Send News. Want a reply? Read this. More in the FAQ.   News Forum - All Forums - Mobile - PDA - RSS Headlines  RSS Headlines   Twitter  Twitter
Customize
User Settings
Styles:
LAN Parties
Upcoming one-time events:
Greenbelt, MD 08/22

Regularly scheduled events

Morning Legal Briefs

View
11 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >

11. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 25, 2013, 02:25 SmyTTor
 
Let's not focus on his father being a violent gangbanger who found religion and made it obsession for living, yet still kept assault weapons and large quantities of ammunition easily accessible.

Yeah, religion never killed anyone. Neither did gang culture.

I bet the kid also played Mario Kart. Fucking psycho.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
10. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 24, 2013, 07:07 Agrajag
 
Cutter wrote on Jan 23, 2013, 16:54:
ANYWAY back in reality, seems to me that that this kid in NM problems were based on a werido, strict religious family, not video games.

I'd like to see the general reaction if a member of Congress pushed a bill requiring warning labels on all religious books and teachings, and banning children under 17 from being exposed to anything deemed overly violent or obscene... Sure, it'd be unconstitutional; but, no more so than the bill here aimed at video games!
 
Avatar 1965
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
9. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 23, 2013, 19:16 Saboth
 
Oh noes...he played violent video games. So when do we expect the other 500 people in his school that also play violent video games to snap?
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
8. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 23, 2013, 17:17 Frags4Fun
 
It boggles my mind when the media and politicians completely ignore the antidepressants and other medications that these killers are on. That's the real issue here, not the video games. Almost all the shooters in the past 2 decades have been on some form of psychological medication, yet the media completely ignores this FACT.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
7. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 23, 2013, 17:02 jdreyer
 
So, one player out of approximately 20 million (in the US) or so goes on a rampage and kills. Even if games were at fault, most other pastimes result in more deaths.  
Avatar 22024
 
"It's just a bunch of mystic bovine scatology to me." - 1badmf
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
6. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 23, 2013, 16:54 Cutter
 
Oh come on, you know if the democrats weren't responsible for all the world's evil it just wouldn't be worth living in for RT.

ANYWAY back in reality, seems to me that that this kid in NM problems were based on a werido, strict religious family, not video games. He looks like he isn't the sharpest tool in the shed either.

 
Avatar 25394
 
"The South will boogie again!" - Disco Stu
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
5. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 23, 2013, 15:47 NegaDeath
 
Not to mention a quick trip to google shows Matheson is a blue dog conservative Democrat, he just barely hangs left of center. He's even been endorsed by the NRA. The world simply isn't black and white like some people want it to be.  
Avatar 57352
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
4. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 23, 2013, 15:33 nin
 
So 5 Democrat-sponsored bills, 3 Republican-sponsored ones, and 7 co-sponsored on both sides of the aisle. So call it 55/45%.

Never let the facts get in the way of trollindunders lies...

 
http://www.nin.com/pub/tension/
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
3. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 23, 2013, 15:31 Orogogus
 
RollinThundr wrote on Jan 23, 2013, 11:52:
Why is it always democrats introducing bills to go after video games?
They should make a new slogan for the party, The DNC: Where personal responsibility is taboo. Or The DNC: It's always someone else's fault.

I don't think that's the case. They do tend to be Democrat sponsored, but I'd say it's no more than a 60/40 split.

A search turns up the following:

US HR231 2009 (warning labels) - D/R
US HR4204 2012 (warning labels) - D/R
US HR5990 2008 / HR287 2013 (restriction of sales to minors) - D
CA AB1792 & AB1793 2005 (labeling, restriction of sales to minors) - D
CA AB 1179 2005 (restriction of sales to minors) - D
IL HB4023 2005 (restriction of sales to minors) - D/R
LA HB1381 2006 (restriction of sales to minors) - D/R
MD HB707 2006 (restriction of sales to minors) - D/R
MI HB4702 SB416 2005 (restriction of sales to minors) - R
MN HF1298/SF785 2005 (restriction of sales to minors) - D/R
MO HB157 2013 (tax on violent video games) - R
OK HB3004 2006 (restriction of sales to minors) - R
UT HB353 2009 (restriction of sales to minors) - D/R
WA HB 1009 2003 (restriction of sales to minors) - D
WA HB2178 2005 (restriction of sales to minors) - D

So 5 Democrat-sponsored bills, 3 Republican-sponsored ones, and 7 co-sponsored on both sides of the aisle. So call it 55/45%.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
2. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 23, 2013, 14:17 TurdFergasun
 
i don't know why anyone with half a brain considers either piece of the governing corporate duopoly to really be any different for actual policy direction. They both dance to the beat of multinational profiteering. Shake your fist at the companies that fund them, oh wait they don't have to disclose that much information directly, almost like it's a giant game designed to obfuscate the real and push the spin.  
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
1. Re: Morning Legal Briefs Jan 23, 2013, 11:52 RollinThundr
 
Why is it always democrats introducing bills to go after video games?
They should make a new slogan for the party, The DNC: Where personal responsibility is taboo. Or The DNC: It's always someone else's fault.
 
Reply Quote Edit Delete Report
 
11 Replies. 1 pages. Viewing page 1.
< Newer [ 1 ] Older >


footer

.. .. ..

Blue's News logo