Michigan One of The Highest In School Threats

Cameron wrote:

When you look at the perpetrators, I believe there are only two significant factors: 1) mental illness, and 2) access to firearms.

If you want to blame video games, you also need to blame music, tv, movies, and pretty much every other form of entertainment. That is not a tenable position.

Cameron wrote:

SawGreen wrote:

Q: Do you play video games? Do you have any first hand experience?

A: Not much anymore, but I have.  Doom was awesome.  Do you own guns?  I don't want to kill because I own them... because I'm talking about me.

Q: Hell, do you have any studies you can point to that demonstrate that video games contribute to real world violence?

A: En masse, of course not.  What's the ratio of "they do contribute" do you need?  We are talking about a minuscule to extremely finite minority of people with mental issues.  Here is what I do think.  Nascar drivers train on video games, as do NFL players, soccer players, etc.  For those predisposed or on the fringe, I earnestly believe that video games can contribute if for nothing else than fantasy and "practice".

None of my comments are an "attack" on society (or gamers).  I do think morality has declined, I do think intestinal fortitude (on the average) has declined. But, even if neither is true, when you look at the perpetrators, I listed things that I believe are contributing factors.  

When you look at the perpetrators, I believe there are only two significant factors: 1) mental illness, and 2) access to firearms.

If you want to blame video games, you also need to blame music, tv, movies, and pretty much every other form of entertainment. That is not a tenable position.

Cameron wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Cam he hasn’t looked at the perpetrators just an idea of what the perpetrators are that someone fed him.

Saw green here’s a start. But by no means the end. You should google more before commenting then come back and talk. Seriously. You’re bringing a handgun to an ar 15 fight with the amount you’ve actually looked into any of this and are just basing it on your own feelings.

https://www.rollingstone.com/glixel/features/video-games-school-shootings-w516863

Yeah, I have a pretty good idea about how much research he's done on the matter (zero). He has a gut feeling, and he doesn't care to know whether or not it's supported by facts. He's as informed as Trump on this.

Since you're not a mod anymore, that last comment won't get this moved to tBin, right?

SawGreen wrote:

Cameron wrote:

When you look at the perpetrators, I believe there are only two significant factors: 1) mental illness, and 2) access to firearms.

If you want to blame video games, you also need to blame music, tv, movies, and pretty much every other form of entertainment. That is not a tenable position.

No music, movies or other form of entertainment even sniffs video games jock on violence and fantasy.  With them, you are a spectator, not a participant.

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

SawGreen wrote:

No music, movies or other form of entertainment even sniffs video games jock on violence and fantasy.  With them, you are a spectator, not a participant.

Movies aren't as violent as video games? Have you never heard of Quinten Tarantino? Or Saw movie? Or those shitty Hostel movies?

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

SawGreen wrote:

No music, movies or other form of entertainment even sniffs video games jock on violence and fantasy.  With them, you are a spectator, not a participant.

Movies aren't as violent as video games? Have you never heard of Quinten Tarantino? Or Saw movie? Or those shitty Hostel movies?

LooseGoose wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Movies aren't as violent as video games? Have you never heard of Quinten Tarantino? Or Saw movie? Or those shitty Hostel movies?

How can that be?   You mean that the HollyWood stars preaching against gun violence got rich off it?   Well golly gee, out here in the sticks we'd call them people hypocrites.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

How can that be?   You mean that the HollyWood stars preaching against gun violence got rich off it?   Well golly gee, out here in the sticks we'd call them people hypocrites.

Except again, despite your precious fe fes, it has nothing to do with the problem.

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
Except again, despite your precious fe fes, it has nothing to do with the problem.

As usual for a discussion with you nothing does unless you approve the observation.

LooseGoose wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

Movies aren't as violent as video games? Have you never heard of Quinten Tarantino? Or Saw movie? Or those shitty Hostel movies?

How can that be? You mean that the HollyWood stars preaching against gun violence got rich off it? Well golly gee, out here in the sticks we'd call them people hypocrites.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I’m sure hotair.aol.com tells you otherwise.

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I’m sure hotair.aol.com tells you otherwise.

Because I'm so damned dumb that I need that unlike you original thinkers.

Typical snotty ass insult from you.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:
Because I'm so damned dumb that I need that unlike you original thinkers.

Typical snotty ass insult from you.

I mean you deleted the part about how you were entirely wrong so that’s cool

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:I’m sure hotair.aol.com tells you otherwise.

Because I'm so damned dumb that I need that unlike you original thinkers.

Typical snotty ass insult from you.

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:
I mean you deleted the part about how you were entirely wrong so that’s cool

Because there's no reason to argue with you.   I've got better things to do like pick at the boil on my ass.

LooseGoose wrote: I've got better things to do like pick at the boil on my ass.

WhiteBoyHatcher wrote:My friends older brother (was a Sr when we were Fr) called in a bomb threat to the office from the payphone outside the office. He got expelled. He was Yugoslavian/Albanian if that helps.

The Education Department reports that roughly 50 million children attend public schools for roughly 180 days per year. Since Columbine, approximately 200 public school students have been shot to death while school was in session, including the recent slaughter at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla. (and a shooting in Birmingham, Ala., on Wednesday that police called accidental that left one student dead). That means the statistical likelihood of any given public school student being killed by a gun, in school, on any given day since 1999 was roughly 1 in 614,000,000. And since the 1990s, shootings at schools have been getting less common.

The chance of a child being shot and killed in a public school is extraordinarily low. Not zero — no risk is. But it’s far lower than many people assume, especially in the glare of heart-wrenching news coverage after an event like Parkland. And it’s far lower than almost any other mortality risk a kid faces, including traveling to and from school, catching a potentially deadly disease while in school or suffering a life-threatening injury playing interscholastic sports.

We sometimes seek protection from our fears in ways that put us in greater peril. In responding to the Parkland shooting, we may be doing just that to our kids.

Statistics seem cold and irrelevant compared with how the evil of a school shooting makes us feel. The victims are children, and research on the psychology of risk has found that few risks worry us more than threats to kids. Parents who send their precious children to school each morning are relinquishing control over their safety; that same research has found that lack of control makes any risk feel more threatening.

Just as surely as there will be another school shooting, it will prompt another flood of outrage and fear. That fear, while understandable, will distract us from greater threats and lead to behaviors that do greater harm. The real lesson we need to learn is this: We need not just reasonable gun control, but also a bit more self-control over our emotions and instincts if we want to keep ourselves and our kids safer.

David Ropeik is an instructor at Harvard and author of "How Risky Is It, Really? Why Our Fears Don’t Always Match the Facts."

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Why did you argue for putting guns in classrooms if the problem is that there really isn’t a problem and people should just shut up and be ok with it is it because you get led around by your nose and are actually a huge cuck or no

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Why did you argue for putting guns in classrooms if the problem is that there really isn’t a problem and people should just shut up and be ok with it is it because you get led around by your nose and are actually a huge cuck or no

Why?  Because I think arming a few more people is a better solution than causing a civil war by trying to disarm many people.

Now feel free to carry on with your jackassery.

LooseGoose wrote:

Watch Out Pylon! wrote:

And of course you'd laugh at such weak sauce.

LooseGoose wrote:lol, as if you make rules for me.

The problem is overblown by the media but that's what they do.

I can certainly hold those two positions. I'm sorry that it's too complicated for you to comprehend.

LooseGoose wrote:

Travis of the Cosmos wrote:Why did you argue for putting guns in classrooms if the problem is that there really isn’t a problem and people should just shut up and be ok with it is it because you get led around by your nose and are actually a huge cuck or no

Why? Because I think arming a few more people is a better solution than causing a civil war by trying to disarm many people.

Now feel free to carry on with your jackassery.

Travis of the Cosmos wrote: is it because you get led around by your noseo