, it's worse because it's so boring.

Southpark episodes are more violent than this game. So were the DOS games of the 90s. It's much ado about nothing.

[nadinbrzezinski]

29. A ten year old flash game?

Chuckle.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

32. The object of the game is my point...

I agree that it's a shitty game from a beauty perspective, my problem with it is that the whole point is to shoot kids.

As part of our trying to understand how and what we are as a society, we need to figure out why we can say that a game in which you shoot kids is 'much ado about nothing'.

[nadinbrzezinski]

43. I am not saying it's much ado about nothing.

But it is a huge distraction

[immoderate]

45. What if you know that they're not real kids, just pixels on a screen?

Maybe it's not the healthiest game, but it's a game! Makes a big difference.

People vary in their levels of sensitivity to this.

--imm

[OneMoreDemocrat]

52. Good point...

regarding levels of sensitivity.

I could tell that it was in fact a game that didn't actually involve harming kids.

At the same time, it's a game in which you actively try to harm kids, fake kids made of pixels perhaps, but kids.

Just found it eye opening is all I guess...didn't really think such things were out there, perhaps I'm too sheltered but I don't think that's it.

[Catherina]

18. Ban, eliminate and fine that kind of worthless SHIT.

There's no such fucking thing as free speech in this country. Ban that sick shit. Otherwise fuck it and just admit you're free market uber alles, consumer choice, we don't need no fucking government, yada dada dada. Ban it.

[RomneyLies]

21. I find your post more disturbing than the game n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. This is as fringe as ban all guns comments.

[Catherina]

28. Lol. Fucking LOL. If a gamer says so, it just must be so. Sad. /n/t

[nadinbrzezinski]

30. Laugh all you want

It is still fringe.

[Catherina]

36. Naw, I'll tell you what's fringe

It's gamers holding on to their right to shoot virtual beings as much as tightly as the gun nuts hold on to their right to shoot hunted creatures.

All of it selfish and pathetic.

Boil it down to a *laugh* if you want to. Both selfish arguments disgust me, both of them pointing fingers at the *other* side.

[nadinbrzezinski]

47. So you want to suspend the first amendment?

What other amendments you want to get rid off to fulfill your ideal world? The second obviously.

So how about we get rid of all of ten? What am I saying? The whole constitution?

Fr the record, the last virtual thing I played was the extremely dangerous and violent game of solitaire.

But ban games and violent movies is just as fringe as ban all guns.

[Kurska]

31. First Amendment protection is a progressive stance.

I will never support government censorship, nor should any progressive.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

44. I don't like the idea of banning it...

or censorship; though I personally think things like this don't really deserve to exist and SHOULD be banned, I can't support curbing anyone's free speech even if I don't like it.

What I find much more troubling is that anyone would actually create it.

America is a really dark place sometimes.

[white_wolf]

46. This is disturbing.

How soon before the government decides your opinions and your ideas are disgusting? By you logic the government should be able to shut down DU if they find it disgusting.. Either you believe in freedom of speech and expression or you don't. It's pretty clear which side of the issue you are on.

[backscatter712]

113. Are you fucking stupid? n/t

[spanone]

34. well, ol wayne is such a devout constitutionalist, i'm sure he's going to defend their 1st amendment

1st amendment rights, right?

[OneMoreDemocrat]

38. Dunno...

I was just sickened that the game was for real.

[Confusious]

108. You search long and hard enough you can find anything

I'm an avid gamer and I didn't even know it existed.

What laperrie is trying to do is deflect.

Example:

the internet has child porn, so the Internet is responsible for child porn, so maybe we should restrict people's access to the Internet.

You know, for the kids. If you don't agree, you're for child porn.

[Livluvgrow]

39. What I find alarming

is people who want gun control also love shooting guns on a tv screen. Gun control needs to exist and we also need to examine our violent media and ask if we can do better. Flame away people label me what you want I have my opinion and you have yours. What you shouldn't have is the right to holler down my opinion I think I just like everybody else deserves that respect.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

48. Actually, I think you're on to something...

We need both (much) stricter gun control, AND we need to understand ourselves better so that we can see how our society feels about guns and violence...both real and fictitious.

I've shot several different guns (in real life) and it's fun, but I wouldn't actually want to own one as I have no need for one. But, I don't think people shouldn't be allowed to own them if they want...wish I could wave a magic wand and only put guns in the hands of people who will be utterly diligent with regards to keeping them safe and who understand exactly how deadly they can be, and out of the hands of those who seek to do harm.

[nadinbrzezinski]

49. Cause we know the shooting of zombies in pixel, ones and zeroes

Are equivalent to shooting a real person.

So after the games? What about Shakespeare?

[Livluvgrow]

53. I understand

where you are coming from just thought there could be a conversation about all forms of our violent culture including media. Guess I was wrong. I know one thing I am right about though is that nobody wants to give an inch and as a result nothing will change everybody wants to protect the status quo

[nadinbrzezinski]

61. There is a rating system in place for games

There is one for movies.

In fact, we have one for works of fiction as well.

What you, and others are asking is that the producers of all these different sources of media stop producing it.

They have actually taken steps.

The NRA, not so much. I just heard a parrot on my tv saying college students an HS seniors should be armed. That is disturbing.

[seabeyond]

64. right. then again, many of us recognize this

and as parents we teach our children the harm, without the need to censor or use the b word (ban).

many of us recognize the need to discuss, educate, explore solutions. just that we are shouted down to often with strawman argument or hyperbole.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

78. Your post is exactly what I was hoping to do with the original post...

that is, use it to have a conversation about our society/culture where it regards our relationship to violence.

I probably didn't do that great of a job, but I'm really happy that you showed up.

[white_wolf]

51. Let's get rid of all violent literature too.

No more Shakespeare, no more Tolkien or any fantasy novels really, no more cultural epics such as Beowulf or Homer's works. Does that sound "safe" enough for you yet?

[Livluvgrow]

55. little extreme are you

Do you think it is healthy for 12 year olds to play first person shooter games all day? Most aren't reading novels they are certainly playing alot of games though.

[nadinbrzezinski]

57. First person shooters are rated M

17 and older. Do you blame the studious for taking kids to watch the chainsaw massacre?

[Livluvgrow]

62. No

but I do ask myself why somebody felt the need to make such a movie in the first place. What is the value of such a movie? We can do better and we dont. You ask whose fault it is well it is obviously the parents fault and I know we cant legislate stupidity, but we could hope that people will do better.

[nadinbrzezinski]

65. To a point the chainsaw, and these games

Will no longer be made when they do stop selling. The one you found disturbing was a flop, is still a flop, why you are not seeing them too often.

[Algebra Palin]

59. wow. people are distracted easily.

[nadinbrzezinski]

63. Yup

[Livluvgrow]

67. Nope

just realize that our problems in this country are complex and require us to think about many different things.

[seabeyond]

68. geeezus. cant even fuckin talk about a subject that one found interesting without posters guiding

and directing where we MUST have our conversation.

you mean, there is not enough threads about gun control. ONE Op discussing this computer game tumbles down the whole discussion on du about gun control?

talk about fuckin censorship on the validity of an Op

[Livluvgrow]

70. now

that is a yup

[Algebra Palin]

76. holy shit!

loosen up your tie, guy.
i don't give a shit if the subject is video games, books, masturbation, or fluoride.
i'm just making a simple observation: a glorified arms dealer tells people to look to some obscure flash game, and they look.

[seabeyond]

84. holy shit right back at you....

people learned about a computer game that we did not know about and we want to talk about it.

so what is the problem?

[OneMoreDemocrat]

102. Not only do they look...

they are disgusted by what they find.

The game isn't the 'cause' of anything...in fact I think it's a symptom more than anything else.

But it doesn't exist in a vacuum, and I wanted to try to talk about what kind of society creates this kind of awfulness.

[Algebra Palin]

110. 'I wanted to try to talk about what kind of society creates this kind of awfulness.'

the kind of society that's been programmed to de-value life.
the kind of society that's watched native americans murdered on the big screen for generations; a society that nods its heads in agreement that a 17 year old black kid wouldn't be dead if he would not have worn a hoodie.

[nadinbrzezinski]

81. Has any of us stooped you? No

And there have been plenty of DU'ers pulling this canard that has been in the air for thirty years.

One murder (related to grand theft auto to be specific) does not correlation make.

Regardless gta is rated M.

The producers have done what was asked from them. They are rated. You go ahead and keep these games from your kids...bravo, you are doing this thing called parenting. But seriously, we have zero evidence, one murder in the yearly average of 34,000 des not correlation make.

Once the lets at the very least change games brigade (if not outright ban them) comes with actual reproducible research, with no researcher bias, and bad experimenter design, the rest of us will start to listen.

Until then, ain't holding my breath, we have real issues that lead to people actually taking up a gun and go commit a crime, or the not so longer rare gun massacre.

So tell me, how are you going to deal with people intent on committing suicide? And trust me, taking my sega gun (never had one) will not stop one actual real world murder. Detecting somebody who should not have a gun, like the convicted felon who can't vote, ever again, but after five years can own a gun, courtesy of the NRA ...don't you think that is a problem?

The games are behind this has replaced the DnD players are killers, which has replaced the Comics are destroying our youth movement.

[seabeyond]

87. people are discussing a particular game nadin. you are arguing what others are not. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

88. I am arguing that this is exactly what Wayne LaPierre

Was hoping.

[seabeyond]

90. who the fuck cares. argue all you want. ONE op wanted to discuss the game because the poster

was not aware there was a game about shooting kindergartners. so what???

that in no way means a person cannot also discuss gun control and the nra speech and what garbage it was.

[nadinbrzezinski]

93. And one that flopped spectacularly.

The part Wayne LaPierre did not tell you.

[seabeyond]

95. which i had in my initial post. nt

[nadinbrzezinski]

96. Have a good day

I am trashing this thread.

I will call anybody though, gun nutters or not, when using NRA talking points.

We are done.

Go talk to your hearts content on the horrors f Hollywood, games and comics...go on.

[seabeyond]

99. ah, nadin...

[seabeyond]

94. ****Not a post to downplay gun control****Not a post to downplay gun control****Not a post to downpl

****Not a post to downplay gun control****
****Not a post to downplay gun control****
****Not a post to downplay gun control****

this should clue everyone in that it is "****Not a post to downplay gun control**** "

[OneMoreDemocrat]

103. I had hoped that would be enough...

I was wrong.

Thank you for actually believing that I didn't have a hidden agenda, I just wanted to talk about something awful that I found and not try to blame anyone for anything...harder than looks apparently.

Apparently I am nothing more than an NRA puppet...which surprises me; I had no idea.

[seabeyond]

106. sigh... lol

[OneMoreDemocrat]

100. Uh, nope...

I am quite pro-gun control and not anti-gamer.

I am also interested in 'us' and why we are like we are and why we do what we do. This game struck a chord...not because it's a game...and I thought it might be interesting to discuss.

Apparently not.

Sorry there wasn't any other meaning or particular point of view hiding my OP, next time I'll harder to obfuscate what I'm REALLY trying to say.

[HeroBrand]

72. I play violent video games.

I am not a warped mutant, and I certainly don't feel any more violent impulses or feelings than before I played the games.

They are fun, and that is why they sell.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

107. Great !!!

Never said anyone was any of the above, but since a lot of people seem to think I did, or that's what I mean then it MUST be true.

Have fun.

[Coyotl]

114. So, do they satisfy your pre-existing condition?

Would you play them if you were a non-violent person in the first place?

[RetroGamer1971]

77. Kindergarten Killer is the exception not the rule. 1st Amendment applies.

I am an AVID gamer, ever since I was about ten. I have been hearing about calls to ban gaming in some form or another for 30 years. Yes there are abhorrent, low quality, goat getter games like this in the mix. But the NRA is leading you by the nose here, to deflect the backlash against gun violence. These kind of video games are more rare than you might think. Video games are an art form. Maybe they are not your cup of tea, but they an art form protected by the first amendment nonetheless. I cannot believe I am agreeing with Scalia!:

Supreme Court says video games are protected free speech, California can't regulate sales of violent games: a complete analysis
http://www.theverge.com/2011/06/27/supreme-court-video-games-protected-free-speech-analysis/

"Today, the Supreme Court agreed 7-2 with the lower courts, and Justice Scalia's majority opinion is thunderous in support of the proposition that video are games are to be afforded the same type of First Amendment protection as any other type of media. In his words:
"Like the protected books, plays, and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas—and even social messages—through many familiar literary devices (such as characters, dialogue, plot, and music) and through features distinctive to the medium (such as the player’s interaction with the virtual world). That suffices to confer First Amendment protection."

Beyond that, there have been millions of games made in the last twenty years, and this is the best example the NRA can find? A ten year old flash game? This is the gaming equivalent of self publishing your own Fan-Fiction. Man I hope Wayne doesn't ever find my 2004 copy of Doom 3! In that one you fight demons on Mars. People are so gullible they just might do it.


Or they might get angry and throw some birds:


Or maybe you will teach some plants to spit at zombies.


Or they might just go to the bottom of the sea, start their own beautiful city to get away from the cowards in Washington, and have it all go to hell in one magical night.



So if video games are the problem according to old Wayne, then how do you get rid of them. Well, it looks like lot of people posting want to ban them. But you can't due to the Supreme Court ruling, and the first amendment. Video Games are art. Art pushes button, it does not install them. I find that the 2nd amendment crowd wanting to regulate video games is very ironic indeed.

[Livluvgrow]

79. dont want a ban

just asking if we could do better

[Evoman]

83. A stupid flash game that no one in their right mind would play more than once.

I don't even see the problem. The game was probably made in two days by some joker whose did it for shock value. Hell, I wouldn't even doubt if the guy who made it was anti-gun or just apathetic.

It's the equivalent of some 10 year old kid running into church, yelling poop really loud, then seeing what everyone in the room does while thinking he is the coolest shit around.

Horrific? That our society allows it?

Pffft.

Ya know, I'm all for studies and discussions and analyses of the effects of video games or other media on violence and culture (and I say this as a gamer, myself), but this stupid game used as some barometer of ANYTHING in our culture except some dunderheads terrible sense of humor is ridiculous. That the NRA even brought it up as some credible game or force in gaming is insulting of our intelligence.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

105. The fact that you don't see the problem...

is probably the problem.

Do you find that adding stuff about blaming video games into your post on a thread that didn't attempt to blame video games for anything helpful?

[Evoman]

112. Well, maybe you can tell me what the problem is? What does this represent for you?

In your estimation, what should my response be? I think it's a gross game. I think it's stupid. I think it's got close to 0 net effect on anyone or anybody, like badly written fan fiction that nobody in their right mind would read.

Although considering people read Twilight and Fifty Shades of Grey, maybe we should be concerned? lol

[Logical]

86. So the NRA decoy worked 100% on you! Congrats!

[seabeyond]

89. so, in order for the "decoy" to not work, we are not allow to discuss the game

since many of us was surprised there was such a game.

sounds odd.

tricky here. defending 1st amendment yet the suggestion in controlling speech so we are not suckered in by a "decoy". this game is mum, the word then, i guess.

no one is allowed to utter the name.

cant possibly discuss a game and still discuss gun control. that concept is too far out there.

[Livluvgrow]

92. We

also cant discuss our own opinion that the police be used in the capacity to actually serve and protect without being shouted down, juried down and labeled an NRA goon. It doesn't matter that many of us have had these concerns that we would like to discuss for a long time. We could have only developed them as a result of the NRA or tv or talk radio.

[seabeyond]

97. this is like the first thread i have even attempted to post in.

i have been staying clear. not thrilled with much any of the "discussion" recently.

[OneMoreDemocrat]

104. Whatevs...

I had never heard of the game, looked it up was appalled and wanted to talk about it.

I guess I shouldn't have come to a discussion forum to discuss anything.

Huh.

[Evoman]

111. You can.

There just isn't really anything to say or discuss really.

The game is stupid. It's a terrible idea. And nobody in their right mind would play it or even think twice about it after the disgust of seeing it once.

What sort of discussion would you like to expand this into? What more is there to be said about it? I'm willing to go in any direction you would like with this. I'm not sure what we would agree or disagree about, but if you want, I will make the effort.

Do you have questions?