The Seattle Times - Video-game industry not to blame for gun violence.
Just like any other form of entertainment, there are a vast number of video-game choices. Don’t throw the whole industry under the bus because of a few games that happen to be violent. And even with those games, there is no proof that violent video games lead to violent acts.
Prez wrote on Mar 19, 2013, 22:46:
I think part of the problem with the issue of gun control is that both sides tend to make arguments that are extreme (almost certainly more extreme than they otherwise would if everyone viewed the issue objectively) resulting in a polarizing and pointless debate. Sure, there are frighteningly-obsessed gun nuts who believe they should be able to own absolutely anything without restriction, just as on the opposite side there are gun-banning obsessed kooks who actually believe life in America would be a bowl of cherries if only we disarmed everyone but the military. But do these views really make up the majority of those of either side? I'd say an emphatic "no" myself. Yet both sides enter the debate as if the other is made up of the extreme view exclusively.
I fall on the pro-ownership side of the debate, but when someone makes a compelling argument for new sensible restrictions that could have a positive effect on keeping firearms out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them I listen. As it stands, I could go either way on the "assault" weapons ban (in quotes because they are not really assault weapons by definition) as I personally don't feel the need to own anything larger than the sidearms I currently own, but the argument needs to be a little more substantive than "well, who really NEEDS an AR-15?" for me.
The biggest negative to the ban debate for me is that in reality the lion's share of mass shootings in America's history that were done with something other than pistols easily could have been carried out almost exactly the same way and have been just has horrific with nothing but pistols (the two major exceptions off the top of my head being the Texas Bell Tower Sniper of 1966 and the DC/Beltway Sniper of 2002). I shoot at a range where on certain days long semi-auto rifles are allowed on the range as well as pistols. From this experience I learned that someone with minimal training can put just as many rounds down range with a pistol in roughly the same time frame. In other words, what people are hoping will be the result of any long semi-auto rifle ban (lower body counts in mass shootings) will most certainly NOT happen. Which I fear could take us inexorably closer to the mass ban/super strict regulation of every firearm to which I am adamantly opposed. I am in no way a "gun nut", and I believe it is governement's right and responisbility to regulate firearm ownership sensibly and lawfully to protect the public at large, but I am certainly in favor of keeping my right to defend myself and others from the huge number of morally defunt and insane cretins roaming the streets of every city.