NIU Shooting: Why Are Games Even Under Discussion?
Posted on Feb 17, 2008 under Main |
With his Friday appearance on Fox News, Miami attorney Jack Thompson has managed to once again introduce the video game violence issue into the aftermath of a tragedy.
In the past, some observers have referred to Thompson’s media tactics as massacre chasing. Frankly, it’s hard to disagree. Beyond that, one has to ask - given that NIU shooter, Stephen Kazmierczak, was 27-years-old - why are video games an issue at all?
Even if you buy into the notion that violent video games lead to real-world violence (and there is zero scientific proof to support that), the NIU shooter was far closer to 30 than 15. Short of an outright societal banning, how would Counter-strike - or any of the far bloodier games on the market - been kept away from Kazmierczak?
The bottom line at NIU, as at Virginia Tech, is that the shooter was a heavily-armed, deranged, homicidal adult. No video game rating system, no amount of retail enforcement of same, could have kept him from playing Counter-strike. No video game law - even if it were somehow constitutional - would have blocked him from buying Counter-strike or any other M-rated game. That’s because such legislation typically seeks to prevent under-18’s from purchasing violent games.
Moreover, Thompson has said in the past that the goal of his anti-game violence crusade is to keep mature game content out of the hands of kids. Stephen Kazmierczak was no kid. So, what’s Thompson’s point?
TV face time, perhaps?
GP: I’ve e-mailed Thompson to ask him to explain how the NIU case relates to his game violence crusade. If a response is forthcoming, I’ll update this entry
This entry was posted on Sunday, February 17th, 2008 at 1:03 pm and is filed under Controversial Games, Media, Jack Thompson. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
| Digg it | Slashdot