Video Games

Trump Wants to Meet with Video Game Industry Leaders to Complain About Gun Violence That's Not Their Fault

No, Call of Duty is not making kids shoot up schools.


Donald Trump

President Donald Trump, who has complained bitterly that safety rules have made professional football less violent and dangerous, apparently plans to meet with video game companies to "see what they can do" about school violence.

This came as news to the video game industry's trade organization, the Entertainment Software Association (ESA), which told the press the White House had not contacted it about a meeting. The White House subsequently said it would be sending out invitations soon.

The answer to the question of what video games can do about school violence is "nothing," because studies have consistently shown that these games have no meaningful relationship with real-world violence. The ESA notes that these same violent video games are played all across the world in countries that do not have a problem with school shootings.

Trump told politicians earlier this week that they need to stand up to the National Rifle Association (NRA), but blaming video games for gun violence actually plays right into the gun group's tactics. The NRA is quick to toss the First Amendment under the bus in order to protect the Second.

It's nothing new for politicians to blame video games for violence as an excuse to try to regulate them, but there are fortunately limits to what they can actually accomplish. The Supreme Court intervened when California attempted to put age restrictions on video game sales, ruling that games are protected under the First Amendment. (An amusing bit of trivia: The anti-gun lawmaker responsible for getting violent video game restrictions passed in California was subsequently arrested and charged with being a gun smuggler. He pleaded guilty to racketeering.)

As Reason's Jesse Walker has documented, pretty much the entire history of video games has been mired in moral panics that politicians from both parties have attempted to commandeer for their own gains. Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) has also been big on trying to regulate video games, so seeing her grinning next to Trump at the prospect of using government regulations to suppress citizens' freedoms should concern more than just gun owners.

Trump also raised the issue of a ratings system for games. He is apparently ignorant of the fact that one already exists and has for quite a while. Due to some of the aforementioned political pressure, the video game industry instituted the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB) in 1994 to inform consumers and parents about what sorts of violence (and other types of mature content) a game might contain. These rating operate much like movie ratings, and they appear on labels affixed to video games sold in stores. The ESRB site allows people to search for games by name to see their ratings. There is no reason for any consumers to be surprised by violent video game content, unless they decide not to pay attention.

We ultimately shouldn't expect much to come from this meeting with video game publishers, and that's a good thing. They're not responsible for gun violence and they're certainly not responsible for coming with a solution for it.

Fun Friday pop culture bonus: One of those early arcade games that prompted moral panics about extreme violence was Narc, released in 1988. In it, players represent law enforcement officers from a fictional narcotics unit who are sent to the street to stop drug trafficking by slaughtering hundreds of dealers without due process. Frankly, that sounds like the kind of violence that would make Trump happy. Watch the game below (and marvel at the tight jeans technology of the 1980s):

NEXT: Trump Has Exposed the GOP's Shallowness on Fiscal Restraint and Free Markets

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. I’ve been playing Stardew Valley lately, and I am this close to going on a vicious farming spree.

    1. how many tomatoes have to die before you ban these violent faming games

    2. I’ve tried playing SDV many times, but it never hooked me. The farm customization and the farming are done well, but it fucked up the “life” part of the simulation. The characters and town are uninteresting and shallow, and the world is incongruous. And unfortunately, mods can’t fix these issues. I hope the sequel improves these aforementioned aspects; otherwise Story of Seasons/Harvest Moon/Rune Factory will always be better.

      Anyway, fuck the government and its lazy and ignorant “must do something” attitude.

      1. Yeah I’m trying to get into it too, but it’s not really doing it. Apparently there’s some critical mass where everything clicks and you realize it’s the greatest game ever.

        1. Their multiplayer should launch this quarter, and I’ve put it off until that feature is realized. Mostly because my fianc? loves that game, and there aren’t many titles where our interests overlap.

        2. Ah yes, like when someone tells you to just make it through the first season of a show, and then things get awesome. Fuck a bunch of that.

      2. Isn’t that always the worst part of Harvest Moon? It is to me. I marry a girl from town because it makes me one step closer to finishing the community center. I talk to townspeople because it’s part of the achievements. But as far as RP value there’s not much there.

        Now, having a greenhouse full of starfruit and rare seeds, and three sheds worth of strawberry preserves and ancient wine kegs – that’s where it’s at.

        1. Starting out with the SNES, the life part of HM took a backseat. But most successive iterations improved it. When I play a HM game or a HM-inspired game, the “life” aspect should at least be good enough to enhance and complement the farming. Plus, with respect to the things you can do with people, the situation became much better starting with A New Beginning for HM and the second iteration of Rune Factory. The latest Story of Seasons did a fantastic job really adding to the life part of the life/farming simulation.

          But even without those added (and awesome) features, HM/SoS/RF mostly did fine job with making a cute, comfy, and immersive world. The sprites, goddesses, witch princesses, saving-the-town-mania, the festivals, and quirky personalities of the residents are what help build a fun experience; not only that, but they make you relate and care (at least a tiny bit) for the villagers. HM64 is a good example of how to build lovable characters. As an example, and I won’t spoil anything, but an event that occurred after you became well acquainted with one of girls emotionally moved me. (At least when I was younger.)

          SDV has none of this. I don’t give a fuck about the village and villagers, and the world makes less sense than the one in HM/SoS but has none of the charm.

          1. Stardew Valley is also being developed by literally one guy last I saw, so I’m frankly surprised it’s even a thing at all.

            1. Yeah, and it’s one hell of an accomplishment. I was tracking its development for a while, but I was quickly disappointed at and after its launch. The game is larger and has has more complexity than HM64; so there’s no excuse for the “life” aspect of the simulation to be worse than that of a game that was released ~20 years ago.

              I think the developer should’ve labelled the game as a pure farming simulator instead of a life/farming sim that’s spiritually connected to HM.

    3. Thus the origins of the infamous chicken slapper become known.

    4. I loved Stardew Valley. I played it a ton about a year or so ago. I’m not usually into that type of game, but it was fun.

      If you liked that, you might like RimWorld, another game I put a ton of hours into.

      1. I actually picked up SDV because RimWorld got a little tedious.

  2. Video games are like any other competitive ‘sport’ but if video games truly caused violence there would be war in the streets by now. How anyone could ignore that hundreds of millions of people play video games without any violence whatsoever is amazing to me.

    Especially MOBA players. They’re probably the worst of the worst in the gaming community, yet they don’t seem to go on murder rampages despite the fact that they are essentially the scum of the internet. Go figure.

    This is more evidence that those in government think that guns themselves cause people to be violent, digital or otherwise. They even only focus on FPS-style games, which is insane.

    1. FPS games are murder simulators, and the people who make them should be beaten for encouraging violence in our wonderful society.

    2. No kidding. Back in the day every time I played Missile Command it made me want to run out and start a nuclear war.

      1. Command and Conquer made me want to shave my head and start a cult around myself.

    3. FPS games might be related to mass shooters, but they certainly aren’t doing much to increase violent crime as a whole. Violent crime has been decreasing since FPS were introduced.

      Violent crime in 1993 (when Doom was introduced, and it was among the first highly successful FPS games) was at 746.8 per 100,000 people. At it’s low point since then violent crime rate was 372 per 100,000 in 2014 (roughly half ow what it was in 1993). In 2016 (last year available) it was at 397.1 per 100k. FPS games seem to decrease violent crime.

    4. Especially MOBA players. They’re probably the worst of the worst … the scum of the internet.

      Fucking noob can’t even spell ARTS correctly. Uninstall Reason and go play WashPo. BG. I hope you get AIDS and die.

      Clearly the reason that MOBA players don’t go on rampages is because we’re all unknowingly Democrats. We blame Russians for everything and can’t recognize that the problem is probably ourselves.

      1. I’m going to assume this is parody, intentional or otherwise. ^_^

        1. Yes, I play MOBAs and that’s how people talk, but without sentences.

  3. Subnautica is pushing me over the edge, im about to go punching sharks in my diving mech

    1. I’m still disappointed that they bailed on the multiplayer option in that game even after promising early on that it would be a multiplayer title. Really ruined any interest I had in the title.

  4. To all you whack-a-doodle, lefty, Trump haters out there, closeted or otherwise, want to talk about root causes?

    Ponder on this: If Trump weren’t facing almost certain impeachment if the Democrats take the House, do you think he’d be doing this shit?

    1. #GamerGate

    2. Spoken like a true libertarian.

      1. If you think exploring cause and effect relationships is un-libertarian, then you don’t know shit. I thought you knew more about us than that!

        If our politicians’ powers were closely circumscribed so that they couldn’t make so many arbitrary decision that impact various business’ bottom lines, then businesses wouldn’t be as interested in donating to their campaigns.

        That’s a perfectly libertarian argument.

        If Trump weren’t as worried about being impeached because of the blind hatred of him for spoiling the SJWs plans for world domination through HillaryPower, then maybe he wouldn’t be shitting all over the gaming industry right now in a frantic attempt to not be painted as a pro-NRA, murder spree enthusiast ahead of the midterms.

        That argument isn’t libertarian or unlibertarian. It isn’t even an argument really. It’s more of a question.

        I’m just sayin’.

        1. Oh, for fuck’s sake, Ken.

          1. Did I get something wrong in there somewhere?

            Do tell.

        2. “If Trump weren’t as worried about being impeached because of the blind hatred of him for spoiling the SJWs plans for world domination through HillaryPower, then maybe he wouldn’t be shitting all over the gaming industry right now in a frantic attempt to not be painted as a pro-NRA, murder spree enthusiast ahead of the midterms.”

          I agree. If we just went ahead and made him Emperor, then he’d never have to worry about getting impeached, and this and many other so-called “problems” would disappear.


          1. I have no problem with presidents being impeached on a legitimate basis.

            I’m convinced that if the Democrats win the House and Nancy Pelosi declines to impeach Trump, the Democrats in the House will probably oust her as Speaker. In other words, the case for impeaching Trump among the Democrats is more or less like the Two-Minutes-Hate session on Goldstein in 1984.

            Because he is not a Social Justice Warrior is an insufficient reason to remove a president from office, and from everything I’ve seen, that’s just about all the evidence they have against him.

        3. Okay, the answer is yes, he still would be shitting all over the gaming industry, and due process, and trade.

          For someone who’s merely asking a question, you sure are ignoring those of us who answer it.

    3. Once again, none of poor Donald’s screwups are his own doing. He sadly lacks any sort of agency and can only do what those evil Democrats force him to do.

      1. To be fair, a lot of Obama supporters blamed all of his screwups on those dastardly Rethuglikkkans forcing him to do things. Partisan shills are gonna shill.

    4. Exactly, it’s all those damn Democrap’s fault that Trump is acting like an unprincipled authoritarian hack and a throwback 1980’s concern troll.

      1. I didn’t say it’s all their fault that he’s showboating, but he isn’t showboating for no reason at all either.

        1. I think it’s far more likely that he’s showboating because it’s in his nature, not because of some calculated political strategery to curry favor with the Dems.

          Besides, the only Dems he’s going to curry favor with over violent video games are the Dianne Feinsteins and Tipper Gore wannabes desperate to hang onto their 1980’s era moral panics.

          Next he’ll start blaming Dungeons and Dragons for some imaginary increase in Satanism.

          1. How big was the #GamerGate controversy on the left?

            That may have been more of a feminist critique than about violence (against women), but I think he’s more or less scratching the same itch.

            1. Gamergate was a big deal because of a right-wing reaction against feminism and social issue pandering in games and the video game media. Without the stupid 4chan trolling and harassment Gamergate wouldn’t have ended up much of anything.

    5. Jesus, Ken, at least the White House flacks and Fox News talking heads are getting *paid* to carry water for Trump’s stupid bullshit. What’s your excuse?

      1. Late at night, Ken cranks up the Q. Lazzarus and dances in front of the mirror dressed like Sarah Huckabee-Sanders.

        1. As he smears an entire tube of lipstick on his lips, no doubt.

      2. Do we have any evidence that he’s not getting paid?

        1. Dipshit.

          1. It’s a joke, man.

        2. Do we really need 23 different kinds of Tonys?

          1. I use Greason and I was curious what Tony said since he’s been pretty reasonable lately, so I unhid this thread, only to learn that we have at least three Tonys now. Why?

      3. . . . do you think he’d be doing this shit?

        I called what he’s doing “shit”.

        If some FBI psychologist could sit down and explain why some axe murderer eats his victims, that doesn’t mean he’s defending the axe murderer’s behavior.


        There are reasons why people do things, and suggesting that Trump isn’t doing anything differently than he would otherwise despite the fact that he’s likely to be impeached if and when the Democrats take the House would be absurd, wouldn’t it?

        Oh, but you aren’t saying that he isn’t doing anything differently than he would otherwise if he weren’t facing impeachment. You’re just saying that no one should point that fact out–because it might be misinterpreted as defending Trump’s shit behavior–is that what you’re saying?

        1. If some FBI psychologist could sit down and explain why some axe murderer eats his victims, that doesn’t mean he’s defending the axe murderer’s behavior.

          I predict you’re going to get lots of mileage out of this stupid sentence. I hope you have it saved somewhere.

          1. I predict that going all wobbly over somebody suggesting that there might be reasons Trump does something other than that he’s an evil moron will continue to make you and your friends look stoopid to everyone but each other.

            1. Just out of curiosity, what will you do if you find out that he really is an evil moron? I don’t necessarily think he’s evil or a moron, but he’s supremely narcissistic. That being said,

              To all you whack-a-doodle, lefty, Trump haters out there, closeted or otherwise,

              is not really a great example of your super libertariany logic reason.

    6. Ponder on this: Trump’s a moron with simple ideas who spouts whatever simple solutions come to his simple mind.

      1. The words “egregiously underqualified” spring to mind. I don’t think he’s an actual moron to get where he is, but he’s not a person willing to admit that he doesn’t know what he doesn’t know (even to himself).

        1. I think he’s playing election year politics.

          This is showboating, hopefully, as a substitute for policy changes.

          Verbally spanking the gaming industry in public is a lot better than trashing due process or raising the age that individuals need to be before their rights are entitled to Second Amendment protections.

          If he goes over the line into regulation or EOs, then that’s a different animal.

          But, like I said, I think the midterms are going to be a referendum on Trump, and I think he’s playing for anti-gun votes by beating up on the gaming industry like whipping boy.

          It’s not stupid. It’s Machiavellian.

        2. Sure, though I want to point out that ‘moron’ is a pretty tame description for politicians.

          1. I understand what you’re saying, Ken.

            Do not worry, the TDS is strong here sometimes.

            Some people understand how Trump works, others cannot see through their hatred of the man. They’ve convinced themselves that Trump is a moron, which I find hilarious.

    7. Yes, because Trump is a circa 1995 Democrat.

      1. He is somewhere to the left of Bill Clinton on certain issues (free trade), and he’s just to the right of Bill Clinton on other issues.

        I doubt Bill Clinton could get nominated by the progressives who control the Democratic Party today. Hillary was certainly far to the left of either Bill Clinton or Trump.

        1. You’re absolutely correct that Bill Clinton couldn’t get nominated in the modern Democratic party, but it’s because he was a Democrat from circa 1995. Same as Trump. I expected this type of nonsense from Trump since the beginning. Of course, Republicans in 1995 were all about banning things in the name of community values so one could make an opposing argument but somewhere along the line this was more or less dropped by most of the Republican party.

          Most likely Republicans dropped the ball because of the many, many bigger issues that have arisen on the social conservative front in the past twenty years. Not that I support many of their pet causes, but I recognize that they have been consistently losing for the majority of my adult life. At that point, it’s only logical to pick your battles a little more carefully.

          1. Yeah, gay marriage, intelligent design, etc., etc. those issues are losers with millennials.

            He might get a little traction with the way certain things are represented in the media, a la GamerGate.

            If he were going after racial stereotypes in the gaming industry, the left wouldn’t even bat an eyebrow.

            But it’ll be interesting to see what pundits on the left say about this vs. whatever they said about GamerGate.

            . . . it’ll also be interesting to see if they’re the same pundits who are calling for Trump to be impeached and effectively mandating this kind of flailing–intentionally or otherwise.

        2. “”I doubt Bill Clinton could get nominated by the progressives who control the Democratic Party today””

          The democratic party is controlled by the Clinton machine, not progressives. Wasn’t that the lesson of the last dem primary?

          1. I’m guessing you don’t actually remember the Clinton administration, but even if it were true that the Clinton’s control the Democrat party it’s notable that they lost. I tend to agree that the Clinton’s had the party in a lock for this past election, but again it’s important that they lost in spite of that.

            Consider Bill Clinton’s speeches on immigration, at the very least, and you’ll start to see why they couldn’t win today before you even take into account things like the Lewinsky scandal as it relates to the #MeToo movement.

            1. Bill Clinton, if he weren’t old as shit, would win today if he were coming up the ranks.

              What most people don’t understand about Bill Clinton is that he is NOT principled. Why people think his stances would be the same today as they were in the 90s is beyond me. His key to success was his charm and charisma and ability to apply those things in whatever political climate, not his non-existent principles.

              1. Why people think his stances would be the same today as they were in the 90s is beyond me.

                Well, for one thing I wasn’t thinking in terms of if Bill Clinton could time travel. I was thinking more in terms of if Bill Clinton could get a third term today.

                1. I didn’t mean to sound like a dick, realized I did, sorry. 🙂

                  Yeah, minus the baggage and age? I think he’d have more of a hard time due to the color of his skin than anything else.

    8. Ponder on this: If Trump weren’t facing almost certain impeachment if the Democrats take the House, do you think he’d be doing this shit?

      I think he’d be doing this shit regardless of the circumstances, because that is who he is. He repeats the most recent thought in his head.

  5. Drumpf is so clueless. Yes, the video game industry deserves plenty of criticism, but he’s going about it all wrong. The major problem with video games is sexism, which I’m sure isn’t what Mr. “Grab Them by the Pussy” wants to address.

    For example, too many games reinforce the “damsel in distress” trope, which is based on the misogynistic idea that women are weaker than men and always need to be rescued. Furthermore, female video game characters too often have unrealistically thin bodies with unrealistically large breasts, which they accentuate with impractical clothing. Feminist Frequency on Youtube has done excellent, informative videos about these problematic depictions of women in gaming; check out the channel if you haven’t.

    1. best thing to do if you dont like someones art is to not look at it, plenty of games for every walk of life out there.
      if you have any doubts please play the Mass Effect Trilogy which is one of the most popular game of all time.
      Player Unknowns Battlegrounds, Fortnite, Skyrim, Fallout, Diablo are all mainstream games that all depict women in warrior roles. your insinuation is very 1990 of you, as most games have long since dropped the “weak women” trope

    2. For example, too many games reinforce the “damsel in distress” trope

      Which games?

      1. Mario Brothers just for one, lol

      2. Which games?

        It’s actually pretty much the premise of the live-action game Night Trap which is generally cited as *the* game that instigated the ESRB. I’d say NSFW, but I’m pretty sure I’d seen racier stuff on Saved By The Bell and I know I had seen Evil Dead, Night Of The Living Dead, Caddy Shack, Animal House, etc. by that point in my life. It was funny because after the moral panic about the game blew over, the ESRB (rightly) gave it the equivalent of a PG-13 rating.

        1. Man I was playing the PS1 versions of Resident Evil when I was 9. The graphics weren’t exactly photorealistic.

        2. So… what the parlor trick is, is to find one obscure game that few people play and say “this is the trouble with games”

          When you could very easily point to some of the largest, most main stream games in the industry which are the exact, polar opposite of the ‘games are sexist meme’ such as Horizon Zero Dawn or The Last of Us, or even BattleField 1.

          Yes, there are a fair number of Japanese fighting games where the female characters are unnaturally large breasted, but the idea the President of the United States of America needs to address Japanese game houses is both stupid and scary at the same time.

          Also, once again, saying that women are too weak to resist the images in video games where they’re portrayed as weak IS sexism.

          Brendan O’Neill is right, modern feminism is anti-female.

          1. Brendan O’Neill is right, modern feminism is anti-female.

            I’d go further to say that it’s anti-human. Plenty of people were willing to tolerate, ignore, or be oblivious too all kinds of mass murder out of the GTA series (not to mention dozens of others) up to IV, but when the plot included rape in V, it was a bridge too far.

            Not that I’m a member of the outrage police. I understand that it’s all fantasy, but under the guise of being unable to distinguish it from reality, if you look past the untold vigintillions of (mostly male) murders perpetrated in the games to criticize outfits for sexism and even rape as a plot device, you’ve got to be pretty fucked up as a human being.

        3. “but I’m pretty sure I’d seen racier stuff on Saved By The Bell”

          Kelly Kapowski… +1

        1. I see she had to not once, not twice, but throughout the entire video go back to 1987, and referenced, repeatedly the mario bros franchise vis a vis Donkey kong– and Zelda which is essentially a classical fairly tale game (Rapunzel, Rapunzel, let down your hair–SEXIST!)

          Also, using the Mario Brothers franchise is a fun trick. Let’s take a series of characters that are seen in the entire franchise and refer to those as repeated incidents of the same concept.

          Snidely Whiplash is problematic.

        2. Karateka? Prince of Persia? Dragon’s Lair? No wonder comments are fucking disabled on the video.

          1. Anita Tarkanian is a national treasure. She probably disabled comments because of GamerGate misogynists. Not her fault anti-feminists cannot conduct themselves with any degree of maturity.

            1. Anita tarkanian didn’t do the video.

              Also, the issue with the mario franchise isn’t that it’s sexist, it’s racist against Italians, portraying them as mere plumbers.

  6. “Trump also raised the issue of a ratings system for games.”

    Genius. Great idea. I’m incessantly astounded at the wisdom and insight politicians show in every pursuit that isn’t being a corrupt piece of trash.

    If only parents had a way of knowing that Grand Theft Auto was a game glorifying crime.

    1. I’ve seen studies where it’s believed that crime rates are going down because young males are playing video games instead of hanging out in the streets.

      1. I was going to mention this same thing, scrolled down to see if anyone else had yet.

        It makes the most sense, to me. Some kids play sports and it keeps them out of trouble. The nonathletic didn’t really have an outlet until video games came around.

    2. If only parents had a way of knowing that Grand Theft Auto was a game glorifying crime.

      But that would actually require them to parent and to pay attention to what their children watch or play. We can’t have that now can we.

      1. I’m pretty sure that was sarcasm. Since the crime is in the title of the game.

    3. It’s especially obtuse given that there is already an ERSB rating system, so he’s advocating for something that literally already exists.

      1. Oh absolutely. All you have to have done is look at the package of one single video game since the mid-90s. I really thought even among Boomers that the ERSB was well-known. They even correlate the ratings directly to the suggested ages for G, PG-13, and R-rated movies.

        I got carded for some game when I was younger. I got carded for Red Bull last week. And cough syrup now, too. I have a full beard and grey hair.

        I think maybe we’ve gotten a little over-protective. If kids don’t chug a few bottles of cough syrup in high school and vomit, what happens when they get to college and try to shove marijuana in their ass?

        Vomiting is my anti-drug.

        1. Vomiting is my anti-drug.

          I don’t think you’re supposed to do that for certain drugs, at least not the one’s I tried when I was younger. I was always partial to hallucinogens though.

  7. …players represent law enforcement officers from a fictional narcotics unit who are sent to the street to stop drug trafficking by slaughtering hundreds of dealers without due process.

    Sounds pretty accurate.

    1. But your score goes up from picking up cash and bundles of powdered drugs.

      *hears whispers*

      Um…. please disregard my previous comment.

  8. In 1976, the video arcade game Death Race had a nationwide call for its banning ( you drove a car to run over people, turning them into tombstones which created blocks that would eventually pen you in and you couldn’t drive anymore).

    It showed up at the county fair in the carny arcade at my bumfuck town!

    Carny chicks in their see-through white tees and rotten teeth….

    1. Carny chicks in their see-through white tees and rotten teeth….

      Now I know what I want to google this weekend.

  9. The NRA is quick to toss the First Amendment under the bus in order to protect the Second.

    As the crisis actress cunt says “I call B.S.”

    The NRA has never called for government restriction/regulation of video games, much less spent even a dime campaigning for it.

    1. I’d also be curious to know how one can have a first amendment without the second. Not really an argument for or against the bit you cite, but it’s important to mention their relation.

    2. Do you believe the kids at Stoneman Douglas are “crisis actors?” As in the shooting never happened?

        1. Opposite of a cuck. I gave your wife the first good fucking she’s ever had while you cried in your baby blue teddy.

    3. Well you’re wrong. It took one minute to google and find Wayne LaPierre blaming video games after Sandy Hook.

      1. Which wasn’t even necessary considering there’s a link embedded in this article.

  10. Well… it can’t be Fallout 4’s fault because there is no AR-15 in Fallout 4. And according to my Facebook meme feed, school shooting are all caused by the NRA’s unwillingness to ban AR-15s. or something like that.

  11. We should ban SimCity (or whatever replaced it in the last 20 years since I played it) because these Big Govt fools have gone on a vicious central planning spree.

    1. The last one was also named SimCity. We don’t talk about it.

      1. At least the music was good. But even that was bad compared to the soundtracks of 3 and 4.

  12. The whole point of video games is so that I don’t have to get real hooker on my car.

    1. Fallout 4 Survival Mode so I don’t have to get tapeworms in real life…

      1. World of Warcraft so I don’t have to skin my dog to harvest Fel Leather.

  13. For all you Borderlands fans out there – have you ever noticed how the goliaths act a lot like the president when you plink them in the head?

  14. Video game industry figures kinda deserve it for caving iin to SJWs when it comes to sex and “misogyny” and putting trannies into everything in the sake of inclusion.

    If sex is video games is bad according to them, why isn’t violence?

    I mean, neither is bad, but with the industry saying one thing is and one thing isn’t, they are kinda hyprocrites. Especially since it’s hard to argue sex is bad, period, while shooting people is generally not.

  15. Massacres long predate video games.

    Here’s what he and gun-control advocates don’t get about mass killings:

    “Gun Control and Mass Killers”

    Join the link and delete the spaces.

  16. Never thought I’d end up reading REASON as a lonely voice of sanity. But here we are.
    Thing with moral panics about violence in media/video games/ etc. is actually a problem because the idea that visual media is, at its core, instructive, or should be instructive, is built into the cultural DNA of Western arts. I work in visual media and a number of years ago performed a study of what, exactly, Western Culture thinks visual media is, and is supposed to do; and at its core Western Culture believes any crafted visual media is intended to be communicative of ideas, and instructive, with that instruction intended to have real-world application.
    A legal defense insisting a work doesn’t instruct at all is an invalid legal defense.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.