×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

343 comments

Well (0, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876588)

Violence is either caused by video games or angry Muslims, that's why we have to get rid of them both.

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876662)

Maybe if we get the angry Muslims to play the violent video games, they'll cancel each other out?

Re:Well (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876774)

angry Muslims

Angry Muslims? Is that the game where the birds throw themselves at pigs, effectively committing suicide bombings?
(in a perfect world, I wouldn't have to post this anonymously...)

Re:Well (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36877042)

Angry Muslims? Is that the game where the birds throw themselves at pigs, effectively committing suicide bombings?

Pigs aren't Kosher, so no.

Re:Well (1)

TheInternetGuy (2006682) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877422)

Well, Muslims actually don't care that much for kosher. They do however like their food to be hal'al (if I remember the phrase correctly)

Re:Well (1)

crafty.munchkin (1220528) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877650)

Not just Muslim's. I think you'll find amongst the known mass murderer's world-wide, while a few may have played violent video games, nearly ALL of them have been religious nutbags (regardless of the specific brand/flavour of religion).

Using the same logic as the anti-video-games movement, we should completely ban religion as clearly it encourages mass murder!

ho hum (1)

That Guy From Mrktng (2274712) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876598)

So if you play video games you're a nutjob in progress trying to conceal a mass murder..

in MEDIA-SPEAK (tm):

SO.. you kids are into gamez? Watchout! They maybe psychotic nutjobs planning the next mass murder!!!1

Re:ho hum (2)

RsG (809189) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876858)

Honestly, I think I've seen more references in the mainstream news of Breivik's religion, politics and manifesto than I have of his preferred entertainment. In fact, the first link in TFS is the first such news story I've seen. Maybe I just don't follow the sorts of news outlets that jump on that anti-game bandwagon.

It might be that games are the default boogeyman in shootings when the killer doesn't give a motive - that explanation is offered when other explanations fail to pan out. When the perpetrator is outspoken about his motives the media doesn't need to invent new ones. In this case, the murderous bastard had an entire freaking manifesto dedicated to telling the world why he did what he did.

Re:ho hum (1)

That Guy From Mrktng (2274712) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876988)

Maybe Columbine could be the a good example where games ACTUALLY are relevant to the shootings, too bad it was the first event of it's kind in a long time, so all the news people have to do is figure out a pattern "every madman lately have been player of war games" and you have a story.

News people don't care, see NotW's complete disregard for human and logical behavior.

Re:ho hum (1)

instagib (879544) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877612)

> the first link in TFS is the first such news story I've seen
Well, it was obvious that Slashdot needed to plug into the biggest current story, and games was the way to go, despite the fact that all /. editors should know that readers here don't dream of rocket launchers for real life. Oh wait...

Re:ho hum (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876892)

When the Virginia Tech shootings happened most everyone in the media quickly blamed violent video games despite the fact that the shooter did not play them and was obsessed by a violent Korean film.

One of the images he recreated [imageshack.us]

Wikipedia Oldboy [wikipedia.org]

Duh. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876612)

Video games are for killing brown people.

Massacre (5, Insightful)

Oh Gawwd Peak Oil (1000227) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876618)

Why is this being downgraded to a "massacre" now that we know the perpetrators aren't Muslim?

Call it what it was. It was a terrorist attack. That's a superset of massacre, and it wasn't merely some deranged nut suddenly going off--it was premeditated, and it was for political reasons. But it seems a lot of people are trying to push that under the rug.

Re:Massacre (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876666)

The ven diagrams of "massacre" and "terrorist attack" can over lap.

Re:Massacre (1)

Oh Gawwd Peak Oil (1000227) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876700)

Do you know, perchance, what I meant by "superset"?

Re:Massacre (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876800)

Not all terrorist attacks are massacres.

Re:Massacre (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876908)

Not all "massacres" are "terrorist attacks". Therefore "terrorist attack" is not a superset of "massacre".

QED

Re:Massacre (4, Insightful)

RsG (809189) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877192)

I think that's incorrect. Neither is a superset of the other, however you want to slice it.

You can have a terrorist attack that isn't a massacre. If someone used a radiological weapon for the express purpose of causing terror to further a political agenda, it would be "terrorism", but not a massacre - there might not even be any immediate deaths, though there would be terror without question.

You can have a massacre that isn't terrorism. All that requires is a large scale loss of life to violence without an express political aim or intent to spread fear. Examples range from genocide, to indiscriminate warfare, to deliberate acts of mass murder carried out by damaged individuals with no particular agenda.

Ven diagram is a better way to look at it. |Massacre|Terrorist Massacre|Terrorism| This was both, and can be called either a massacre or a terror attack.

I do agree however that the media called it "terrorism" when the bomb hit Oslo and the perp was unknown and shifted more to "massacre" when it became known that the attack was domestic rather than foreign. There seems to be a certain amount of denial around the idea that this terrorist is a white christian killing his countrymen instead of a brown muslim from some dusty corner of the middle east.

Re:Massacre (1)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877452)

I do agree however that the media called it "terrorism" when the bomb hit Oslo and the perp was unknown and shifted more to "massacre" when it became known that the attack was domestic rather than foreign.

I don't think that's even true. I think they were calling it a "terrorist attack" when it was a bomb blowing up a government building, and they switched to "massacre" when it was a guy with a rifle walking through a summer camp, picking off kids like Jason Voorhees.

Re:Massacre (1)

RsG (809189) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877618)

Might be. It depends on how much credit you want to give the media; whether they changed the wording based on the shooting or the shooter.

Regardless of how cynical you are toward the media reaction, I still think that, given the political manifesto, the attack ought to be called terrorism. Fits the dictionary definition to a T.

Re:Massacre (1)

danlip (737336) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877222)

Not all terrorist attacks are massacres - the attack might fail to kill anyone, but just because it failed doesn't mean it isn't a terrorist attack. And not all massacres are terrorist attacks, for the reason you explained - someone who is just a nutcase without political or religious motivation is not committing a terrorist attack. So super-set is the wrong word.

Re:Massacre (1)

Kenja (541830) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876744)

Massacre is the verb, terrorism is the noun.

Re:Massacre (1)

Barny (103770) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877068)

Don't make me come over there and terror your arse!

Re:Massacre (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36877284)

Don't make me come over there and terrorize your arse!

FTFY. There, it's a verb.

Re:Massacre (1)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876838)

It was a terrorist attack. That's a superset of massacre

Don't think so. Many battles have ended as massacres, and yet they involved no targeting of civilians for political ends.

You're full of shit.

Re:Massacre (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36877212)

Re-read the above, with special attention to the meaning of "superset". In that light, "Don't think so" should probably read "I agree entirely".

You are non-empty of shit.

Re:Massacre (2)

blackraven14250 (902843) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877296)

He's confused as to the technical sets that massacre and terrorism overlap on, but he's right about one thing. It is a terrorist attack, as he did try to affect a change via fear. The media has also shied away from the term, which makes it seem like they're reserving the word for "those people".

Re:Massacre (1)

That Guy From Mrktng (2274712) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876840)

By constant repetition and Pavlovian dynamics, Terrorism == Muslim extremists. I didn't happened as a coincidence, ratings after 9/11 used to favor media that was more openly hateful towards Muslims.

This is non news in the context that it does not help to promote the Muslim Terror agenda, it's even dangerous in an ADHD ridden society to derail a good and long lasting discourse by the glitch of some blonde Christian conservative racist, a demographic profile thats not so irrelevant.

tl;dr
Blame the gamez!!! corrupting our society!!! think of the children etc.

Re:Massacre (5, Interesting)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876986)

For what it's worth, I'm far more terrified of domestic terrorism than Islamic terrorists. The KKK, neo-nazis, "Christian"groups like "Hutaree," various well-armed militias, animal rights psychos, pro-lifers who seem to think life is worth less outside the womb, and random nuts with guns... There are more home-grown terrorists than there are foreign terrorists, they generally know their targets better and raise less suspicion, and there have been more domestic terrorist acts than foreign terrorist attacks.

Neither are likely enough to lose any sleep over or vote for someone to protect me from those evildoers of course. Fox news scares me even more than any type of terrorist combined.

Re:Massacre (1)

ArsonSmith (13997) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877218)

Somewhere there is a government official reading this and feeling their job is working. Keep everybody scared and they'll do what ever you ask.

Re:Massacre (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877778)

I think you missed the last line there, about how both were trivial concerns. And government officials are trying to construct -foreign- terrorism as the big threat precisely because it's so much less real than domestic. A domestic terror attack is more likely. Happens on politician X's watch? No big deal, after all, he's keeping you safe from the the threat he was telling you he was protecting you from.

Re:Massacre (5, Informative)

omglolbah (731566) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877258)

It wasnt "downgraded".

Here in Norway it is still being described as a terrorist attack.

The attack at Utøya is described as a massacre while the bomb was obviously a bombing.
These two attacks has to be differentiated when described for clarity so they are described that way.
Overall it is described as "the terrorist attacks" or a variation of that.

Do not for a second think this is some "downgrading" because of the nutjob being Norwegian.

I dont know who you feel are pushing it under the rug, but I dont see anything like that happening -here-.

Re:Massacre (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877576)

I think you're trying too hard: "terrorist" describes the motivation behind an attack, "massacre" describes its scale; a thing can be one, both, or neither.

One is not inherently juicier than the other.

Repeat, ad nauseum: (4, Insightful)

Hartree (191324) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876624)

The usual silliness.

You might as well blame the wetsuit manufacturer for making the wet suit he was photographed in for a youtube video, as it made him feel too much like James Bond.

The problem is not that he's a violent politically motivated murderer that plays video games.

The problem is that he's a violent politically motivated murderer.

Re:Repeat, ad nauseum: (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877062)

I dunno... I watched Natural Born Killers the other day, and killing people seems pretty fun. But I should download some first-person shooters and train before I go and get that semi-automatic.

Oh, by the way, did anyone check what movies this guy watched? Not that a MOVIE would have anything to do with his actions... I mean, that would be absurd. A movie is just pictures on a screen, while video games are clearly both the motivation and the how-to guides of murderers.

Re:Repeat, ad nauseum: (2)

IrquiM (471313) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877254)

What he liked was BSG, SG1 and SGA, Dexter, etc....
Same as 75% of the people reading Slashdot

Re:Repeat, ad nauseum: (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877478)

Hmm... If you dropped Dexter from that list, it'd be 98% of the people reading Slashdot.

Re:Repeat, ad nauseum: (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36877552)

I must be in the 2% Don't watch nor care for any of those.

Israel connection (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876640)

In his 1500 page document he says he is a supporter of zionism and the state Israel, just after Norway announced they would support an Palestinian state this happens. Why is everyone ignoring this fact? Why are Christians and "right-wingers" being blamed?

Re:Israel connection (1)

ElectricTurtle (1171201) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876740)

Christians are being blamed because it is Biblical Christianity that supports "Zionism". Perhaps you haven't heard of the go to Bible verse: "I will bless those that bless thee and curse those who curse thee" (Genesis 12:3)? Most evangelical Christians I know are die hard supporters of Israel no matter what.

Re:Israel connection (1)

marcello_dl (667940) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877562)

If you get to the "Christianity" part, supporting Israel is strange. First, the promised land has already been given, the diaspora comes with the Roman destruction of the Temple but, by that time, Jesus had already spread the faith to the whole world. Some of the guys choose not to recognize Christ, to think they still have to get the promised land and await the Messiah? They are entitled to their opinion, but supporting this vision is not compatible with Christianity.

Yet nobody notices - or I am reading a different Bible, who knows.

Back to the topic, a guy who play games to practice is Not a gamer, end of discussion.

The truth: bad people have no faith, race, or nation (those are concepts they use to control their victims), instead of supporting or attacking this flag or that race, watch out for them.

Re:Israel connection (2)

Ultra64 (318705) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876750)

"Why are Christians and "right-wingers" being blamed?

I guess you meant to write:
"Why aren't Christians and "right-wingers" being blamed?"

Re:Israel connection (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876928)

Yeah, let's get down to the heart of the matter: Jews. Obviously this was orchestrated by the apartheid Zionist state, to extent their genocidal reach. It makes all the sense in the world. After this massacre, no one will dare vote in favor of of an independent Palestinian state. If they do, they'll be the next target.

Re:Israel connection (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36877054)

Just read some of these comments on haaretz, they support the terrorist attack and say norway deserved it.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/international/norway-massacre-suspect-warns-of-two-more-terrorist-cells-1.375202#article_comments

Re:Israel connection (1)

derGoldstein (1494129) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877582)

Rock-hard evidence, that is. Comments on a website.

Do you view Slashdot comments "raw"? If you do, you know that about 20% of Slashdot readers are Klan members. Sure, they get modded down, but they're not *erased*. This allows White Supremacy groups to communicate on Slashdot, where they know they have like-minded friends.

Re:Israel connection (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876968)

Yes because you can clearly see his blond haired, blue eyed Jewish heritage.

Premeditation (2)

CyberDog3K (959117) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876642)

If you play a video game as "training" to commit a violent act in the real world, the game is not the thing making you a violent psychopath, you're already there.

It's because of organizations like Forbes (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876648)

And their cronies like Abigail R. Esman, who condone these acts.
  And I quote "But I fear that, unless Europe begins demanding that its Muslim population live according to its Enlightenment traditions and the values of democracy, he will not be the last." She means this as a threat. She is very, very pleased at what has transpired in Norway, despite any protestations she might make in postscripts to the contrary.

Forbes Condones Terrorism [forbes.com]

Re:It's because of organizations like Forbes (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876712)

Go to the Telegraph's comments sections. There are a number of people posting there who have, I suspect, their own Knights Templar uniforms sitting in their closets. This guy isn't alone. I'm not saying his co-believers are common, but I suspect there are a few folks in Europe who harbor his dangerous delusions and narcissistic views.

Re:It's because of organizations like Forbes (1)

MrHanky (141717) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876846)

If you look at the comments under the first Slashdot story covering this, from when people still suspected the Muslims, you'll find several people agreeing with ABB's goals: a war against the Muslim world. Hos co-believers are far too common (more here than elsewhere, i suspect), but luckily very few of them agree with his methods or have the will to do what they think is necessary.

Re:It's because of organizations like Forbes (-1, Troll)

Hognoxious (631665) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876890)

And I quote "But I fear that, unless Europe begins demanding that its Muslim population live according to its Enlightenment traditions and the values of democracy, he will not be the last." She means this as a threat

Mind reader, are you?

I fear that, unless you replace those tires, you will wrap your car around a tree.

Is that a threat too, you kumbaya-singing prick?

There hasn't been media hysteria (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876654)

In Finland, news are FULL of headlines related to the Oslo shootings (all news broadcasts, frontpages of all major papers, etc.). Before this SlashDot entry, I hadn't heard of a single reference to videogames. Everyone has concentrated on the political climate (norway has its own version of the tea party, as does pretty much every european country at the moment. All have gained a lot of popularity within the last two years, all are similar in their nationalism and anti-islam views).

I don't know about other countries but I certainly wouldn't call this a media hysteria about violent video games. It's some sort of strawman attention whoring.

Re:There hasn't been media hysteria (5, Insightful)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876866)

What seems to be happening, typically, is that a number of groups are attempting to disown Breivik. I'm not sure why, as the media and the police have made it pretty clear this guy was a far right extremist, and hardly typical of the moderate right anywhere in Europe. Still, you see Christians nitpicking at his Freemasonry to claim he isn't Christian, conservatives trying to find ways to move him away from any kind of right wing ideology, Norwegians declaring him sort of alien species (despite the fact that there has long been a small right wing and neo-Nazi movement in Norway). I guess that's typical enough, people want nothing to do with this kind of person.

To my mind, and I don't even play a psychiatrist on TV, Breivik seems a very narcissistic type. I mean, this guy went to all the trouble to write a 1,500 page manifesto of his mutterings, make himself uniforms (the picture of him in his neo-Templar uniform is precious), and along with some other nuts (whose doors, I'm assuming, are already being busted down) played a very bizarre private fantasy. The events of a few days ago are sadly where Breivik's private fantasy tragically intersected reality.

It's hard to call the guy insane in the general use of the word. He clearly planned this, and if he did it himself, he's shown no lack of diabolical genius in setting of the bombs then making his way to the island to con a bunch of kids into gathering around him so he could blow them away. There's no denying that's a mad, crazy act, but this guy knew what he was doing. He still hopes, it seems, to use the court as his soap box, and while the judge has deprived of him it for several weeks, eventually this is going to go to court and the Norwegian and international press are going to have to make the hard decisions of how much of this guy's ranting they should report or not. Based upon current reporting, this will be to sensational for them not to repeat his every utterance, and so, at the end of the day, even if they throw Breivik into a deep dark hole and throw away the key, he's accomplished a good deal of what he wanted. He's got the exposure, he's got people of like mind posting all over the place trite messages about how "we deplore the his methods, but what he says makes sense!"

People will compare him to Timothy McVeigh, and to an extent, it does seem that kind of terrorist act, but in some ways Breivik reminds me more of one Colonel Hitler, and I suspect before this is done, every far right culture conservative out there from American white supremacists too Western and Central European neo-Nazis to Serbian racist thugs will be declaring this guy some sort of champion. Polite society certainly will reject him, but the wingnuts, well, he's the perfect poster boy, handsome, dashing and articulately mad.

Re:There hasn't been media hysteria (1)

second_coming (2014346) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877438)

Excellent post! The whole thing has been orchestrated by him to try and get a global stage for him to spout his bile into the world (who are now unfortunately waiting to hear what he has to say). The best thing they could now is to keep the whole thing behind closed doors and not allow court reports to be released. Don't give the flame any oxygen and it will die out.

Re:There hasn't been media hysteria (1)

robot_love (1089921) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877610)

I don't have any issue with this guys rantings getting out. I think we should read them and think about them, and if they're insane, discard them. But we shouldn't hide them.

How will we know if they're good ideas or not if we don't see them in their entirety? If we don't inspect and analyze them in detail? If we don't find the places that are morally unjustifiable and rip them to shreds?

As long as it remains a "1500 page manifesto" that no one has read, all kinds of people might believe that they agree with it. As a thoroughly refuted diatribe of insanity, everyone can reject it and move on.

I mean, isn't this why censorship is wrong? Forewarned is forearmed.

Re:There hasn't been media hysteria (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877640)

I'm not advocating censoring it. Quite the opposite. But let's not fool ourselves that like-minded people are going to look to Breivek's writings the way oodles of self-proclaimed revolutionaries have poured over Mao's Red Book or Hitler's Mein Kampf.

Re:There hasn't been media hysteria (1)

PCM2 (4486) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877786)

People will compare him to Timothy McVeigh, and to an extent, it does seem that kind of terrorist act, but in some ways Breivik reminds me more of one Colonel Hitler, and I suspect before this is done, every far right culture conservative out there from American white supremacists too Western and Central European neo-Nazis to Serbian racist thugs will be declaring this guy some sort of champion. Polite society certainly will reject him, but the wingnuts, well, he's the perfect poster boy, handsome, dashing and articulately mad.

That's probably inevitable, but I doubt it will be as widespread as you suspect. As much as he tried to describe his ideology at length, it doesn't stand much scrutiny, and it doesn't necessarily intersect with the beliefs of a lot of right-wing groups here in the U.S.

He specifically went out of his way to criticize National Socialism as a dead end and categorically stated that his "Neo Templars" were not a Nazi group, so that could alienate him from some neo-Nazis right there. (At the same time, he does seem to sort of identify with National Socialist groups. I suspect he doesn't actually disagree as much as he claims, it's just more of a "my way or the highway" kind of thing -- he doesn't see himself as a foot soldier but as a "commander.") The people who criticize his extreme nationalists beliefs he describes as "Hitlers" because they oppress right-minded people.

As for his enemies, he categorizes them all as "marxists," in ways that often do not make much sense. Someone who does not accept an extreme nationalist/racialist view of culture is a "cultural marxist" -- do those two words really go together? People with ideas he doesn't agree with tend to be "intellectual marxists," and so on. By comparison, he categorizes himself as a "cultural conservative," and his politics as "national conservatism." (Maybe his aversion to "marxism" explains his distancing himself from "national socialism"?)

There are a few things in his writings that some will snicker over, too. I'll just quote:

Although I have had a change of mentality a majority of my friends have not. My stepfather Tore, one of my best friends Marius and my more distant friends Kristoffer, Sturla and Ronny are all living manifestations of the complete breakdown of sexual moral. All five have had more than 300 sexual partners (two of them more than 700) and I know for a fact that three of them have one or more STDs (probably all of them). I have several other promiscuous (slut) friends and I could list at least 30 male and females in my social environment if I wanted to. I don’t blame them personally and it has absolutely nothing to do with envy. I could easily have chosen the same path if I wanted to, due to my looks, status, resourcefulness and charm. It’s just terribly sad that my country have been the victim of severe Marxist infiltration leading to the political doctrines which have been allowed to destroy all moral and norms, resulting in the complete breakdown of our once great ethical standards.

Got that? Sexually-transmitted diseases are a result of "Marxist infiltration" of society leading to the infection of its "sluts." He devotes several pages to what can be done about STDs, including the unfathomable cost to society of millions of infections, the effects of the shame felt by some people after diagnosis, etc. He goes on:

Artists such as Madonna, Lady Gaga and Christina Aguilera and series such as Sex and the City must be considered political activists/political movements and the lifestyles they propagate considered political propaganda. Alternatively, artists/series/movies propagating/glorifying promiscuousity must be restricted to liberal zones.
. . .
The following are a few arguments against excessive sexuality:

  • Sexuality can complicate relationships (as when people are hostile towards each other because they are sexually attracted to the same person).
  • Sex may hinder one's spiritual development (non-secular argument).
  • Sexual desire can cause people to place primitive instinct ahead of intellect (people across the world continue to have unsafe casual sex despite their awareness of the dangers of STDs, for example).
  • Sexuality asserts itself in the human mind by releasing neurochemicals comparable to addictive drugs into the brain.
  • Sexual desire can cause people to lie and cheat in the pursuit of sexual relationships.
  • Sexual desires could be false assumptions that are foisted on you by society, hence you may need to look at how your sexuality is ideologically and institutionally constructed.
  • Some opponents of lookism, a recently documented form of discrimination, along with some proponents of fat acceptance, argue that sexuality, which is usually based on notion of physical attractiveness, encourages and justifies obliviousness to the unfairness of discrimination against people who are deemed unattractive by others.
  • There is not necessarily a difference between consent and coercion, sex can therefore be a means of oppression.

Not that it's been on his mind or anything. It's just that, you know, he's trying to reorder society here, and he has to think of everything.

In short, this guy is an isolated, obsessive man with a persecution complex and delusions of grandeur, and he thinks a lot more highly of himself than most people who have never met him are likely to.

Surprise surprise (3, Insightful)

WiiVault (1039946) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876678)

Sometimes I wonder if the reason the media goes after video games has something to do with the fact that they are often in direct competition with each other for the (mostly) finite number of media consumption hours of the average person. I seem to remember the media, at least in the US, seemed to spend an endless time demonizing the internet and focusing on worst-case scenarios back of ID theft, scams, and viruses in the late 90's when they still thought they might snuff it out. I wonder in newspapers and radio engaged in these same tactics in against radio and TV when they were the up and comers?

Re:Surprise surprise (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876826)

Interesting theory. And the motive certainly holds reason! It's pretty rediculous the amount of blame gets directed towards the gaming industry. Television violence doesn't seem to be taking any of the responsibility anymore. Theres no such thing as bad publicity, right? For example (and a scary one), all this coverage on the news over this and other terrorist attacks, might actually catch the eyes of other would-be mass-murderers with the same ideals, and give them the gumption to follow through in similar fashion. The news is therefore just as much to blame. "We only receive what we demand, and if we want hell then hells what we'll have."

Not video games (3, Insightful)

squidflakes (905524) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876690)

It appears that radical right wing thought, conspiracy theories, bigotry, and a healthy dose of nationalism is to blame, but god damn that's hard to shorten in to a catchy headline.

Re:Not video games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876948)

Didn't consider life sacred - killed children.

Re:Not video games (1)

Mashiki (184564) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877034)

So the guy who shot Giffords, and was a hyper-leftwing nationalist, full of conspiracy theories. We can blame on the left right?

Re:Not video games (1)

Meeni (1815694) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877608)

Do you have a link proving that he is a "leftish" ? I keep reading that as a casual comment every here and then, but never found a proper source for it. Not that I would believe that Fox News might be at work, but you know, better check anyway...

Considering that Gifords is a Democrat (1)

publiclurker (952615) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877816)

I think you can ignore mashiki's ramblings unimportant, and you should not hear his words

Re:Not video games (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36877696)

We see your giffords attacker and raise you Timmothy McVeigh.

Bets on you.

Monopoly (1)

Fuzzums (250400) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876702)

Personally I think Monopoly is the root cause of all the financial problems we're having for the past years.

Re:Monopoly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876834)

amen, brother.

Re:Monopoly (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876984)

I hardly think that Hasbro is the source of all our worldly financial woes.

Re:Monopoly (2)

hyfe (641811) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877400)

Personally I think Monopoly is the root cause of all the financial problems we're having for the past years.

2.5% unemployment, 520$ billion dollars stashed away in a goverment fund for later spending, universil healthcare and ridicilously good unemployment benefits (80% of your last salary, available for 100 weeks as long as you're looking for a job). Apart from the odd massacre and a holier-than-thou-attitude we're fine thank you.

Re:Monopoly (1)

Fuzzums (250400) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877574)

just to be sure: I was referring to the subprime mortgages, wallstreet and we're-too-good-to-pay-sales-taxes-like-everybody-else-amazon and everything related to that.

Hmmm I wonder.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876722)

Is there a correlation between journalistic reporting on violence and commiting violent acts...

Somebody get on it!

games in genres (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876802)

I would blame Microsoft Flightsimulator for 9/11

CoD and Battlefield has +100million players(I got no clue over real numbers)
1 went berzerk, so we must ban all games with guns in it!

Typical /. Jargon (0)

Lysander7 (2085382) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876856)

Facts? There are no "facts" stated whatsoever in either this page or the article. I thought /. was relevant news without the hyped up media bullshit. I guess not.

Violence suppression (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876878)

I've had so many arguments with my wife about this but she does not understand.

This is why I play Crysis 2 all the time, to keep from killing aliens in real life.

P.S.

Osama Bin Laden never played a violent video game in his life.

Pft (4, Informative)

hyfe (641811) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876896)

If your media makes a big deal out of him gaming, read better media. If you can't find any, stop reading. You're probably better off.

His manifesto actually (readily available in english) makes a big deal out of how pretending to have a gaming addiction is really usefull for hiding nefarious activities. He wasn't a gaming addict, he was using it as a cover.

Also, if your media is one of those who kept harping on about this being muslims long after it was clear he was Norwegian you're probably better off without them either (I'm looking at you NY Times). The american coverage of this incident has been pretty much abysmal, and I'm sorry for being able to read english. I wish I couldn't.

However, while his gaming certainly didn't affect him, it's pretty clear that the fact that he was taking a coctail of anabolic steroids did. He even described it himself in his manifesto. To which extent we won't know until later, but we'll figure it out. There's plenty of time, and we have to grieve a bit of first.

Signed
A Norwegian
(Also; Glenn Beck; May you burn in hell)

Not a big topic in Norway (3, Informative)

audunr (906697) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876916)

It has been mentioned in the media here in Norway, but it's really not part of the discussion about why he did this. His political beliefs (anti-Islam, anti-Labour Party, etc) is the focus now. In addition to how much of a lunatic this guy really is.

The manifesto is full of details about just about everything, so it's easy to pick one small thing and focus on just that. Remember that this document is something he put together and published before the bomb and shooting, knowing that it would be read trying to find an explanation for what he did. If he expected to die, this was to be his legacy, I guess. So who knows how much of it is true and how much is how he wanted us to look at things.

Conservative and religious zealotry was the cause (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36876938)

Guess what? Anders Behring Breivik was a religious conservative.

If anything, it was the hate-filled politics of conservativism and of the Right Wing in general which drove Mr. Breivik. Video games is a red herring and a scape goat.

O'RLY? (2)

geoffaus (623283) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876966)

Its so predictable that some people will blame video games and the media when these things happen It really reminded me of the interview Michael Moore did with Marilyn Manson in Bowling for Columbine I really recommend people rewatch it as its still true now http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrHFB2KP8fc [youtube.com] Maybe its the way that governments conduct themselves that should have the finger pointed at them before they start with the media - unfortunately its much easier to blame someone or a video game rather than look at a how governments legitimize violence and the effect that this might have.

Batman Gambit Anyone? (1)

Gly (2402034) | more than 2 years ago | (#36876998)

This is exactly why he started playing World of Warcraft. His manifesto said that he would be able to use it as a cover for planning the attack because of the reaction people would have. He was expecting this and, if I had to guess, he'll probably use it to defend himself in his trial.

Where is the Manifesto? (1)

ideonexus (1257332) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877020)

Because this document is going to be a political football for weeks to come, can anyone point me to where I can download a copy of this manifesto and see the nonsense for myself instead of having it cherry-picked by every pundit with an ax to grind? I see quotes from it all over the internet, but no link to the primary document.

Re:Where is the Manifesto? (3, Informative)

ideonexus (1257332) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877182)

Found it. Thanks Wikipedia:

http://www.kevinislaughter.com/wp-content/uploads/2083+-+A+European+Declaration+of+Independence.pdf [kevinislaughter.com]

In looking for this, I found a Right Wing blog arguing that he was motivated by the belief in Evolution, another blog arguing that he was a liberal Al Queda sypathizer, a liberal blog arguing that he would be a member of the Tea Party if he lived in America and all of them using this 1500 pages of batshit insanity to justify their positions.

Re:Where is the Manifesto? (1)

MightyMartian (840721) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877300)

It's hard to see how a guy who advocated a return to conservative Roman Catholicism, hated Islam, fancied himself one of the Knights Templar and despised and blamed those he viewed as Marxists as responsible for most of the ills of Europe as anything but a Far Right nut.

Re:Where is the Manifesto? (5, Insightful)

ideonexus (1257332) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877448)

My gut reaction agrees with you. I'm still flipping through the manifesto and a lot of it reads like what you would hear on Rush Limbaugh for the three hours that slime is on the air every day.

This guy wasn't stupid, and his insanity is of a psychopathic nature, not delusional. He killed all those people in a cold calculated stunt for attention. He's very well read, hates Muslims, hates socialism, hates hip-hop, believes in implementing population control on 3rd-world countries, has an extensive understanding of history that is completely biased, and, most of all, extremely Christian. I can easily see this manifesto being picked up by the militias in the United States and secretly admired as a great work. Scary.

Re:Where is the Manifesto? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36877626)

There's also the fact that big parts of his manifest is just copied from the unabombers manifest; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unabomber

Re:Where is the Manifesto? (1)

swillden (191260) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877662)

I can easily see this manifesto being picked up by the militias in the United States and secretly admired as a great work. Scary.

I don't see why you find that scary. Would you also find it scary if a nutcase killed a bunch of people after publishing a manifesto that is a slightly more extreme version of your political positions (whatever they are)?

The manifesto and the guy's ideas ultimately had little to nothing to do with his actions. They were justification and window dressing, but he could have used a completely different set of ideas just as well. And there may well be plenty of people in the US who would read his manifesto and agree with it, but that doesn't mean they're going to do anything similar, or that they don't deplore his violence just as much as you do -- perhaps more.

Re:Where is the Manifesto? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#36877716)

Nope, he's a Catholic the nutjobs that twist Christianity in the US hate Catholics.
Also, worth noting, there are hardly any extremist militias left, there are still militias around, but very few of the racist extremist "militias" that were the bogey man of the 90s.

Re:Where is the Manifesto? (1)

ideonexus (1257332) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877830)

Also, worth noting, there are hardly any extremist militias left, there are still militias around, but very few of the racist extremist "militias" that were the bogey man of the 90s.

incorrect [cnn.com]

It's ironic... (1)

Sepultura (150245) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877026)

It's ironic that by calling for action against what they judge to be violent entertainment these ones are, in fact, imitating the behaviour of the suspected perpetrator. Sure, their actions haven't risen to the point of violence against others, but their actions come from the same preconception: That their judgments of the beliefs, motives and actions of others are infallible and that they have the right to then force their opinions on others.

The only difference I see is that they seek to use the law to enforce their will, and the suspect had no hope of influencing government to act on his behalf and so took matters into his own hands.

Re:It's ironic... (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877236)

The only difference I see is that they seek to use the law to enforce their will, and the suspect had no hope of influencing government to act on his behalf and so took matters into his own hands.

You're right - why, that's hardly any difference at all!

It's even more ironic than you realize, all those who want to foist onto others their judgment that murder is wrong also use the law to force people to accept their preconceptions. Just like the shooter!

Media hysteria blaming video games? (3, Informative)

IrquiM (471313) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877210)

Not here in Norway at least.

The facts are, he was a right wing nationalist, conservative christian and idolizing the Knights Templar and the crusades.

Kind of phoning it in at this point (1)

glwtta (532858) | more than 2 years ago | (#36877528)

Am I the only one who thinks that the attempts to manufacture outrage here are pretty half-hearted?

There hasn't actually been any media "hysteria" around video games with this story, but I guess one hard up for ideas editor of - what is it even, an Australian gaming blog? - decides that there's life in the old girl yet.

Slashdot dutifully carries the thing, to stoke the requisite "nerd outrage" side of the story, but even that pretty much sputters out.

Can't we just agree that this one is not going to happen?

Maybe post a couple more BitCoin stories instead, that's sure to get the pageviews flowing.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...