13 year old father attempts murder over a video game

[Saint Jade IV]

It's like that's the only possible negative outcome from viewing age-inappropriate content.

That's the problem with some people. They think in extremes.

Because that's the only way they can mount a defence against most arguments. If there's one thing I've learnt on NS, it's that most people would rather be idiots rather than wrong.

I have noticed that. It's like, with some issues, there can be no middle ground. In fact, on every issue, there is at least one extremist person, who can't see a reasonable middle ground. Like with this one. Apparently, it's impossible to suggest that some video games are inappropriately violent and realistic for young adolescents, and that parents should perhaps rethink their child's access to them, without wanting to ban all video games, or believing that violent video games automatically make one violent. I support neither position, but have been accused of both by people in this thread.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

I think my parents would have been aware of any negative consequences videogames would have brought to my lifestyle.

Really? Because I bet most parents, in fact ALL parents are not perfect, and do miss things that negatively impact on their child's development. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean that their children are going to grow up into stunted, terrible people, incapable of interacting with the wider world without violence.

And negative outcomes, in all cases, it usually means it has warped a person's mind in a negative way. So would you kindly explain how that isn't a bad outcome? And how wouldn't that be discernible?

Negative impacts don't mean this at all.

No, I just think it's stupid to think videogame violence = real life violence. It doesn't work like that if the parents educate the child about the games. I would let my children play any kind of games, but I would have a talk with them to not be idiots and attempt these things out of videogames, which is what a parent should be doing anyways, fucking educating their children instead of thinking their children can do nothing wrong.

How about "Ethnic Cleansing"? Nothing possibly wrong there. Or "Rapelay"? You cool with your kid playing that at 13?

Would you let them watch porn, or read Hustler too, at 13?

I never said that children that play violent video games will engage in real life violence. At any point. Some will, some won't. But that is not the only potentially bad outcome from playing age-inappropriate violent games.

I have watched and played violent videogames and movies since I was a child, and there is still not that correlation, so I don't see what the point is of saying "oh no! We should ban all games from children's consumption!" Please, like children are stupid.

I also at no point ever advocated for banning video game consumption in children. Perhaps you should read what I actually wrote, instead of making strawmen.

Also, as for your snarky comments, I know I am not very social. Do you really think I care? Absolutely not, but I don't blame my lack of social skills to playing videogames, I correlate them to my bad experiences with people.

Your point being? I'm not sure how this relates to anything I have posted.

And I am not so shallow as to think I am perfect, which is of course, another thing you should be teaching your children anyways. I am humble enough to not think I am perfect unlike some people in here.

Your posts would suggest otherwise.

However, I can't think of a single negative correlation between videogames and IRL violence in my case, and I have asked the same thing to other gamers who say the same thing, therefore it isn't just a group of us who turned out to be fine.

Again, not something I have ever argued at any point in this thread.

As for the "life" inference, you may think that, however nobody is entitled to have life just handed to them. No way in the history of the world has it been that way that we can be efficient at everything we can possibly do. We are just better at certain things and we suck at others but that's life. We don't live in this fairy-tale world where candy canes and blankets are there for us whenever we need them. Life is cruel, and we just have to work around the bad things and move on.

I never argued that. Seriously, try reading what I actually wrote.

All of this can be condensed into a single statement out of you: BLAH.

Seriously, you seem to want to baby children around but here's the thing: I wasn't babied around, I wasn't given a break, and yet I have to see one single person tell me I am a piece of shit, unfit person at life. Honestly, you make these things overly complicated.

You talk about negative outcomes, but I have yet to see one negative outcome that could come out of playing violent videogames or watching porn that would make you unfit to actually function in society. Honestly, you make things sound rather complicated when they really are not: teach your child not to be such a pussy, to respect others, and to not take everything he reads/plays/watches that seriously and there, the child should not have any reason to do any shit like what he watches/reads/plays. It's not that complicated and I can't see why am I even arguing, Again about shit that, honestly, has no relevance in my life or am I supposed to be convinced of like you try to convince me there may be something wrong with me just because I watched porn at 13 (I didn't, but just placing a hypothetical there) or I played violent videogames when I was a child. Seriously, get that trumpet of purity off your throat, it doesn't fit you.

Like I said, what you should be questioning here is not the child's exposure to these things, but how can parents be such fucking morons to not explain to the child that videogames are not real and really watch their behavior instead of fucking babying him around like he is a delicate flower. Violent games are not bad per se, it's how the parents introduce said games to the child that is relevant, which translates with parents giving a fuck about their children's upbringing, which isn't rocket science, it's just most parents leave educators to teach their children shit they are supposed to be teaching anyways.

[Sedikal]

Honestly why would you buy a 13 year old an M rated game? Expecislly with the content gears has. It not a bad by a long shot but yeah young kids are impressionable and will try stupid things because they saw them and this is not the games fault as a whole but only a part of it. That said the parents should have noticed something I mean there must have been some sort of mental issues around before hand. But again it may have not be prevalent enough to notice right away. There was probably a lot going besides the game and the argument that would have lead to this event.

I don't mind 13 year olds playing an M-rated game, but if it's online, that's a different story. For whatever reason, these online game communities breed the most obnoxious, foul-mouthed, angry players I have ever heard. And it's the adults, mainly 20-something year olds that are behind this and kids just copy what they see.

I know these games are mean't for adult players but some of these adults that play these games online don't even act mature. I enjoy my online games like TF2, Counter Strike etc, but I never felt the need to scream, cuss and name call random people over the internet. Now and then, I troll for fun on the game's chatbox but never use voice chat to express my anger.

I don't even get angry because it's a game. This is why I don't play sports with people either because some people have really bad anger issues and doesn't make the game fun.

Well I also don't mind it do much as I see it as "really?" I think once the Highschool years come around you can let the kids DI whatever within legal guidelines. But I would shit bricks if u heard my son playing online at 13. Mainly because if the fact that I've played online and yes most people are stupid fucking jackoffs while online. I guess it's just me though and my views could change by the time my son turns 13.

I've always seen parenting as just a kids Safty net when reality gets to hectic. I mean the kid ain't living in my house till he's 30 but if he's like 15 and shit gets to heavy ill be there for the kid. Honestly responsible parenting is to blame for this incident.

I'm against stupid parents and censorship.

[Terraius]

Its time we banned video games.

If we can save just ONE life. Just one. We have an obligation.

Common sense legislation.

Photo-op with the kids parents in the background.

Time to put those video game nuts in their place. National Videogame Association types, you know who you are. Your days are numbered.

[Saint Jade IV]

Really? Because I bet most parents, in fact ALL parents are not perfect, and do miss things that negatively impact on their child's development. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean that their children are going to grow up into stunted, terrible people, incapable of interacting with the wider world without violence.



Negative impacts don't mean this at all.



How about "Ethnic Cleansing"? Nothing possibly wrong there. Or "Rapelay"? You cool with your kid playing that at 13?

Would you let them watch porn, or read Hustler too, at 13?

I never said that children that play violent video games will engage in real life violence. At any point. Some will, some won't. But that is not the only potentially bad outcome from playing age-inappropriate violent games.



I also at no point ever advocated for banning video game consumption in children. Perhaps you should read what I actually wrote, instead of making strawmen.



Your point being? I'm not sure how this relates to anything I have posted.



Your posts would suggest otherwise.



Again, not something I have ever argued at any point in this thread.



I never argued that. Seriously, try reading what I actually wrote.

All of this can be condensed into a single statement out of you: BLAH.

Seriously, you seem to want to baby children around but here's the thing:

Suggesting that children shouldn't be unnecessarily exposed to some things is babying them now?

I wasn't babied around, I wasn't given a break, and yet I have to see one single person tell me I am a piece of shit, unfit person at life.

The more you post these statements, the more I believe that you have been negatively impacted, since you clearly cannot comprehend what I actually am arguing.

I have stated, numerous times now, that negative impacts from age-inappropriate exposure to certain things does not in any way limit someone's ability to function productively in this world. I have never, in any way suggested that people who are exposed too early to realistic violence, pornography, or other inappropriate material are necessarily going to become degenerate criminals.

I have, however, suggested that a parent has a responsibility to be aware of the content they are wilfully exposing their child to, and limit it appropriate to their age.

Honestly, you make these things overly complicated.

You make these things overly simple.

You talk about negative outcomes, but I have yet to see one negative outcome that could come out of playing violent videogames or watching porn that would make you unfit to actually function in society.

So your only determination of whether a child has been adversely impacted is whether or not they can function in society? Plenty of people can make do, and improve themselves in other areas to ameliorate the effects of damage. I know illiterate people who can function reasonably well in society. They will never be doctors or lawyers, but hey, as you said, they aren't damaged. They hold down jobs, they pay bills. Does that mean we shouldn't, as parents, do everything in our power to ensure our child becomes literate?

Furthermore, I'd really appreciate you answering my questions. Would you allow your child to play a game such as Ethnic Cleansing, or Rapelay, if that is what he wanted to play? Would you willingly purchase those games for your 13 year old child?

Honestly, you make things sound rather complicated when they really are not: teach your child not to be such a pussy, to respect others, and to not take everything he reads/plays/watches that seriously and there, the child should not have any reason to do any shit like what he watches/reads/plays.

I have never once argued that playing violent video games will cause children to emulate that violence. Please, if you cannot argue against what I have actually said, stop making shit up.

It's not that complicated and I can't see why am I even arguing, Again about shit that, honestly, has no relevance in my life or am I supposed to be convinced of like you try to convince me there may be something wrong with me just because I watched porn at 13 or I played violent videogames when I was a child. Seriously, get that trumpet of purity off your throat, it doesn't fit you.

Are you saying, with absolute certainty, that watching pornography at 13 didn't colour your views of what sex was, or your expectations of sex? Furthermore, are you suggesting that your personal experience can be extrapolated to the greater population?

That because you apparently experienced no negative effects from violent video games at very young ages, the only people who would are, in your words, "pussies"? It's telling that you choose that word to describe people who are negatively impacted by the way.

[Soldati Senza Confini]

All of this can be condensed into a single statement out of you: BLAH.

Seriously, you seem to want to baby children around but here's the thing:

Suggesting that children shouldn't be unnecessarily exposed to some things is babying them now?

I wasn't babied around, I wasn't given a break, and yet I have to see one single person tell me I am a piece of shit, unfit person at life.

The more you post these statements, the more I believe that you have been negatively impacted, since you clearly cannot comprehend what I actually am arguing.

I have stated, numerous times now, that negative impacts from age-inappropriate exposure to certain things does not in any way limit someone's ability to function productively in this world. I have never, in any way suggested that people who are exposed too early to realistic violence, pornography, or other inappropriate material are necessarily going to become degenerate criminals.

I have, however, suggested that a parent has a responsibility to be aware of the content they are wilfully exposing their child to, and limit it appropriate to their age.

Honestly, you make these things overly complicated.

You make these things overly simple.

You talk about negative outcomes, but I have yet to see one negative outcome that could come out of playing violent videogames or watching porn that would make you unfit to actually function in society.

So your only determination of whether a child has been adversely impacted is whether or not they can function in society? Plenty of people can make do, and improve themselves in other areas to ameliorate the effects of damage. I know illiterate people who can function reasonably well in society. They will never be doctors or lawyers, but hey, as you said, they aren't damaged. They hold down jobs, they pay bills. Does that mean we shouldn't, as parents, do everything in our power to ensure our child becomes literate?

Furthermore, I'd really appreciate you answering my questions. Would you allow your child to play a game such as Ethnic Cleansing, or Rapelay, if that is what he wanted to play? Would you willingly purchase those games for your 13 year old child?

Honestly, you make things sound rather complicated when they really are not: teach your child not to be such a pussy, to respect others, and to not take everything he reads/plays/watches that seriously and there, the child should not have any reason to do any shit like what he watches/reads/plays.

I have never once argued that playing violent video games will cause children to emulate that violence. Please, if you cannot argue against what I have actually said, stop making shit up.

It's not that complicated and I can't see why am I even arguing, Again about shit that, honestly, has no relevance in my life or am I supposed to be convinced of like you try to convince me there may be something wrong with me just because I watched porn at 13 or I played violent videogames when I was a child. Seriously, get that trumpet of purity off your throat, it doesn't fit you.

Are you saying, with absolute certainty, that watching pornography at 13 didn't colour your views of what sex was, or your expectations of sex? Furthermore, are you suggesting that your personal experience can be extrapolated to the greater population?

That because you apparently experienced no negative effects from violent video games at very young ages, the only people who would are, in your words, "pussies"? It's telling that you choose that word to describe people who are negatively impacted by the way.

1 - Yes! That is precisely being babied around! If a child isn't exposed to reality how will he be able to handle it on his or her own?! And I don't mean actually putting them in these situations but to tell them what is wrong and what isn't. Parents have the responsibility to prepare children for the world out there and making them think things are peachy is not the way to prepare them, sorry. And yes, I think that if a child can't function socially, in one way or another, then there was something wrong on how he was raised. That is my only valuation, therefore, anything for me at least that doesn't affect a child beyond repair that will make him or her have a shit life is irrelevant. Meaning, more precisely, everything bad they experienced, but they got over, is irrelevant in the way that they have learned how to live with it and move on completely, further, it demonstrates maturity when you're not resented about your past, you just accept it and you try to live a peaceful life.

2 - I can't seem to think your way of thinking is the right one simply because we come from two different backgrounds. It isn't that hard to understand, which is why I find this argumentation pointless at this stage.

3 - Willful exposure is not going to do anything once the child goes to school. Do you really think children will wait for you to teach them the lesson about procreation when they are old enough while they hear this at school?! Like honestly, if you think children are going to be ignorant about anything at all while they are young until you tell them you are mistaken, they will figure, one way or another, what is wrong and what isn't. This whole "willful" exposure thing is why there's so many young girls pregnant down here, because parents go "oh they don't have to know this" and then when they are 16 they have sex and get pregnant and the parents get mad when they are the ones responsible to teach their daughter this basic shit which is: if you have sex without protection, you get pregnant, so just have safe sex or don't have sex at all. Really, it isn't that fucking complicated to teach a child these and many more things.

4 - Yes, I am saying, with absolute certainty, that watching pornography at a young age never colored my expectations about sex and it didn't set any expectations about sex, and it still doesn't. I am a virgin at 24 years for God's sake, what would I know about sex? I don't even know how good it feels or how good is it going to feel and I am not about to speculate out of watching a man and a woman getting it on about how my experience will be. Plus, I am waiting to be with only one girl in my life at this point, so no sex for me until I at least am near marrying or something and I wouldn't even have sex with her like in a porno flick. Thus, why would I feel the need to put the bar on something I feel I can't put bars on? See, unlike other people I can set boundaries and logical expectations, so I don't feel with the need to be with a porn star or else no relationship.

I am not that stupid to expect things I watch on TV or on the internet to be such in real life. Compared to other people, I was raised somewhat properly and my parents did give a shit about raising me thank you. And no, I am not suggesting my personal experience can be extrapolated to the greater population but hell, I am not even that great, or even a genius, but if I can do it why can't others do it? What is this amazing ability I have that nobody else can grasp is beyond me for comprehend as I see myself as an average joe.

And no, people who experienced negative outcomes by playing violent videogames are not "pussies", they are feeble-minded and their parents were idiots to begin with for not explaining this shit to them when they started to see changes in behavior, big difference. No, being a "pussy" like I called them (and I mean no sexism with that word) is merely the fact that they are WEAK! Simply the fact that parents baby their children so much they have no reference point to how the real world is. That is what pisses me off about baby parenting, you can't expect a child to be raised normally when you are being overly protective of them, but you can't expect them to be raised properly by not giving a shit either, there has to be a balance and both extremes I am mostly against.

[Rostrog]

So reading through this for the past thirty minutes and I see a lot of you stating bad parenting, the reason for bad parenting could be.

Truly there is bad parenting or

the kid is such a snob and jack ass the parents just gave up on that one or

the parents do not beat the child senseless enough after they do stupid shit, this is grounds for the ultimate ass kicking, I would beat my son with in an inch of his life if he pulled some shit like this over a video game, yeah they are fun and you get to blow sht up on the safety and comfort of your sofa but to nearly kill another kid is disgusting, so yeah parents should beat their kids more often.

So you want to prevent violence with violence.

Which is worse a knife wound deep enough you can see your wind pipe in the mirror or a minor spanking, Look at America before the 80s okay maybe late 90s before kids started threatening their parents with taking them to social services if they land a hand on them, as far as I can remember every kid has been spanked or in severe cases given a good ass kick, but there is a difference between punishing your kid for something they did wrong, like slash another kids throat, and actual child abuse, it is common to get the two confused with each other, so yes to answer your question I would prevent uncontrolled violence with controlled violence.

[Vitaphone Racing]

How do you "teach your child not to be a pussy"? This sounds like a brilliant parenting method.

[Norjagen]

Its time we banned video games.

If we can save just ONE life. Just one. We have an obligation.

Common sense legislation.

Photo-op with the kids parents in the background.

Time to put those video game nuts in their place. National Videogame Association types, you know who you are. Your days are numbered.

No! A ban on video games is an infringement on our first amendment rights!

We need to focus on mental health and enforcing EXISTING video game laws!

Once you ban video games, you set a dangerous precedent for banning things like movies and books!

MOLON LABE!

[Morrdh]

"Video games have been accused of fuelling youth violence after a 13-year-old boy slashed a friend’s throat following an online row.

He had only known his 14-year-old victim for a few months after they met online while playing Xbox game Gears of War 3.

Mr Brown said: ‘The pair had fall-outs online amounting to name-calling via the messaging system used in the game.’

The accused grabbed the 14-year-old then struck him across the throat with a knife. The victim told paramedics a boy had ‘slit his throat in an argument about Xbox games’. He suffered a wound so deep it exposed his windpipe and required 20 staples following surgery.

Then, in a scene reminiscent of violent video games – the accused sneered at his victim: ‘Don’t die,’ before calmly walking off. The accused, who cannot be named for legal reasons, admitted assault."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... z2SLAmXoFR

Tells you a lot about that kid's parents, huh?

Give that its the Daily Fail thats published this article I do have to wonder how true the Xbox connection actually is.

I mean this is the same newspaper that published an article that stated a study had proven that video games caused violence only for the actual scientists behind the study to say that actually they found that video games did not cause violence.

[Imperium of Tanith]

Okay, I'm tossing my hat into this one.

This is, in all effects, a case of bad parenting, it's not the game's fault, the blame should and will fall entirely on the parents.

I will use myself as an example, I have been playing video-games since I started Pokemon on my GBA when I was six. Look at me now, I'm 18 years old and the only violent issue I've ever had was when I knocked some asshole out because he was trying to bully me. (Dude deserved it)

Video Games have only had a positive impact on my life, it's burst the bubble that all children live in, allowing me to see things how they really are and not through some rose-tinted shades. It's also made me have one of the best hand-eye coordination and reflexes in the school, with a proven reaction time in under 1 second, less then half of the usual person's.

All of my friends are the same way, never had a single problem with violence, in fact if video games and the Internet have taught us anything, it's to remain calm while under fire and do not let the other man win by reacting.

[Saint Jade IV]

Suggesting that children shouldn't be unnecessarily exposed to some things is babying them now?



The more you post these statements, the more I believe that you have been negatively impacted, since you clearly cannot comprehend what I actually am arguing.

I have stated, numerous times now, that negative impacts from age-inappropriate exposure to certain things does not in any way limit someone's ability to function productively in this world. I have never, in any way suggested that people who are exposed too early to realistic violence, pornography, or other inappropriate material are necessarily going to become degenerate criminals.

I have, however, suggested that a parent has a responsibility to be aware of the content they are wilfully exposing their child to, and limit it appropriate to their age.



You make these things overly simple.



So your only determination of whether a child has been adversely impacted is whether or not they can function in society? Plenty of people can make do, and improve themselves in other areas to ameliorate the effects of damage. I know illiterate people who can function reasonably well in society. They will never be doctors or lawyers, but hey, as you said, they aren't damaged. They hold down jobs, they pay bills. Does that mean we shouldn't, as parents, do everything in our power to ensure our child becomes literate?

Furthermore, I'd really appreciate you answering my questions. Would you allow your child to play a game such as Ethnic Cleansing, or Rapelay, if that is what he wanted to play? Would you willingly purchase those games for your 13 year old child?



I have never once argued that playing violent video games will cause children to emulate that violence. Please, if you cannot argue against what I have actually said, stop making shit up.



Are you saying, with absolute certainty, that watching pornography at 13 didn't colour your views of what sex was, or your expectations of sex? Furthermore, are you suggesting that your personal experience can be extrapolated to the greater population?

That because you apparently experienced no negative effects from violent video games at very young ages, the only people who would are, in your words, "pussies"? It's telling that you choose that word to describe people who are negatively impacted by the way.

1 - Yes! That is precisely being babied around! If a child isn't exposed to reality how will he be able to handle it on his or her own?! And I don't mean actually putting them in these situations but to tell them what is wrong and what isn't. Parents have the responsibility to prepare children for the world out there and making them think things are peachy is not the way to prepare them, sorry.

And of course, the only way to prepare them for the world is to let them watch whatever they want to watch, and play whatever they want to play.

Even though those video games don't actually represent the real world at all.

2 - I can't seem to think your way of thinking is the right one simply because we come from two different backgrounds. It isn't that hard to understand, which is why I find this argumentation pointless at this stage.

No, you keep arguing against something I never argued to begin with.

3 - Willful exposure is not going to do anything once the child goes to school. Do you really think children will wait for you to teach them the lesson about procreation when they are old enough while they hear this at school?!

I have no idea what teaching your children about procreation has to do with anything. Seriously, TRY to stay on topic.

Like honestly, if you think children are going to be ignorant about anything at all while they are young until you tell them you are mistaken, they will figure, one way or another, what is wrong and what isn't. This whole "willful" exposure thing is why there's so many young girls pregnant down here, because parents go "oh they don't have to know this" and then when they are 16 they have sex and get pregnant and the parents get mad when they are the ones responsible to teach their daughter this basic shit which is: if you have sex without protection, you get pregnant, so just have safe sex or don't have sex at all. Really, it isn't that fucking complicated to teach a child these and many more things.

That was quite a rant. Completely unrelated to the topic, or anything I posted. But quite a rant.

Now, how about you start responding to what I actually wrote?

4 - Yes, I am saying, with absolute certainty, that watching pornography at a young age never colored my expectations about sex and it didn't set any expectations about sex, and it still doesn't.

Then you are a rare gem. Psychologists should study you. Since, I find it difficult to believe your experience is the norm, when this is a growing trend among teenage girls of 14, directly linked to their early viewing of pornography.

I am a virgin at 24 years for God's sake, what would I know about sex? I don't even know how good it feels or how good is it going to feel and I am not about to speculate out of watching a man and a woman getting it on about how my experience will be.

That's interesting. That also has nothing to do with whether the viewing of pornography at young ages does or does not generally impact on the expectations or sexual behaviour of young people.

I am not that stupid to expect things I watch on TV or on the internet to be such in real life. Compared to other people, I was raised somewhat properly and my parents did give a shit about raising me thank you.

And so, anyone whose experience differed from yours naturally had shitty parents? You really need to stop using your experiences to generalise about the greater population.

And no, I am not suggesting my personal experience can be extrapolated to the greater population but hell, I am not even that great, or even a genius, but if I can do it why can't others do it? What is this amazing ability I have that nobody else can grasp is beyond me for comprehend as I see myself as an average joe.

That's the definition of extrapolating your experience.

And no, people who experienced negative outcomes by playing violent videogames are not "pussies", they are feeble-minded and their parents were idiots to begin with for not explaining this shit to them when they started to see changes in behavior, big difference.

Wow. Sorry, I didn't realise you were an authority on adolescent development, or parenting.

You really, really don't have any idea of how ignorant your statements are, do you?

No, being a "pussy" like I called them (and I mean no sexism with that word) is merely the fact that they are WEAK!

Whether you mean sexism or not with that word, is rather irrelevant. It is sexist, and demeaning.

Your continued suggestion that someone who is negatively affected by something that did not affect you is weak is demeaning and ignorant as well. It also shows your inability to grasp nuances and subtleties of an argument.

Simply the fact that parents baby their children so much they have no reference point to how the real world is. [/quote[

And the only possible way to get that is to allow them to play whatever they want and watch whatever they like.

Again, would you purchase Ethnic Cleansing or Rapelay for your 13 year old?

That is what pisses me off about baby parenting, you can't expect a child to be raised normally when you are being overly protective of them, but you can't expect them to be raised properly by not giving a shit either, there has to be a balance and both extremes I am mostly against.

I really don't think that suggesting that parents be informed about what their child is consuming, and limiting that consumption appropriate to their age is babying them. I don't see why allowing them to be exposed to realistic violence or pornography at such young ages should be the hallmark of good parenting.

[Saint Jade IV]

How do you "teach your child not to be a pussy"? This sounds like a brilliant parenting method.

I guess it means teaching your child about preventing dicks from fucking you. Or how to be a dick.

I'm curious really, as to what he intends to do if he has daughters. Since, they have a pussy attached. Kind of hard to remove those.

[Ridann]

What! No respawn!?

[Kaznan]

Where did you get this? Fox News...

[Blouman Empire]

Wait? The attacker a 13 year old is already a father?

[Ovisterra]

This is a very sad incident that will likely lead to a bunch of people trying to ban something for little to no reason. It will likely also involve a lot of intellectually dishonest comparisons to other debates.

Finally, the quality of the reporting in the article makes me want to cry.

[Lamassu]

Any chance this kid will be tried as an adult?

Last time that happened a 14 year old got fried IIRC

But he killed two girls.

[Monlyth]

What! No respawn!?

Stupid glitches. Gotta reset the whole save file now...


Immaturity aside momentarily; I'm sorry for the victim, and hope most, if not all, the trauma they might have suffered afterward has ceased.

[Tropical Scandinavia]

This messed up violence seems typical of messed up British society. At least the victim is still alive and I hope that the perpetrator is imprisoned for a long time.

[Immoren]

Lesson is that 13-14 shouldn't be playing Gear of War.

[Nationalist State of Knox]

Lesson is that 13-14 shouldn't be playing Gear of War.

How wonderfully incorrect.

The lesson here is that we need to put good guys with knives in homes.

[SaintB]

I DON'T blame video games.

[Cromia]

Ban XBOX

XBox doesn't kill people, people kill people.

[Benomia]

Turns out, this guy (who's 13) is actually a father as well.