News Game blamed for hammer murder

hmmmm, now let me seee

at age 10 i should have been going to germany to kill nazis in a big ass castle

then later on i should have been shooting guard dogs with a nail gun

after which i got my m4a1 out and killed a few american grunts

then i advanced to slashing up the dead corpse of the underground mob i just massacred

which then led me to killing all the illegal aliens and running them over with my jeep/tank


1. if your kid acts out what they see on tv, either they need some more love and attention from you, or you need to get them counceling quick
2. if your kid is 10 and asks for a game which has an 18+ cert on it DONT BUY IT THEM, no matter how much they scream and moan
3. how about a little fmaily bonding instead of sticking your kids infront of pcs/consoles/tv all day from the age of 2
4. computer games/films etc are not scapegoats when your nutter son goes on a rampage with a hammer and a pick axe, you are the only ones to blame (and mostly likely your son, as he should know better)

stupid parents breed stupid kids who will do stupid things tbh

 

Genius!!

I went shopping today and was very tempted to by Manhunt. All the clips they've shown of it on TV made me want it. It looks like great fun!!

Did anybody hear ITV news 24 interview a guy from PCWorld asking him about the game. It was hilarious. The presenter was asking him if he thought it should be banned and he was like: 'No Why would we do that, it's a good game that sells well.' Then was saying stuff like 'most people can tell the difference between a game and reality '

 

OMG, this is so stupid

Kinda reminds me of a time when I was speaking to a friend who worked in gamestation at the time, this woman walked up to him with some random '18' game in her hand and asked him if it was suitable for her 10 yr old son, he just replied 'yeah, if he likes running round shooting things with big guns, killing people, having blood splattered up walls etc etc' and she just stood there with a blank look on her face 'What? they make games like that? who the hell would buy them? sick *******s' and i was just pissing myself laughing

Damn parents, they should do their job properly and this wouldn't happen

 

Hahaha... That's hilarious. At least she didn't walk up to your friend holding Panty Raider asking if it was good for her 10 year old. Boy I think he would been fired that day.

 

Ok, if violence in modern games, films, TV, etc, doesn't affect people why is violent crime increasing in so-called civilised countries? Why does our hospital casualty department get youths in every weekend covered in blood, missing teeth, after a drunken argument that's turned very nasty? A bit of alcohol and a lad can play out all his fantasies of kicking somebodys face in. For real.

Same old arguments, "it doesn't affect me so it's OK" but many of the same posts show a poor family relationship, no respect for other people, an "I do what I want" attitude to life. You''re being exposed to brutalising influences every day, some will resist, some will succumb, but everybody is affected in some way so don't just ignore it.

Western society today has been given more freedom than ever before, it's time the citizens developed the responsibility to go with it.

 

I have a solution for that! Beat your kids!

Teach them that they don't own the world... Reality isn't missing for kids because of video games, and movies. It's because parents don't dissipline their children when they do something wrong, therefore, children don't know what IS wrong.

BEAT YOUR KIDS (Lovingly.)

 

But it happens without the game anyway. Shouldnt the government just ban alcohol then?

A game isnt the soul cause - a breakdown of society values and less disipline and good parenting are also factors. TVs and games shouldnt be subsitute parents.

 

Alcohol doesn't put ideas into your head, it just slackens off any inhibitions you might have about your behaviour. The media shows you a role-model, and in a game you're playing that role for all you're worth.

It's a spiral, society slackens some rules, commercial interests move up to the new limits and push for further slackening. Freely available girlie magazines now are what was hard porn a few years ago. Films use language rarely heard in a steelworks. Games show violence in ever greater graphic detail.

The woman was right. It's disheartening that the poster found it "funny".

 

I see your point, but violent crime in "civilised" countries is not much different from that in "uncivilised" countries. Bad stuff happens everywhere. It's just that it occurs marginally less in the "civilised" countries and we make a bigger deal out of it because we have not been brutalised into a learned helpless acceptance about it (quite) yet.

You put your finger on the cause when you say:

"Uncivilised", or so-called "primitive" societies often still display strong family and local tribal/society values and traditions. Children are raised within an extended/tribal family structure in which they have a defined place and role, and are treated as an integral part of society. As such they learn to see themselves and their actions, roles and values as an integral part of that tribe or local society. They learn that they (and their actions) matter and everyone else matters too.

You can see this as nearby as, say in Mediterranean countries. Try running a restaurant over there and say: "no kids allowed". People there don't get nearly as pissed and out of control as over here. Alcohol consumption again is seen as integral to daily life (and daily food) and children are gradually introduced at a relatively early age to its responsible and appropriate use, because they are an integral to family and community activities.

Last time I was in Portugal, there was this big family party at a restaurant with kids of all ages running around the place (but not out of control), sitting on laps, being part of things (turned out to be the local motorcycle club). There was wine (although the children, of course, didn't drink any), and everyone had a good time.

Over here, children are almost seen as separate entities that need to be managed and contained in a world separate from the parents' own. Parents often go out to restaurants, pubs, nightclubs etc. and pursue their own entertainment in which children have no place. Children as young as five have their own TV and video in the bedroom. When they get bored they're out on the street; the parents shrug: "well, you can't force them to stay in" (No, but you can make it so that they want to stay in). Parents often feel overwhelmed by the responsibilities of parenting, juggling demanding jobs with the attention that children demand, and seem unable to accept that once you have kids, your life is no longer your own.

The reason parents struggle so much is because the extended family that provides the social infrastructure required to raise children with sufficient care and attention, is becoming extinct. Same with the local community (OK, test. What are the names of the neighbours of your neighbours?). You need more than just two working adults to raise several small children adequately, especially when these adults come from a deprived background and have received inadequate parenting themselves.

As you can gather, there are lots of complex issues going on here, only a few on which I have touched here. People evolved to live and function in tribal groups or small communities. Unfortunately nowadays, we are alienated egocentrics in a sea of anonymous people.

 

If video games really affected kids that much, we would now have a bunch of twenty-something year olds hopping around in a dark room to monotonous (sp?) music eating pills...

 

Yes, I have that quote on a t-shirt...

 

Just for completeness, the correct quote is...

"If Pacman had affected us as kids we'd be running around in dark rooms, munching pills and listening to repetitive music."

And it was written by Marcus Brigstocke.

Now I'm off to play Doom 3, get out of my way or I'll blow a hole in you with my boomstick.

 

apparently the found the game in the victims bedroom.
clicksome

“We haven’t connected the game with the murder and we’ve already made that statement, but some sections of the media chose to ignore it…the motive was robbery.”

 

I could not have said it better myself

 

They're called students.

 

The boy's friend has been sentanced to life in jail - or 13 years minimum.

A youth who stabbed and battered a boy of 14 to death has been jailed for life.

Warren Leblanc, 17, admitted the murder of Stefan Pakeerah in a Leicester park in February.

On Friday, Judge Michael Stokes at Leicester Crown Court said Leblanc should serve a minimum of 13 years.

Stefan's parents believed Leblanc was obsessed with a violent computer game called Manhunt, but police insisted the motive was robbery.

Glad the police re-enforced that the game was not responsible. (shock horror!)

Full story as always on The BBC

 

now to correct you

"Computer games don't affect kids; I mean if Pac-Man affected us as kids, we'd all be running around in darkened rooms, munching on magic pills and listening to repetitive electronic music." Kristian Wilson, Nintendo, Inc. 1989

'doc

 

Just when you thought that the whole thing was done and dusted, what with the police dismmissing it's influence in the murder and leaving the Title out of it's case against Leblanc - and Leblanc getting Life for his crime, it all comes to the surface again.

Good 'ole Tony, sniffing out a potential vote winner with the Daily Wail crowd has waded into the argument:

The prime minister has told parliament a violent video game - blamed by some for the death of a Leicester boy - should not be used by children.

Leicester East MP Keith Vaz asked Tony Blair to investigate links between Manhunt-type games and violence.

Mr Blair said, on Wednesday, the game was "wholly unsuitable for children".

Police investigating the murder of Stefan Pakeerah, 14, dismissed its influence. Manhunt was not part of its legal case.

More from the Beeb here



And of course, Saint Blair is right. And as usuall is stating the BLOODY OBVIOUS. The game is an 18+. Leblanc (at the time) was 17. He should not have had the game, and it should not have been sold to him. I could go on, but it's all been said before....

 

Well done... I'm glad you read my post fully, and even followed the link I posted.

Of course, I'm being sarcastic, because if you really had followed the link you would know that what you attempted to correct me with is wrong. No one at Nintendo EVER said that. Marcus Brigstocke did.