Slashdot Log In
German Gov To Ban Paintballing After Shooting
Posted by
samzenpus
on Fri May 08, 2009 09:15 PM
from the we-all-fall-down dept.
from the we-all-fall-down dept.
whoever57 writes "In response to the school shooting in March in which 16 people were killed, the German Government
plans to ban all games in which players shoot at each other with pellets. The rationale for this is that 'paintball trivializes violence and risks lowering the threshold for committing violent acts.' Fines could be up to 5,000 euros."
Related Stories
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Really Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)
Come on Germany, you used to be cool.
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, the piece I saw on Euronews yesterday (I think) had the journalist saying that the move was a consequence of recent school shootings and, basically, just a way to uppease certain lobby groups that were demanding stricter gun control rules.
Now, I don't know if it's true, but it does seem like nothing more than a smokescreen manouver on the part of the German government.
It's actually funny, in a way.. I remember the first time I played paintball. Besides being tons of fun, I specifically remember how it struck me, for real, for the first time, just how easy it is to get killed in a combat scenario. One slip up, one moment's distraction, one false move, and you could end up with 4 members of the opposite team lined up in front of you like a firing squad (got blasted with something like 5 shots a piece that time, had to scream at them that I was dead -- corridor negotiation on an abandoned Asylum... man, what a perfect scenario for a match).
That and all the nooks and crannys where a shooter can hide and pick you off without you ever figuring out where he/she was.
Of all the people I know that play (or used to play) paintball, not one of them even owned guns. Yeah, they do have a certain charm, but .. *sigh* Correlation is not causation, anyone? (that is, assuming those recent school shootings even had any connection whatsoever to paintball).
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)
Speaking as a non-American, I'm interested in just when you guys are going to utilise the second amendment you're so fond of for that purpose. My personal bet is this side of never....
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)
I play paintball. You obviously don't.
I know at least two people with military training who also play. I can, and routinely do, tag them both.
It isn't "combat training" of any sort. The weapons don't work the same way - paintball guns are generally pump-action, semi-auto or work via electronic "ramping" systems, which do not resemble fire selection modes on firearms in the slightest. The recoil is practically non-existent. The range is measured in feet instead of meters as would be the case with rifles.
Projectile velocity is around 240 fps, whereas actual firearm projectiles move at anywhere from 1000 fps for pistols to over 3000 for military rifles. Trying to aim a paintball gun using firearm skills or vice versa is a good way to miss. You need to lead a lot more, and correct for dip a lot sooner.
The fields at which you play paintball are generally symmetrical (for speedball), or at least balanced.
About the only combat skill relevant to real life warfare and paintball is cooperation. Both a paintball team and military squad need to communicate, coordinate and cover each other. Since the "angry, but otherwise untrained" people you're talking about commit solo acts of violence, paintball would be useless training for them.
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Interesting)
It's even more ironic that they plan to ban pellet sports. The soldiers in training use lasers, which involve no pellets, and the guns are real and fitted with blanks. So if anything, they are making the more violent/practical sport a legal alternative. Way to go legislature.
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)
From at least one of the Australian tragedies, it can be deduced that military training is more of an issue than paint ball
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Reminds me of something Herman Goering said once (Score:5, Insightful)
Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Funny)
Also, in paintball, bushes are cover :-).
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)
Woah, woah, woah.
I play paintball too. And I disagree with some of your statements.
It isn't "combat training" of any sort.
It can serve as a form of combat training, especially for close-quarters combat. I used to play with some soldiers on an Army base who would train with paintguns for just that reason. They said that the military laser systems were rampant with cheaters and they also wanted the soldiers to feel the sting of being shot. (This was 10 years ago, maybe they have improved the laser systems since then.)
Trying to aim a paintball gun using firearm skills or vice versa is a good way to miss. You need to lead a lot more, and correct for dip a lot sooner.
Paintball really honed my snap shooting skills and I have found that directly translates to shooting real firearms. I find that shooting trap or skeet with my shotgun is almost exactly like shooting a paintgun at a moving target. I also think that it improves defensive pistol shooting where you aren't carefully aiming at a target, but just trying to draw and hit it quickly.
Projectile velocity is around 240 fps
I know Germany keeps the velocity low (210??), but it's 280-285 in the US at insured fields, and a lot of people who play on their own fields turn it up to 300 fps.
That said, I totally agree that in paintball, cooperation is key. The angry or solo players are usually taken out early... unless they are really good.
TFA said that the crazy kid's dad had 15 guns, so I am betting that little Johnny was a pretty good shot... especially when matched up against an unarmed, unsuspecting crowd. Germany needs to reconsider their gun laws, not their paintball laws. I doubt that banning guns would deter a motivated individual anyway.
But you've got to remember that Germany has had a hard-on for paintball for a while. They have ridiculously low velocity limits, you can almost jump out of the way of the paintballs. Also, German paint markers have to be certified and F-stamped or they are considered unregistered firearms.
It kind of sucks for paintballers, but I think that the atrocities of WWII remain in the collective German subconscious to some extent. So it isn't unreasonable that they are hypersensitive about any activity that could even be construed as promoting violence.
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)
It can serve as a form of combat training, especially for close-quarters combat. I used to play with some soldiers on an Army base who would train with paintguns for just that reason. They said that the military laser systems were rampant with cheaters and they also wanted the soldiers to feel the sting of being shot. (This was 10 years ago, maybe they have improved the laser systems since then.)
I'm sorry, feel the sting of being shot? Paintballs leave welts. Gunshots leave holes. That doesn't just "sting".
Unless you meant that as more along the lines of denying cheaters the opportunity to claim they weren't hit, which happens much too often in airsoft matches. With paint or lasers though, it isn't about the sting of being hit, so much as it is about there being physical evidence of a hit.
Paintball really honed my snap shooting skills and I have found that directly translates to shooting real firearms. I find that shooting trap or skeet with my shotgun is almost exactly like shooting a paintgun at a moving target. I also think that it improves defensive pistol shooting where you aren't carefully aiming at a target, but just trying to draw and hit it quickly.
Snap shooting, maybe. Marksmanship, no. And I can get you three guys who know more of shooting than I who I've paintballed with to back me up on this.
Over short distances the difference is lead and dip is going to matter less. You'll be off be a few inches. Medium range, it's more like a few feet. With a shotgun, that might matter a bit less, though (given enough spread).
And anyone used to shooting a paintball marker is going to be in for a rude shock when a shotgun kicks them hard enough to dislocate their shoulder. Recoil control is a really big deal with guns.
I get where you're coming from, but from the sound of it, most of your marksmanship skills come from actual firearms. Somebody who trains on a marker isn't going to have that.
I know Germany keeps the velocity low (210??), but it's 280-285 in the US at insured fields, and a lot of people who play on their own fields turn it up to 300 fps.
We're still talking a full order of magnitude lower than a rifle though, and less than a third the muzzle velocity of a pistol.
That said, I totally agree that in paintball, cooperation is key. The angry or solo players are usually taken out early... unless they are really good.
Which, conveniently, makes the whole "oh, it'll train psychos" argument even more lame. I'd kinda think that paintball would give the loners a chance to make friends with like-minded people. Teamwork can be good for that sometimes.
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Funny)
The range is measured in feet instead of meters as would be the case with rifles.
So rifles are metric! How very 21st Century, perhaps they're more accurate too!
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Funny)
douche
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Funny)
Make you wear a helmet while driving your car.
Parent
Re:Really Germany? (Score:5, Insightful)
Germany, where you can watch two people shit in eachothers mouths while doing backflips, and where you'll get arrested for doing "the gun" with your hand.
Funny thing is, in the US it is exactly the other way round. Dozens of firearms in the house, even automatic ones? Hey, no problem! Dare to show a female nipple on TV? This goes straight to the Supreme Court.
Parent
Haven't these people learned? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
Each time I hear about some retard in office limiting the People's freedom, my treshhold for committing violent acts upon said retard is significantly lowered.
Obviously we should ban such retards from office.
Parent
New black market! (Score:5, Funny)
Psssst! Hey man, want some splat? I'll get you freaky painted.
2 EUR a ball, 20 for a baker's dozen.
Just don't share a dirty gun with your friends.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
What problem? That people kill each other? That's going to be the case no matter what.
According to the article, the last time they tightened gun laws in Germany was in 2002 in response to a guy killing 16 people. So... that's what, 31 people in 7 years? About 4.5 a year? Statistically, you're more likely to win the lottery than be shot by a crazed gunman. Or be struck by lightning. Hell, you take a bigger risk just crossing the street.
This isn't about safety. No, these politicians know exactly what they're doing. They LOVE stuff like this happening. It just gives them one more way to subjugate the public. But you'd think the Germans of all people would understand the risks of having an overly powerful government and a largely unarmed populace.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Interesting)
31 people in 7 years? That's nothing. Germany has something like 1 intentional homicide per 100,000 people (about 1/4 of the USA murder rate, which is about half of the Zimbabwean murder rate ... not that the US needs gun control).
Germany has 82 million people, so that's 820 homicides per year. I am guessing that the biggest offenders will be husbands, and the next biggest offenders will be wives.
I say they should ban marriage - it's obviously a far bigger cause of violence than paintball games.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
Exclude drug-related murders from both Germany and the US. The remaining violence statistics are on par.
The "War on (some) Drugs" is the most common proximal cause of murder in the US. Firearms are just the most popular tool for accomplishing a bit of drug fueled violence.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
Drugs have about as much to do with the violence as the guns do.
Guns and drugs are inanimate objects that don't do anything with out a person's input.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
It's about motivation. If drugs were legal, there wouldn't be vast amounts of profits for the drug dealers, because American corporations have made profiting from anything an art form. You get the beer companies and the cigarette companies fighting over legalized pot, and you stop the real assholes from murdering over it.
Burger King doesn't get into block wars with McDonald's just because they opened up a new restaurant right across the street.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
As much as I hate to see paintball and airsoft banned... I don't see how this is the government subjagating its population. More like being a stupid hysterical parent (of which I have seen dozens in response to paintball over the years).
Just because this isn't effective, doesn't mean it isn't well intentioned. I'm sure the reason they're doing this is out of fear and outrage not some nefarious plot to supress the paintball revolution that was slowly fermenting in their borders.
Stupid? Yes. Ignorant? Yes. Useless? Yes. Evil plot by the government? Not likely. The government is run by people just like you and me. Most normal people think paintball is a strange and violent game played by a bunch of sociopaths. Normal people also think the world is 7,000 years old. Think they're more likely to get their identiy stolen by buying something on amazon than by their brother in law. Think only children play video games. Think photoshop only runs on a mac.... etc etc etc...
And who can really blame them in this instance. When else would you think it's normal for two people to be eating lunch and excitedly recounting how "He totally didn't see me coming. He was just sitting there and I snuck up behind him and shot him in the head. SPLAT!"
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
Oh, it wasn't a problem for the Germans. It was a problem for the Jews, Gypsies, homosexuals, and other undesirables who were largely unarmed when the government came to take them away. And this is all within living memory for many. How quickly some people forget...
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Interesting)
This is a living memory only for a few old people, the young people and probably even all of the ruling class has heard about it but it's part of history rather not remembered just like the templar knights and the inquisition.
My grandfather remembers it since he was arrested and sent to Bergen-Belsen, escaped, betrayed and sent to Buchenwald because he was in the resistance (sabotage) but he's 89 years old. He was also in the Belgian Congo and as he described it: shot blacks with spears off a bridge with a machine gun while being dropped by parachute to extract a "diddling" priest, the only white man in the village while there was an unusual amount of "mulatto" children. I had a friend that has lived it because of his religion (even went through the Death March) but he died last year.
What I think is the main problem is 1) education: the gritty details are not being revealed to children because they believe they are too shocking while a lot of the media around it is romanticized or only described from one side (the winners side or what the soldiers had to go through to win) 2) shame: the survivors are to this day (with exceptions) ashamed to talk about it, the people or nations that went along with the nazi's (Germany, the Netherlands, the Catholic Church, Switzerland) are ashamed/afraid to admit wrongdoing. 3) Hitlers empire and the power he exerted over people is a wet dream for many politicians and rulers, if you analyze the political standpoints (without taking into account the blind hatred for minorities) you'll notice that politicians have been trying to do the same thing in a different way over and over again. What he promised was good jobs for everybody and to get rid of whomever seems to be the boogeyman for the current problems in exchange for their basic rights and freedoms all wrapped in a thin veil of hope for the children and pride in their own country.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
Read up about the Warsaw Ghetto Uprising [wikipedia.org] and then tell me fighting a losing battle never does any good. A few poorly armed Jews managed to hold off the the Wehrmacht for nearly a month. Sure, they lost in the end. But would it have been so easy for the Nazis to round up their victims if they faced such a battle every time they had tried?
Remember that between 11 and 17 million people were killed in the Holocaust. Do you really believe that if every one of these people had a gun and used it against their oppressors, there would have been nearly as many murdered as there were? Look at the bigger picture.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
If the rebels in the Warsaw Ghetto accomplished nothing simply because they lost, then neither did the Third Reich.
Perhaps you will have the foresight and good fortune to flee a tyrannical government when you finally recognize your own to be one. Maybe to you the possibility of fighting back seems hopeless, and compliance--or even collaboration--is the only answer. I, for one, will not be rounded up so easily. I wish I could say the same for the rest of my countrymen, for my own sake if nothing else. But sadly many of them, like yourself, have forgotten or are willfully ignorant of the lessons of history. Against a single criminal or a tyrannical war machine, a gun can be the great equalizer.
And for the record, the Nazis outnumbered the resistance fighters by a ratio of between 2:1 and 7:1. And the Nazis had tanks and an effectively unlimited supply of weapons at their disposal. You dishonor the fighters by trivializing their accomplishments.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:4, Insightful)
Your definition of "accomplishment" is bizarre and self-serving. If the only thing that makes anything worthwhile to you is immediate success in the endeavor, then we have no common ground on this matter.
I stand behind everything I've said. The only thing you seem to be concerned with is short term well being. I find this attitude contemptible. If you would like to meet I will tell you the same thing in person.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
Having a gun in a fight works if the fight is nearly fair. Two men with pistols each have a decent chance of winning a gunfight. We aren't talking about that here. We're talking about a civilian against soldiers, plural. Guns don't help there. Other weapons do.
If every group of soldiers suffered just one serious casualty for every group of jews or whatever group they were assigned to bring in, morale would plummet to the point of mutiny pretty quickly. Even if soldiers ended up slaughtering everyone in each group, there would still be a pretty good chance of them taking one casualty in the process.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
No, if everyone the SS tried to round up had been armed and aware losing meant a near sureity of death for them and theirs they would have taken over the country. Hell, even if only 10% had been ready and willing to die for the cause they would have won, guns or no guns.
History is filled with examples of asymetric warfare where armed fanatics bested or held their own against huge numerical and military advantages. The vast majority of soldiers in every regular army aren't killers nor eager to die. They mostly just go with the flow and try not to get shot. Except for a small number of elites they are useless without their command structure and the psychological comfort of group membership.
Fanatics or people with their back to the wall don't suffer the same disadvantages. When failure is as good as death for you and yours you'll fight back even in isolation. Military hardware is great for defeating armies but most of it is useless against a scattered population of individual killers. That's why a small number of insurgents in Iraq can keep hundreds of thousands of our troops occupied and even then most insurgents aren't true fanatics or up against a wall. Even a thousand men ready to kill and die to stop you is a grave threat even if they are armed with sticks.
But of course the upshot of this is that I agree with your conclusion. Guns wouldn't have made a difference, only knowledge would have. Even without guns the holocaust would have been a fraction of the size had the victims really believed they were to be sent to their death. On the other hand without that belief guns would be confiscated before anyone was willing to use them.
--------
Let me put it this way. No matter how racist and unfair you think the police where you live are how likely are you to shot back if they come and demand your guns under a new law? Would you have fired back to stop them from taking you to a japanese internment camp in WWII?
If your answer is no why would you think it would have gone down and differently during the holocaust? Maybe during less organized genocides but not the holocaust.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:4, Informative)
Haven't these people learned that they are just going to cause a much bigger problem then they are trying to solve? It saddens me to see how they are going after everything but the cause of it. Banning paintballing isn't going to solve a thing, stuff like this is still going to happen. Next thing you know they are going to try and ban all FPS games over there. Get to the root of the problem, not something they "think" is the cause.
Actually some aspects of the proposed laws do indeed get to the root of the problem. For instance tightening the restrictions on how registered guns are stored (the gun in this shooting was registered by the father but was not locked away -- had it been, this particular shooting certainly would have been much more difficult). As it is, there's talk of punishing the father through "involuntary manslaughter" under the existing laws (because the father knew his son was depressed and should have known this might happen) but that seems like vague retribution for the incident having occurred rather than unambiguous preventative legislation instructing gun owners that their guns must be securely locked away. Banning paintball is an odd reaction, but so far this is only a proposed bill -- AFAIK it's usual for proposed bills to be debated and to have things that turn out to be a bit silly taken out of them on the way through parliament (the Bundestag).
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Insightful)
What is the root of the problem? I know it's not video games, music, or any other activity or media that they could honestly care to ban. As far as I can tell it's just that a certain small portion of the population aren't mentally stable and would actually bring a gun to a school, church, etc. and start unloading on people.
There's no real way to prevent it from happening short of a big brother government with the observational powers mentioned in 1984. Short of that, we just aren't able to tell who's just a little strange and who's going to blast his classmates. People will always like to say that they thought little Billy was a little off, but they've probably thought that about hundreds of other people who didn't go postal.
I'm sure we can identify some risk factors, but there's no way we can possible identify some root cause until we have a much better understanding of the human brain. There're plenty of mentally unbalanced people who don't go around shooting up the neighborhood. Until they actually do go over the edge, are we supposed to lock them up based on the assumption that they'll do something horrible? If that's the case we might as well lock up every woman based on the assumption that she's more than capable of engaging in acts of prostitution and selling her body.
As far as I'm concerned the only possible solution is to keep these people from acquiring the weapons that allow them to inflict high numbers of casualties or to allow people carry sufficient protection to put one of these people down when they snap. Neither of these are particularly easy solutions (or even good) in my opinion. Perhaps someone else has a better solution of eliminating some root cause that I'm just not seeing or solving the problem in some way that's not a complete pain in the ass.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Interesting)
When people in our society believe they can't as individuals, make a difference, it's bad for all of us. "Powerless" people become apathetic and toss in the towel, which means others have to carry them on their backs, or they become hostile and try to tear down a system they can't understand and don't believe they can control. This attitude pervades our world. Some of its symptoms are declining productivity and senseless violence.
Lynette "Squeaky" Fromme was one of those who became hostile. She attempted to gun down President Gerald Ford. After her arrest, she explained, "When people around you treat you like a child and pay no attention to the things you say, you have to do something!"
The "something" Squeaky did was psychopathic and self-destructive. Her self-perception was miles off base. She didn't realize that she had other alternatives that were socially acceptable and legal. She didn't realize that a criminal act, regardless of its goal, is almost always an abuse of power.
I think it is a problem in society of people not seeing things clearly. It is the same problem that we have with poverty: people living in the slums could pick themselves up, get an education, get out and greatly improve their lives, but it is hard for them to see the path to accomplishing that. Sometimes it is hard for them to believe they are even capable of it, so they stay stuck where they are. The two are often related: people killing each other because they don't understand how the world is, and people remaining in poverty because they don't understand how the world is.
Life sucks, but you can change things. We need to get that message out to people. It will be a lot more effective than banning guns.
Parent
Re:Haven't these people learned? (Score:5, Interesting)
By LTC (RET) Dave Grossman, author of "On Killing."
"Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident. Most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.
I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin's egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers, and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful.? For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.
"Then there are the wolves and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.
"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf."
If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen, a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath, a wolf.
But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? What do you have then? A sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero's path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed.
Let me expand on this old soldier's excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools.
The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.
Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa."
Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.
Parent
From the article... (Score:5, Insightful)
This shows the gun registration laws work! If only we made it illegal to shoot people in the first place, all our problems would be solved. Oh wait...
I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry (Score:5, Funny)
But I will say I find this entirely in keeping with the policy of the German government. They have similarly ridiculous laws in place regarding video games and other entertainment, so while this new one seems utterly idiotic, it is at least a logical extension of what they've already done.
At this rate, they'll be banning soccer next. Wouldn't want those hooligans "lowering the threshold for violent acts", now, would we?
Ah, yes. (Score:5, Insightful)
This is sure to succeed, just like banning the swastika has completely removed any trace of right-wing hate groups in Germany.
People are inherently violent (Score:5, Insightful)
Backward Thinking (Score:5, Insightful)
When I was 15 or so, I wanted to play paintball. My parents were initially resistant to the idea. They thought it was militant and would be a poor influence on me. I learned quickly that it's damned well easy to get shot and the welts those things leave don't let the memory fade. Rather than thinking, "Hey self, let's go join the army and shoot people for real," I thought "If those were real bullets, I'd be dead inside of 5 minutes along with all of my friends."
So, yes, I did learn a thing or two about taking down mansized targets with horribly inaccurate, slow moving projectiles with no ability to penetrate cover. What I also learned was that I am not invincible, I play by the same rules as everyone else, and I want to be nowhere near real bullets fired in anger.
Re:Backward Thinking (Score:5, Interesting)
I had a similar experience with Airsoft(plastic BB guns essentially)when I was about 17. I also realized how much proper instruction in gun safety was after several of my friends shot themselves accidentally. I had been taught about pistols and rifles as I grew up, and my father took me to the shooting range a few times over the years, so I had the safety training they didnt get. If they had decided to pick up and play with a real gun they found, they could have seriously injured themselves.
Back on topic, I do think to a degree, these war games can be an encouragement for using violence to work out your frustration. I continue play airsoft regularly, with about a dozen people for years now. Inevitably someone will start to take things too seriously, so we have rules in place where we can send them off to cool down. That being said, I think banning it because some might have obvious mental instabilities that would make this lead them to shoot people with real guns is absurd. Will they ban toy swords and water guns next?
Parent
Cowboys and Indians (Score:5, Insightful)
Years later, I amused myself with computer games, including a fair number of first-person shooters. Spent many an enjoyable hour playing Descent and Quake 3. Descent with the PC hooked up to my stereo was awesome -- those fireballs on the screen looked pretty damn good, and, by God, the booming from the speakers was way cool.
I'm 44 now and haven't killed anyone yet, but who knows, eh, what kind of violent rage was set into motion by all that mock fighting, only waiting to turn me into a murderous monster like that kid in Winnenden, Germany? OMG, I'm a ticking time bomb!
*shakes head in disbelief*
we should promote science (Score:5, Insightful)
Instead of (correctly) complaining that "correlation != causation" or "this won't work!!", could we use examples like these to promote science education?
Will banning paintball cause a decrease in school shootings? Did you know that's a scientifically tractable question?
When a tragedy like this occurs, the public demands a political reaction. More education on the only known way to get at causation - the scientific method - might cause people to demand political reactions that work.
The pussification of the West (Score:5, Insightful)
Here's how it usually goes down with these situations, aside from the case where the person isn't a sociopath:
1) Guy gets marginalized and picked on.
2) School knows about it and does nothing.
3) Guy gets subjected to violence.
4) The authorities do nothing despite the basic fact that we know from common sense and scientific observation that eventually an organism will lash out in self-defense if not protected.
5) Guy may defend himself, at which rate the authorities will come down hard on him because as we all know "violence never solves anything."
6) The authorities will earnestly pat themselves on the back as guardians of civilization for having stopped a victim from exercising force in self-defense.
7) Guy lashes out with disproportionate force because pent up frustration made his temper 5x more explosive it would have been if causality had been allowed to run its course between the attackers and the victim.
8) The authorities will claim it couldn't have been stopped.
Violence solves things splendidly with bullies. In the early 1960s, victims of bullying were allowed to beat the shit out of the bully, and the authorities didn't even think about taking up for the bully unless it was so extreme as to be a violent crime.
You want less violent shootings? Let teenage boys shoot guns (real guns), play video games and beat the shit out of each other when one attacks the other. When violence usually brings more violence back on the perpetrator, people usually are less inclined to use violence. Violent people who are quick to use force are not wired like normal people, and the best way to restrain them is to create a culture that will respond to them violently when they act out.
In related news... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:In Other News: (Score:5, Insightful)
Fingers will be stumped, penises removed... You know.. to prevent the rapes and the sexual harassment..
Soon they'll find use for the banned sporks and start scooping out eyes from sockets at birth --- to prevent people from seeing things that they *might* interact with in ways that *might* have negative outcomes.
It will only end when The Matrix is fully developed so nobody can actually be harmed.
Ban fire, it won't save your house. Ban weed, millions don't give a shit. Ban guns, the innocent lose power to fight for their rights, criminals blow a line and move forward w/ guns like it never mattered.... Ban piracy, all your songs are now belong to soundcat.
Ban words, people still say them. Ban religion, like that would ever work... Ban skittles, some jerkoff with a recipe will *STILL* make them and teach his kids how to do it out of spite and our human nature to do whatever we truly want to do.
Ban meteors... Ban terrorism... Ban lies... Ban polygamy.... Ban swine flu.
I swear, you could ban Dick Flavored Pizza and somewhere, somehow, in S. Korea, a guy will get a pizza that tastes like a dick.
Banning paintball guns and airsoft won't bring 16 people back to life. I'm sure anyone involved wants to be noticed for caring (hence this stupid law idea)... But sometimes its ok to say 'such is life' and move on. Yes, bad things happen. Sympathize, accept, move on.
Just don't let all that emotion force you to forget to think.
Parent
Re:What about banning... (Score:5, Funny)
Guns? Cars? Hookers? Cigarretes? Diseases? Stupidity?
First they came for the paintballers, and I did not speak up, for I did not play paintball.
Then they came for the hookers, and I was unable to get a date...
Parent
Re:Problem still exists (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, movies are probably worse. They teach that the main character can kill dozens without getting a scratch. Airsoft and paintball teaches you that you suck with a gun. Which is more glamorous in the eyes of a downtrodden teen?
Parent