Joe Biden's Meeting With Video Game Representatives On Gun Control Is A Waste Of Time

Sandy Hook #corrections

And he's not meeting with them about 'gun control.' Stupid tweet, stupid headline.

Someone in a government is doing something completely pointless?! Stop the presses!

Glad to see films and TV shows still get a free pass.

did you not read the second paragraph? He's also meeting with the motion picture association.

I must have missed it, but my point still stands about the gun violence issue in general. It's always about the games, no one talks about the music or the movies as much as they did decades ago.

Well yeah, music doesn't make you kill random people. It only makes you kill cops and fools who make a move on your *****es.

I hope the administration continues to be as neutered and ineffectual in creating laws that only hurt law abiding gun owners.

Meet with Hasbro next, Uncle Joe, because GI JOEs came with guns.

I've said it before, and won't beat a dead horse here, its about being held accountable for one's actions. Punishing the whole for the acts of the few solves nothing. By all means make firearms harder to get, but where there are ppl willing to commit such monstrous acts, a means to their ends will always be available.

I agree. Prohibition does nothing positive.

Marijuana has been illegal in this country for half a century. I could have some within 30 minutes if I wanted, but I don't.

This is about one specific type of firearm. Designed and engineered to kill people, a purpose built weapon, employed by soldiers worldwide. Semi auto assault weapons. Not handguns, not hunting rifles. These weapons have no place or practical use in civilian hands. I think its being completely reasonable to put additional restrictions on these firearms.

You know what the only significant difference between an 'assault weapon' and a 'hunting rifle' is? 'Assault weapons' are less powerful. They look scarier but looks do not translate into lethality.

Really? The Armalite AR-15 semi automatic assault rifle was designed and engineered by request of.the US govt. It's purpose was to deploy a lethal, light, dependable and accurate rifle. It shoots lots of bullets fast, and its ballistic characteristics are desinged tumble after impact, which causes tremendous tissue damage. There is a reason every standind army in the world is equiped with similar semi auto or variable fire assault weapons. Variations of the AR-15 can be purchased by civilians today.

There's no such thing as a "Semi auto" only assault weapon. There have been restrictions for decades on assault weapons, because assault weapons are capable of full auto fire.

I'm replying to this comment instead of the one below so you'll get a note.

The AR-15 was designed by Eugene Stoner. It was a followup to his already radical and experimental AR-10. The original rifle, as with the AR-10, was select-fire, not merely semi-automatic. In terms of power per shot, and lethality and accuracy beyond about 300 yards, the average hunting rifle, whether it be an M-14, Savage S3, Mauser, Dragunov, or other, is far and away more powerful than an AR-15. Some popular hunting rifles are repurposed battle rifles. The adopted model of the AR-15 (the M-16) was designed around reaction to the realities of modern combat. Previous rifles (the G3, FAL, M14, AR-10, K98k, SVT-40, M-1 Garand, etc.) were designed in reaction to the Boer war (the M-1 wasn't, but it was jawboned into meeting the pattern of weapons which were, and that's a story unto itself) where long range flat shooting rifles held by skilled marksmen were the deciding factor. British troops found themselves heavily outclassed by Dutch farmers using Mausers. The problem being that the Boer war was unique in the history of warfare. None since generally contained the prevailing tactical conditions of that war. Also the reason why all western armies are equipped with similar weapons is due to STANAG.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." Ben Franklin 1755 (Pennsylvania Assembly: Reply to the Governor, Tue, Nov 11, 1755)

I have played over 1200 hours of The ElderSrcolls games, and I haven't even once thought buying a sword to hack people up with.

Then your not playing it right.

All of it...is so...****ing...retarded. Im not even going to sit here and try to debate people on the internet.

Hasn't the government done enough studies on this crap? Didn't Jack Thompson and Hilary waste enough tax dollars? They're just going to get the same answers.

Don't forget the deinstitutionalization of the mentally ill. Maybe they should meet with mental health care and case management reps.

Very good point!

Shut up! Shut up! You stupid f@cking foreigner!

From Yahoo! News: Vice President Joe Biden said on Friday he was “shooting for Tuesday” to get President Barack Obama his recommendations on how to battle an epidemic of gun violence and warned “there’s no silver bullet” to stop the killing.

Those puns are weapons-grade Godek vintage. Using them in an act of war would get you put on trial before the Hague. A short Swiss man would say to you (in a mishmash of French, German and Italian) "Have you no shame? Shame on you!" The families of the victims would be crying and screaming in the gallery and they wouldn't even clear the court.

"How could he use such a pun? How could he? What kind of monster is capable of that?"

Do you see what you've started Mr. Hindman? One day it's a blog post the next it's a war crimes tribunal.

I take issue with the Penn & Teller: BS episode that claimed that video games can't make kids better at shooting guns. They picked a nerdy white "Urkel"- looking kid who wasn't old enough to have been shunned by society, unable to get women and spend day and night in his mom's basement playing video games (murder simulators) until reaching the point of snapping.

Video games don't improve marksmanship automatically because the hand-eye coordination of the controller hasn't connected to the hand-eye coordination of an actual gun (yet), but there can be no denying that the fundamentals of shooting guns are taught through video games.

My first time on a gun range, I felt like I already knew what to do (thanks to Time Crisis 1/2) and I DID FANTASTIC.

youtube.com/watch?v=p_IjFXp0zQc&list=HL135​8002280&feature=mh_lolz

KIDS KNOW MORE ABOUT GUN/AMMO combinations THAN THEY KNOW ABOUT THEIR SCHOOLWORK.

"America is #1 in murders with firearms and #3 in murders committed by youths."

The site you linked needs to be updated. If you click through the link to the list that's obviously not true. It's number four. When you consider the US also has far more people than the countries which handily beat it in homicide totals the picture is thrown in somewhat starker relief. The US is a violent country, but it's far from the most violent. Per Capita violent crime rates are, overall, lower now than they've been at any other point in the nation's history. Looking at rate (homicides per 100,000 - which doesn't discount justified homicides) in which the US comes in 14th, I'm amused to note in passing that a number of countries which stagger the US homicide rate have very strict gun laws, or overall very low rates of possession even among criminals.

But the US is far and away # 1 in gun homicides compared to other western developed countries. Most striking is the number of gun homicides in US vs UK. Over 9000 here, only 39 there. When adjusted for population differences we still have a homicide rate 37X higher. Those in the UK are exposed to the same music, games movies and media, but with much lower instances of gun violence. The only really significant difference is their very restrictive guns laws compared with ours in the US. I think there is something to that. I don't support banning all firearms, but we need to be reasonable here.

There is one thing wrong with the stats you are quoting. Yes there is less gun violence when there are less guns, Duh! Is a appropriate response to that. When there is less of something in a area of course that will less likely affect the area. But to stay on topic there is no evidence that says less guns means less murders/homicides. UK has less gun related deaths but is there still people killed? Yes. Stats are misleading.

Then you have made the gun control activists' case dude. Less guns = less gun violence, meaning strict regulations are effective.

I think a more productive approach is to examine overall rates of violent crime. This helps us keep our minds on the more fundamental problem of violence in society and not get caught up in blaming the means by which the mad and wicked inflict suffering on others. To blame the means is at once to ignore the actual cause of the crime and to divert attention from the criminal responsible. It places an amoral emphasis on a naive prevention scheme (they don't work, Washington D.C. is strong enough evidence of that) that is based more on emotive desires than rational expectation of results.

I think the administration is taking a three pronged approach, assault weapons, mental health care accessiblity and media / cultural viloence. The idea is to seem less focused on placing restrictive measures on assault weapons and look appear more concerned with addressing a host of issues that contributes to mass shootings. I don't think many of the last few generations actually believes games lead to gun violence.

stupid ****ing people