Trump to meet US video game industry heads on Thursday

[Corky34]

We should make all drugs legal. It's worked in Portugal!

It seem you're trying to paint it in very black and white terms, Portugal has not made all drugs legal it's relaxed its laws.

Using or possessing drugs is still illegal without authorisation and more than a 10 day supply can still see you being sent the chokey, and that change only came about because they're trying to reduce the harmful effect of drugs. However, as has been said many times now, this isn't a thread about drugs policies, as much as you'd like to throw that in the mix as a false equivalence, drugs and firearms are two very different things.

[Tabbykatze]

TeePee, considering the amount of posts you have made, you should know how to use the multi-quote feature and reply just once?

Portugal didn't legalise drugs, they decriminalised them. So that means the consumption and possession of drugs is still illegal, but the resultant charges are not criminal in nature. They are designed to help the person get off drugs through healthcare and social work.

It has worked quite well and the number of repeat offenses has drastically dropped.

[Rob_B]

The US doesn't give firearms to nutters either. In fact, there are laws preventing nutters from owning firearms. They obtain them anyway, illegally, because they break the law. More laws won't help.

I thought a recent issue was the pretty rubbish laws around this and the gunshow loopholes. It's far easier to get any type of gun in the USA than (most) other countries, there's a list doing the rounds ive seen where it compares different places, I'll try to find it.

[spacein_vader]

Sooooooo, back to the point about video games and any links to violence:

I've been a PC gamer since I was 8 years old and am now in my mid 30s. If there is any link to between gaming and violence I would definitely want to be aware of it. As of yet I haven't seen any quality peer-reviewed research that shows any link but then I'm not sure if much/any exists.

If there IS a link, I still can't see how that would explain the American problem with school shootings as surely we'd then see the same rise in the EU, Japan, Korea and other countries with widespread access to violent video games?

[Zak33]

CAT, dear chap you're not reading what I wrote.

I'm not interested in Elephants or Moose. Where did that even come from? I said Coyotes. And I didn't say an Assault rifle, .. but a multi shot semi auto larger calibre.
Many many hunting rifles are based on previous Armed Forces rifles. A gun is a gun. There's only so many combo's man can invent.
Fully Automatic isn't essential BUT look at it like this, where a fully automatic would be a real boon.....shooting a Coyote with rapid fire pattern of 3 to 5, 5.56mm while it's running is just so much more efficient than trying to get a single shot into it's engine room while it pegs it across the farm, and you reload the bolt of a .260 or .308

You said "The US has 10X the number of guns per capita than Switzerland" but that chart shows Switzerland at 24.45 Guns per 100 and US at 100.05 per 100.
The only way this works as a debate is if you actually read and digest the info given.

[Zak33]

Sooooooo, back to the point about video games and any links to violence:

I've been a PC gamer since I was 8 years old and am now in my mid 30s. If there is any link to between gaming and violence I would definitely want to be aware of it. As of yet I haven't seen any quality peer-reviewed research that shows any link but then I'm not sure if much/any exists.

If there IS a link, I still can't see how that would explain the American problem with school shootings as surely we'd then see the same rise in the EU, Japan, Korea and other countries with widespread access to violent video games?

good point.

The allegation is that because of the ease of ACCESS to guns in the US, the kids who fancy a right old tear up, after playing CoD, find it easier in the spur of the moment (that Spur of the moment can last weeks or months... but in countries that just don't have the heavy arsenal,the time passes and the desire ebbs )

[Mr_Jon]

All the thousands of hours I've wasted in championship manager and its various guises have failed to make me any more of a football manager.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Why would you need virtual guns in games,when you can buy the same stuff many special forces use in other countries,and fire it in your back garden??



The US has 10X the number of guns per capita than Switzerland,and both have significantly higher gun related deaths than here. Switzerland has nearly 9X the amount of guns per capita than the UK and if you just look at gun related murders,its a few times higher than here.

Considering Switzerland is a country which much lower poverty rates as it is very wealthy,and has under 9 million people,I am actually surprised the amount of gun related deaths there.

Plus I am not sure people are supporting the notion games cause more realworld violence - look at South Korea.

Games are national sports there,and their gun related homicide rate is lower than the UK.

The country is technically still at war with North Korea and conscription is mandatory. They not only have enough people who know how to fire a gun,but gun ownership is lower indicating greater regulation.



Watch some documentaries,on places like Alaska,etc. Most of the weapons such people carry,are hunting rifles and shotguns with limited ammo capacity due to Bears,Moose and Mountain Lions. These people are living in isolated communities and they also hunt these animals so they can eat them.

Its the same in other countries - do you honestly think a maurading Elephant,Leopard or Tiger is any less dangerous - I knew some people who owned a farm in a tropical country,and there was no need for a rapid fire,assault rifle,and neither was it allowed,and I saw the guns they had. They were hunting rifles and shotguns.

Assault rifles are design to kill people in body armour,at a rapid rate with quick reload times,not to kill animals:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assault_rifle

The StG 44 was not made to kill animals,but to kill people at RANGE quicker than a battle rifle.

The problem is also the ammo capacity - this is what assault type weapons,have loads of ammunition and quick reload times,and they can be modified quite easily to accept things like drum magazines,as criminals have done that in the US:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/North_Hollywood_shootout

I watched a US documentary on that - even the SWAT officers found it hard to take them down with an MP5 or an AR15!! An MP5 firing 9MM ammo. That is what the SAS used to use.

Do you honestly think,modern day Moose,Mountain Lions,Tigers,Elephants,etc have suddenly mutated in the last 100 years,etc requiring rapid firing ranged weapons to take one down?? Really??

I would imagine the ammo cost alone would not make sense!!

CAT, dear chap you're not reading what I wrote.

I'm not interested in Elephants or Moose. Where did that even come from? I said Coyotes. And I didn't say an Assault rifle, .. but a multi shot semi auto larger calibre.
Many many hunting rifles are based on previous Armed Forces rifles. A gun is a gun. There's only so many combo's man can invent.
Fully Automatic isn't essential BUT look at it liek this.....shooting a Coyote with rapid fire pattern of 3 to 5 5.56mm while it's running is just so much more efficient than trying to get a single shot into it's engine room while it pegs it across the farm, and you reload the bolt of a .260 or .308

Sorry,but don't you see think I see what you are trying to do here?? In the US fully automatic weapons are not allowed,so the guns are semi-automatic and the flash suppressor is not allowed.

So by sideways logic justifying semi-automatic weapons you can justify semi-automatic rifles and NO a gun is not a gun.

Is a Barrett 12.7" anti-materiel rifle just a gun?? An M82?? Its semi-automatic and is mahoosive and you can buy one in the US.

Have you ever seen one of those types of rifles at a MILITARY exhibition?? They are nearly 1.5M long. The size of the 12.7MM round?? Its bloody huge. So are you telling me,we need MILITARY grade rifles designed to go through body armour and light vehicle armour to hunt animals?

Dude,seriously - this is what armies use to kill people and destroy vehicles.

Also,I knew people in the past who had a farm abroad and if you are so terrified of a mountain lion,have you ever seen an Elephant up close?? They are huge and when they are drunk or get territorial they are not slow and they are dangerous especially Tuskers. There were Leopards too - you know why,there was a stuffed one in the entrance of their house,and Leopards can be quite vicious too.

Yet,despite this they "only" had shotguns and standard rifles,so no you don't need semi-automatic weapons with 20 round magazines.

Maybe learn to be a better shot??

Plus,maybe you should also look at all those documentaries in Alaska,etc - especially all the off gridders,who actually NEED a gun. Not the fanatics who have an armory,cause they need to protect themselves against the US government,just people living in the wilderness.

Yes,if you paid attention to what these people had,it wasn't assault type weapons,with 20 round magazines,and bump stocks.

They were limited capacity things like mostly hunting rifles and shot guns,etc. These people conserve ammo due to its cost and the remote locations they live in. A bag of cement can cost £50 a pop due to transport costs alone.

Plus if you even paid attention to some of the series,one or two follow people who actually hunt Mountain Lions with dogs.

They mostly have hunting rifles,etc. Some of the designs were made for a 100 years!!

If you went by the logic of the internet,they would be dual wielding a pair of AR15 rifles,with a backup M82 in the jeep just in case.

You said "The US has 10X the number of guns per capita than Switzerland" but that chart shows Switzerland at 24.45 Guns per 100 and US at 100.05 per 100.
The only way this works as a debate is if you actually read and digest the info given.

Yet,with 4X times more they still had more deaths so I misquoted a figure while on the phone. So what are you trying to prove,not much.

Plus I am not even debating whether they should be allowed guns,just not semi-automatic types(especially ranged ones) which can easily carry loads of ammo(or can be modified to do so easily) and easily reloaded.

Yet countries like Israel and South Korea who are surrounded by hostile countries,etc and have conscription, have very tough gun laws,and have less gun related deaths than the US and less guns per capita.

South Korea just loves gaming too.

Edit!!

Even looking at TP's posts,I am still not seeing the justification for why semi-automatic rifles,or any fast firing,easily reloadable weapon with a large ammo capacity is actually required beyond "its nice to have".

If you are such a poor shot,I would argue that justing spraying and praying is probably not going to help you when an animal attacks or some chap tries to attack you on your land.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

Sooooooo, back to the point about video games and any links to violence:

I've been a PC gamer since I was 8 years old and am now in my mid 30s. If there is any link to between gaming and violence I would definitely want to be aware of it. As of yet I haven't seen any quality peer-reviewed research that shows any link but then I'm not sure if much/any exists.

If there IS a link, I still can't see how that would explain the American problem with school shootings as surely we'd then see the same rise in the EU, Japan, Korea and other countries with widespread access to violent video games?

Exactly and in countries like South Korea,its compulsory for 18 to 35 men to do national service and the South Koreans take gaming very seriously.

So despite lots of young people having used guns,North Korea on their border,and both countries still technically at war,they have some of the most restrictive gun laws in the world,and have some of the lowest gun related homicide rates in the world.

The Republic of Korea, known as South Korea, has strict gun policies. Hunting and sporting licenses are issued, but any firearm used in these circumstances must be stored at a local police station. Air rifles also have to be stored at police stations; crossbows and electric shock devices are also classified as firearms but their private retention is permitted. Tasers are prohibited, and possessing a toy gun without an orange tip is strictly prohibited. Violation of firearms law can result in a US$18,000 fine and up to 10 years in prison.[75]

The majority of South Korean men are well-trained in the use of firearms, due to mandatory military service.[75] Despite this, gun culture is notably absent in South Korean society outside of the military, and gun ownership and deaths rank among the lowest in the world.

It seems the pro-gun lobby was taken over by extremists in the late 1970s and this is why even restricting one or two types of weapons is an issue:

https://timeline.com/the-hostile-tak...a-e3af86edccae

Perhaps no other lobbying organization has seen such a striking political turnaround as the National Rifle Association. First granted a charter in 1871, the National Rifle Association was founded by a group of Union officers appalled by the the fact that many soldiers barely knew how to use their weapons. The group’s stated goal was to train better marksmen.

In the 1920s and 30s, the association—and its counterpart, the National Revolver Association—helped lobby for policies that are surprisingly pro- gun control: requiring permits, adding time to gun-crime sentences, waiting periods, and outlawing non-citizen ownership. In fact, in 1938, the president of the NRA testified before Congress in support of these laws: “I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns. I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.” The Gun Control Act of 1968—brought about in response to the decade’s brutal assassinations of JFK, Martin Luther King, and Robert F. Kennedy, enforced and strengthened the earlier gun laws.

It wasn’t until the early 1970s that a call to the Second Amendment—an individual’s right to bear arms—became part of the NRA’s narrative, and a schism in the group began to emerge. In 1975, Harlon B. Carter was brought on as part of a lobbying arm, the Institute for Legislative Action. A Texan and a former U.S. Border Patrol officer, Carter believed deeply in expanding gun owners’ rights. The N.R.A. actually fired Carter in 1976, but in May 1977 he and a small group of likeminded employees who had also been let go hijacked the annual meeting and reconfigured the agenda.

Carter became the NRA’s Executive Director, changing the culture and direction of the organization drastically and cementing its dedication to “protecting the Second Amendment.” This telling article shows the deep divide within the Association, describing Carter and his group, which came to be known as “the Federation,” as “the most extreme of the extremists” who left no room for argument, discussion or disagreement: “Let a timorous official show the slightest weakness, and his name will go down on the Federation’s secret ‘hit list.’”

Edit!!

Here is a more detailed article on the NRA shifting towards a rather more extreme stance:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/polit...=.8826424189b1

So,this whole "if we ban one type or gun or increase regulations its the end of the world" stuff,is something that has only been a thing from the late 1970s.

Having said that churches do bless AR15 guns in the US:

http://www.dw.com/en/us-rifle-toting...rch/a-42778174

Worshippers clutched rifles and donned crowns made of rounds of bullets, as they exchanged or renewed wedding vows at a church in the US state of Pennsylvania on Wednesday.

Brides wearing white and grooms in dark suits brought dozens of unloaded AR-15s for the commitment ceremony at the World Peace and Unification Sanctuary building in the town of Newfoundland, about 190 kilometers (120 miles) north of Philadelphia.

The church, which has a worldwide following, believes the AR-15 symbolizes the "rod of iron" in the book of Revelation, and encourages couples to bring the weapons.

AFAIK,I don't think they had AR15 rifles 2000 years ago,but apparently they seem worthy of blessing!! I didn't realise Armalite was doing the bidding of the Lord!!

[Zak33]

where did the barrett come from?

i didnt mention 50cal

im out of this

[spacein_vader]

Interesting viewpoint on the makeup of that meeting from a gaming standpoint (obviously they may be biased.)

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

where did the barrett come from?

i didnt mention 50cal

im out of this

Maybe you need to understand when you say a gun is a gun,what level of guns you can get in the US. An M82 is a semi-automatic weapon and very large calibre,ie,0.5" or 12.7MM and you can buy it as a civilian. This is why when people try to sell that semi-automatic weapons are OK,by extension you are saying even an M82 is OK for civilian usage. You seem to then ignore the whole concept of what an assault type weapon is or even why rapid fire weapons exist. They are only made to kill people rapidly,usually at range,with large magazines which are quick to reload.

However,since modern body armour has gotten better,so did the guns.

You also then try to saying semi-automatic weapons as "being fine" due to Cougars. Then when I mention Elephants and Leopards and in the realworld knew people who were farmers and had to actually deal with those animals and poachers too,you said ignore that.

Maybe realise that the rest of the world has to deal with dangerous animals too - marauding Elephants are a big problem,and Leopards can be driven to attack people if there is not enough food. The same with Tigers,etc. Plenty of countries have bears too. Yet in many countries around the world even with these problems,semi-automatic weapons are restricted even for farmers.

Yet magically they seem to be able to still kill these animals fine. There is no need for any kind of semi-automatic weapons for defending yourself or hunting animals. Only people making up scenarios,to fit them.

Yet,in any of those Alaskan/Canadian documentaries or series I watched,I am yet to see any of those hunters or normal off-gridders run around with AR15s,etc. Mostly older rifle types,older style shot guns with limited rates of fire and reload,etc. The only ones I ever saw who have guns like the AR15 are those people who think the US government is there to "take their rights" so they need to "defend" themselves against the danger,and are holed up thinking the government is going to get them at short notice.

You say you own shotguns - if someone broke into your home,and attacks you is having a loaded AR15 instead suddenly going to protect you better if they get the jump on you?? What about the bullet which could pass through things and hit someone else? Or what are you going to be sniping potential trespassers at range?? Is it a quick magazine reloadable semi-automatic combat shotgun what you need then?? A semi-automatic 5.7MM pistol like an FN 5-7 which can in theory take magazines with upto 30 rounds?? The round was designed to go through kevlar body armour.

How many bullets in your magazine do you need to "protect" yourself?? 8,12,20?? What rate of fire?? Why do you even NEED a magazine reloadable weapon in the first place??

What rate of reload - why do you need a magazine reloadable weapon for hunting or self protection?? What is this self protection or hunting scenario where you need to reload loads of bullets in a few seconds,just after firing 6,8,etc in a short period??

Yes,I know a scenario,when you have to fight some moron who decided to use such a weapon and fire as many weapons as quickly as possible into civilians, or when they attack banks and injure 20 policemen/SWAT team members using the same weapons!

Its a self fulfilling prophesy.



No its become a toy,meaning all manner of weapons which make zero sense for basic civilian usage still gets sold. Gun fans seem to think even restricting a few classes of guns(well one just ONE kind of semi-automatic weapon in this case) equals to "oh noes! they are destroying our rights and our hobbies". Heck even suggestions they do what some countries do,and have such weapons stored outside the owners home so they can be used only in restricted conditions at a gun club/event,usually is "oh noes! they are destroying our rights and our hobbies".

[Corky34]

Interesting viewpoint on the makeup of that meeting from a gaming standpoint (obviously they may be biased.)

I would say that article was surprising but unfortunately the moment it was announced that Trump would be meeting with video game industry heads it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that it would turn into an echo-chamber. It seems it's a bit like the tobacco industry from years ago only even more stark, point the finger at anything as long as it's not tobacco/guns.

[CAT-THE-FIFTH]

I would say that article was surprising but unfortunately the moment it was announced that Trump would be meeting with video game industry heads it was pretty much a foregone conclusion that it would turn into an echo-chamber. It seems it's a bit like the tobacco industry from years ago only even more stark, point the finger at anything as long as it's not tobacco/guns.

What do you expect when the NRA went from an organisation which was more pro-gun control(for nearly a 100 years),and made a total turnaround since some uber gun fans,did a coup and decided to spin one of the US amendments instead. Since these people have made their bed,for 40 years,any indication perhaps the people they kicked out might have had a point,would be an indication of failure on their part and they have far too many vested interests now,and they will make sure their fans forget how it has changed from 40 years ago.

This is their pride and business interests on the line,so as long as they fund enough politicians,it doesn't matter how many kids march for better gun control,it will always be watered down.

It took decades for the Tobacco industry to admit that they knew that smoking increased the chance of getting cancer going back 40 years.

[TeePee]

TeePee, considering the amount of posts you have made, you should know how to use the multi-quote feature and reply just once?

Portugal didn't legalise drugs, they decriminalised them. So that means the consumption and possession of drugs is still illegal, but the resultant charges are not criminal in nature. They are designed to help the person get off drugs through healthcare and social work.

It has worked quite well and the number of repeat offenses has drastically dropped.

Great! Let's do that! Something that will actually reducing the murder rate, rather than a worthless knee-jerk reaction.

[TeePee]

I thought a recent issue was the pretty rubbish laws around this and the gunshow loopholes. It's far easier to get any type of gun in the USA than (most) other countries, there's a list doing the rounds ive seen where it compares different places, I'll try to find it.

There is no gunshow loophole, that's another myth. Buying a gun at a gunshow requires that you follow exactly the same laws as anywhere else in the State.