Virginia finds no link between violent games and V-Tech murderer
by Alexander Sliwinski 
{ Aug 30th 2007 at 2:43PM }
The final official Virginia state report by the Virginia Tech massacre review panel found no link between video games and the murders committed by Seung Hui Cho. This corroborates the federal government findings in June which found no link. Turns out that the only game cited in the report is Sonic the Hedgehog. In the mental health history section of the report regarding Cho it says, "None of the video games were war games or had violent themes. He liked basketball and had a collection of figurines and remote controlled cars."The video game connection regarding the V-Tech massacre got rolling when Jack Thompson went on FOX News hours after the event and started making stuff up. Only to be outdone and followed with premature reporting by The Washington Post, which was later changed. According to both the state and federal reports, whatever is to blame for Cho's illness, it wasn't video games.
[Via GamePolitics]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
eldee @ Aug 30th 2007 2:48PM
dunno about you guys, but I sure am glad they wasted a lot of taxpayer money chasing a red herring. Jack Thompson should have to foot the bill for that entire aspect of the investigation, I'm sure that would shut him up for a while.
borland502 @ Aug 30th 2007 4:39PM
"dunno about you guys, but I sure am glad they wasted a lot of taxpayer money chasing a red herring."
I'm glad you're speaking for yourself. Because I'm hella glad they wasted taxpayer money on this study. Science isn't all about new frontiers and a thorough study that proves the obvious (crazy people don't need games to be crazy) is good all around.
People look for something specific to blame and games like Manhunt 2, Postal, GTA[X], etc well nigh beg for blame. So having evidence that you can go on a rampage without being addicted to havesting Adam from little girls is good news for gamers.
I mean Charles Manson killed people years before Pong came on the scene.
eldee @ Aug 30th 2007 4:44PM
You act like this study will change anything. Wait till Manhunt 2 comes out and some random crazy guy kills somebody. This 'study' will be all but vapor.
What *will* happen, however, is for each crime where video games are suspected as 'training', a new study will be launched. Again and again, until they find something that seems valid. All of the disproven cases will be forgotten, and the conservative right will have an entire industry to throw a noose around.
borland502 @ Aug 30th 2007 5:20PM
"conservative right will have an entire industry..."
Good lord son, you speak as if the conservative right is a monolith. I am part of the conservative right and while I refuse to play games like "Manhunt", it doesn't mean I'm forming lynch mobs for the developers. I know it boggles the mind, but even now there are conservatives growing up with video games. They don't want to give up their gamecrack any more than I do.
If you will, substitute "evidence" for the phrase "talking points". This provides defenders with talking points. If the other side had solid evidence that violent entertainment made you psycho, this battle over expression would have been over long before video games came on the scene.
And while I prefer the PS3 over the Wii, you can thank your lucky stars the Wii has become so popular. Jack Thompson is already a liability to his cause (family groups have distanced themselves), but he'll lose even more support once he harps on that family-friendly gem.
And finally, money talks. Why do you think films like "Hostel" and "Saw" are still being released? So by all means, keep up the good fight brother...but try to realize that you are not the last light of freedom in the gaming world.
chris @ Aug 30th 2007 2:50PM
enough about this jackass and anyways, saying violent video games make people more prone to violence is the exact same as saying the same video game could be releasing stress and making them less pron to violence.
Paul P. @ Aug 30th 2007 2:50PM
Hmm, I dunno. Sonic the Hedgehog? Did you see how FAST he killed those people?
mr nimblewick @ Aug 30th 2007 3:03PM
It was probably the new one. That load of crap would make anyone want to go on a murderous rampage.
Xeno Mezphy @ Aug 30th 2007 3:32PM
It couldn't have been the new one. He'd have spent at least 20 seconds trying to talk to someone or passing through doorways.
Crono @ Aug 30th 2007 2:51PM
Not likely Eldee.
And whatever happened to "crazy" as a reason.
"Why oh why did this person commit this murderous rampage?"
"Video Games"
"Depression"
"Made fun of"
How about just f-ing crazy? He was nuts. A looney. Coocoo.
We need to bring crazy back.
mr nimblewick @ Aug 30th 2007 3:07PM
Crazy is going the way of "died of natural causes." We want everything explained nowadays. Now it's all heart attack and cancer and amnesia and worms in the brain and whatnot.
"My grandpa died because he was old, not because of multiple stab wounds to the chest, dammit!"
mr nimblewick @ Aug 30th 2007 3:07PM
Crazy is going the way of "died of natural causes." We want everything explained nowadays. Now it's all heart attack and cancer and amnesia and worms in the brain and whatnot.
"My grandpa died because he was old, not because of multiple stab wounds to the chest, dammit!"
Poisoned Al @ Aug 30th 2007 2:51PM
Not that it matters. The "news" outlet already crapped out their own half-baked option into a steaming heap for the great unwashed to eat up. They'll won't run this story because it's not sensationalist bullshit they can scream at easily influenced morons.
Poisoned Al @ Aug 30th 2007 2:52PM
Me grammar good after few pints.
Zaphod Beeblebrox @ Aug 30th 2007 2:52PM
Surpize surprize. And you know they tried really hard to "find" a link.
What now Mr. Thompson, what now?
I bet he cries conspiracy and bribery by the Evil Videogame companies.
Paul @ Aug 30th 2007 2:57PM
I believe I speak for most of the readers here when I say...
"Duhhhh."
CanadianZero @ Aug 30th 2007 3:01PM
somewhere in Florida, a man named Jack is crying...
Madjack @ Aug 30th 2007 3:02PM
Who knew collecting gold rings could drive some one insane.
Poisoned Al @ Aug 30th 2007 3:04PM
Well the later Sonic games made me want to kill the Sega devs.
Kevin Lee @ Aug 31st 2007 1:15AM
Jack Thompson just got owned.
Cox Attack @ Aug 30th 2007 3:10PM
John Carmack is stoked.
Jack Thompson is not stoked.
Shagittarius @ Aug 30th 2007 3:10PM
Ban Sonic!
Secura @ Aug 30th 2007 3:17PM
And now when they can't figure out why the guy did what he did, they'll go back to violent video games and say that was the "problem".
Zaphod Beeblebrox @ Aug 30th 2007 3:16PM
Suddenly I feel the urge to put on a red and blue plumber outfit and find some furry animals, corner them and kill them by landing on them with my plumber butt.
Then I will have this uncontrollable need to steal a plane and blow stuff up because I have been playing Warhawk and that EVIL game is telling me that is what I have to do.
Can't control, must do what videogame tells me too.
NATO_Duke @ Aug 30th 2007 3:16PM
I guess Virginia will be getting sued by Jack Thompson for this vulgar report.
GRANTED @ Aug 30th 2007 3:20PM
guns kill people.
why do we have such easy access to guns. it doesn't make any sense to me.
g.Park @ Aug 30th 2007 3:22PM
Cars kill more people a year than guns.
Why do we have such easy access to cars. It doesn't make any sense to me.
mr nimblewick @ Aug 30th 2007 3:25PM
"Cars kill more people a year than guns.
Why do we have such easy access to cars. It doesn't make any sense to me."
Guns are made to kill people.
Cars aren't made to kill people.
Well, except for my car.
GRANTED @ Aug 30th 2007 3:29PM
because people drive cars you retard. cars aren't used primarily for killing. what the fuck do you think guns are used for.
megaStryke @ Aug 30th 2007 3:30PM
"Guns are made to kill people.
Cars aren't made to kill people."
And then again, video games aren't made to kill people either.
g.Park @ Aug 30th 2007 3:41PM
Guns are designed to kill people, while cars aren't. But the fact is that when either are used irresponsibly, they result in death. However, when a guns are used responsibly (hunting, self defense, sport), there is little argument against them. When used irresponsibly, there's an issue. When cars are used irresponsibly, there is no argument against them, but rather their irresponsible drivers (often drunks). We should treat gun violence the same way we treat drunk or inattentive drivers- blame the operator, not the tool.
Your problem isn't with guns, it's with people who use them irresponsibly.
Crono @ Aug 30th 2007 3:46PM
"Guns kill people"
No, people kill people. Guns rarely go off on their own.
I read a statistic that there are 90 guns for every 100 people in the US. To that I say: Go US!
Matt @ Aug 30th 2007 4:23PM
Bullshit, g.Park. A big, steaming hot pile of bullshit.
Guns are tools of destruction, period. That is their sole purpose on this earth. No good comes out of them, with the rare exception of hunting for food.
There is *only* potential for killing with guns. Not so with vehicles.
You completely ignore the fact that many different types of guns are made, for many different types of killing PEOPLE. That tec-9 is for deer hunting? Tell me another one. A glock for bobwhite quail? Please.
A gun isn't a gun isn't a gun. If Eric Harris and Dyland Klebold didn't have access to the automatic weaponry they did- so small, so easy to conceal, so easy to use- there would have been that much less carnage in the world.
Instead of scrutinizing just how many people we should be able to kill after a trip to Wal-Mart, we should be discussing how to make a world that doesn't need guns. I know, a revolutionary concept, peace. Try and imagine it for a second.
Synner @ Aug 30th 2007 4:43PM
My guns are all for shooting paper, and people who don't belong in my home meaning me harm. Plus those 2 retards in colombine DIDN'T have automatic weapons, they had semi automatic weapons, And Glock is the most widely carried police sidearm manufacturer. Why not learn not to talk out of your ass before posting
g.Park @ Aug 30th 2007 4:50PM
Matt,
Guns do have potential outside of killing. They can be collected, used for target shooting, hunting, or even to non-lethally incapacitate an attacker or intruder.
Removing guns from the equation will not stop violence. If Klebold and Harris didn't have access to automatic weapons, they would have (and did) built homemade explosives. Or they would have found other ways to obtain the weapons they wanted. Sure, it was easy for them to find the weapons they did, but would making it harder to find them have stopped them? Would legal barriers stop two people that insane and driven?
The design of a gun (assault rifle vs. hunting rifle vs. target pistol) does not make it a murder weapon. The person who fires it at another human being outside of legitimate self defense makes it a murder weapon.
I agree that we should work towards a culture that does not resort to violence as a solution for disputes (Bush is setting a terrible example here). However, that involves a shift in thinking away from compliance via force (give me your money or I shoot you/ give me your gun or you go to jail) and compliance via agreement (we all agree not to shoot each other anymore). Laws are never going to get you to that point.
Grindstone @ Aug 30th 2007 5:41PM
A couple of months ago, near my town, a 15 year old girl was straggled to death. We should ban hands, they are deadly...
http://www.katu.com/news/local/9200027.html
Stop blaming guns -- people are violent, have been since recorded history, will be until I am elected president (Vote for Grindstone, 2024!).
ThornedVenom @ Aug 30th 2007 7:11PM
Why do people learn martial arts? They kill people too.
The primary objective of course is not for killing purposes, but for self-defense (not by necessarily via killing, but by submission)and also by tradition. The same could be applied to firearms.
The difference is that is not only in range and lethal power but in responsibility. In martial arts, you're supposed to learn about how dangerous your "natural weapons" are, their limits and their consequences. For gun purchasing, nobody gives a damn about that.
I don't think that guns kill people. Just extremely irresponsible individuals. We perhaps shouldn't inhibit others' freedoms, but there certainly sure is room to prevent this type of behaviour at all costs.
And to all the naysayers who yell out "we'll always find a way to kill each other, even without guns", it still doesn't justify why guns should be so accessible. "Since we'll always find a way to kill ourselves, let's let everyone purchase nuclear weapons!"
Synner @ Aug 30th 2007 7:47PM
There's this little thing in that old outdated constitution thing called the bill of rights, and the second little blurb on there says guns should be accessible. In fact when the British oppressors were trampling the rights of the colonists, the first thing they did was try to take away their guns. The stocks would be smashed and the barrels bent around the trunk of the nearest tree, or something to that effect. Fact is, the whole purpose we have the right to bear arms, is so another oppresive regime doesn't try to take away our God-given rights and freedoms. Unfortunately, a bunch of whining sissies who don't understand that some people don't care whether you want to reason with them or not think that they can change all the evil in the world with words and thinking happy thoughts. These people I like to refer to as "victims". They will continue to try to reason with the people who don't think the same way as them and really don't care for their point of view, all the while being systematically destroyed.
t_m @ Aug 31st 2007 7:43AM
guns don't kill people. People obsessed with guns kill people.
Oh wait, that is 90% of Americans. I blame John Wayne!
yippee kayee motherf**kers!
GRANTED @ Aug 30th 2007 3:20PM
guns kill people.
why do we have such easy access to guns. it doesn't make any sense to me.
GRANTED @ Aug 30th 2007 3:20PM
f--k it. time to shoot this comment system in the face.
Synner @ Aug 30th 2007 5:38PM
Axes kill people, why do we have easy access to axes? You don't even need to be 18 to buy one, I am personally endorsing axes as my massacre weapon of choice.
g.Park @ Aug 30th 2007 3:24PM
The VA report will be summarily ignored by the "video games kill children crowd" anyway. Beliefs that aren't based on evidence in the first place a rarely debunked by more evidence.
Matt B @ Aug 30th 2007 3:28PM
Video games caused Bush to start a war.
Shagittarius @ Aug 30th 2007 3:29PM
They found out that the guy was really a big fan of Matlock. Ban the Lawyers!
Exo @ Aug 30th 2007 3:36PM
I await the day when some one goes on a murderous rampage, and tis found the only game they own is Americas army.
Sabata @ Aug 30th 2007 3:39PM
Thats a little morbid
borntokill @ Aug 30th 2007 3:39PM
what a suprise.... that is, if youve never played a game and dont have half a brain
Jake @ Aug 30th 2007 3:42PM
There is an entire science dedicated to identifying factors in violent criminals. This science is called criminal profiling (psychological profiling). Dozens of environmental circumstances have been statistically linked to violent individuals over the year.
Lack of a father figure, poverty, sexual abuse, chronic rejection by peers at school, and mental illness are some of the really heavy hitters. Being associated with those factors dramitically increases the chance an individual will commit violent crime.
Video games have never been statistically linked to being a violent individual. Period. That is the end of the story. The "evidence" that games are associated is completely anectodal and has no basis in statistical study.
There are thousands of murders per year and a large percentage of our population plays games. It is inevitable that there will coincidences in which murderers played games and coincidences in which they did not play games.
grapejoos @ Aug 30th 2007 3:44PM
It amazes me that they focused on the video games aspect when the guy sent in a picture of himself posing in the same position as a shot from the ultraviolent movie Oldboy. If they were going to focus on some pop-culture link to complain about (not that it accomplishes anything), you would think it would have been that.
WiNG @ Aug 30th 2007 3:46PM
wow. at least my last name isn't Cho.
First I found out the guy's asian
the same age as me
also an english major
Sonic fan?? dammmit that's 4 for 4
I guess I'm gonna have to play a lot of Manhunt and Gears to distance myself from this dude
See what you made me do, Jack?