[Farseer_Del]

How logicial. One nutter gets a hold of his father's (legal) firearms, goes on a shooting rampage, and the German Government decides to ban Paintball, Laser Tag, and similar sports because they "trivialise and encourage violence." :

I'd say things like "not to trivialise the deaths" or whatever before I begin airing my views on this one, but the trouble is they're already being trivialised by the German government by banning something completely unrelated. If someone is a loony and wants to go out and harm people, he isn't going to be driven to it by shooting pellets of paint at people in a regulated environment, and these kinds of thing are rare to start with. They're just high-profile for obvious reasons.

The gunman didn't have any notable links to paintball that I've seen, and this knee-jerk ban culture based entirely on perceived threats, moral panic, and downright undemocratic action is too large. It does nothing to prevent another incident, but it just makes them look good to the uninformed masses.

It infuriates me. All the big bugbears of the moment get attacked and slammed, often because it's the "in" thing that helps a government pander to populist media and public perceptions. Yet rarely has the legislation been based on reliable evidence that there is a genuine threat to the public that warrants such draconian legislation, and there is virtually no evidence such legislation ever has effect to stop it again. The UK has banned most firearms and heavily regulated knives yet gun and knife murders are almost never out of the papers.

This one is all because this incident at heart is impossible to stop. If someone is determined enough, even in a firearms free society they will find a means of mass murder: For instance, the Akihabara Massacre in which the murder weapons were a truck and a knife. Not to mention illegal firearms and home-made weapons like bombs of course. The pen of legislation may think itself mightier than the sword but even the insane can improvise to deadly effect.

But what does everyone else think? Are the German government justified? Or are they making a scapegoat to try and look like something is being done to stop the unstoppable?

[Shas vre Tau kais]

I agree that the German government seems to be being stupid about this, but one thing:

Originally Posted by The Not Quite as Dark Mewsevelt

The UK has banned most firearms and heavily regulated knives yet gun and knife murders are almost never out of the papers.

I have one problem with this comment, it is that unlike the paintballing which is the thing the Germans are banning, guns and knives can genuinely be linked to shooting and stabbing. Yes it still happens, but not as much as in America where they don't regulate weapons so strictly. You don't notice the difference in the UK because instead of quite a few murders that get reported quite widely, we get a handful of murders that are prone to being national news.

Newspapers are not an accurate way of measuring crime, thanks to the extra awareness provided by newspapers the majority of the UK public seems to be under the impression that crime here is on the increase. The actual statistics, on the other hand, tell a completely different story with crime on a steady decrease since the 1990s.

Yes banning paintball and laser tag is silly, but you're being naive if you genuinely believe that banning actual weapons doesn't work.

[omegatron]

Originally Posted by The Not Quite as Dark Mewsevelt

But what does everyone else think? Are the German government justified? Or are they making a scapegoat to try and look like something is being done to stop the unstoppable?

And what's next? banning violent games even if it's pre rated ? banning movies which depicts violence?

As you've said that's a knee jerk reaction from someone who doesn't understand the 'item' of the issue. Obviously the author of the bill gathered his 'knowledge' from hearsays and biased reports.

One psycho kid even if he's linked to the hobby (airsoft/paintball) doesn't justify the ban. Only if you have a significant number, say 10-15% of the hobbyist population and the trends is increasing while the hobby is isolated as the 'aggravator' does the ban justified.

I collect airsoft (TM and CA) models.

[Dangerman]

Another simplistic solution to a complex situation. Some people forget that the square peg does not fit into the round hole.

Paintball is a regulated game that simulates a war like environment. It is an outlet where we can satisfy the urge of aggression and war. I believe strongly that humans will always get into conflict because we all have varying ideals that clash. Hence paintball is a regulated outlet that satisfies a aggressive urge where at the end of the day no one is dead and everyone can share stories of heroism and embarrassment.

To ban this outlet will only push these urges into different outlets that my not be beneficial to society.

[Farseer_Del]

Originally Posted by Mr X

I agree that the German government seems to be being stupid about this, but one thing:

I have one problem with this comment, it is that unlike the paintballing which is the thing the Germans are banning, guns and knives can genuinely be linked to shooting and stabbing. Yes it still happens, but not as much as in America where they don't regulate weapons so strictly. You don't notice the difference in the UK because instead of quite a few murders that get reported quite widely, we get a handful of murders that are prone to being national news.

Newspapers are not an accurate way of measuring crime, thanks to the extra awareness provided by newspapers the majority of the UK public seems to be under the impression that crime here is on the increase. The actual statistics, on the other hand, tell a completely different story with crime on a steady decrease since the 1990s.

Yes banning paintball and laser tag is silly, but you're being naive if you genuinely believe that banning actual weapons doesn't work.

My point isn't that banning the weapons doesn't work (Though in a way, it is true in that simply banning an object used in crimes does not prevent that type of crime ever happening, legislation needs to be enforced and supported.), but that the media representation is, as you say, is disproportionate to the instances of the crimes. High-profile. High profile leading to knee-jerk, badly planned legislation. Additionally, that part was to back up my statement that this kind of legislation is often ineffective.

So, legislation that is probably doing nothing to fix the "problem" which may not even exist... just like this German move. You picked out an out of context point I'm afraid, but partly my fault for being a little unclear as to my intent. The shootings and stabbings happen DESPITE the legislation, therefore the legislation is ineffective by it's intent. It doesn't mean there's no point to it, just that it is being let down. Often because rather than simply trying to make current laws work better, Gordon and Company simply make new laws.

New Labour have created hundreds of new offences, many of them either previously covered by other legislation, sometimes even conflicting with that legislation, or just a knee jerk reaction to a famous front page crime. If they had simply enforced existing laws rather than making new ones, crime figures would drop even further. But as it is, they've bowed to the media pressure and inflated their own figures with new crimes.

This German move is really the same thing. Just a scapegoat to try and divert attention from something, but in this case, it's no failure of legislation or government. It's just a tragic act of a single madman, something virtually no one can predict or really prevent.

[Vyrion]

Unfortunately, my solution requires a mix of time travel and murder. The true travesty here is the real "trivilization and encourager of violence" is the chemical propellant weapon itself. Any a**hole can walk into a place with a gun and is instantly invincible. S/he holds the power to destroy or permit life in that instant, because of that unobtrusive little piece of metal. The real source of violence, and enabler of violence, is the firearm. Killing someone with a knife is a lot more difficult, there is a struggle, and it takes some serious brains and skill to actually kill someone in hand-to-hand combat (provided they're not a kid, sick, or old). More than that, it takes guts. When you're the one holding the gun, you're in control, you own that person's ability to live. With a knife, it's not that simple. You have to fight to end that life, and if you've got to fight for it, it must really be worth ending.

Now obviously, I'd be all for getting rid of all guns forever, but such a process is unfeasible and impossible. I don't have a solution, though I do agree that banning paintball and lasertag and similar games is the dumbest thing I've ever heard of. If anything, I'd encourage the playing of paintball: If this kid's got a cross to bear and feels like taking it out, why not take it to the paintball arena and shoot people with a gelatin capsule full of food colouring? In comparison to shooting up a school with a MAC9, it's (relatively) painless, no one dies or suffers serious permanent injury. If anything, paintball is a stress reliever.

However, I feel that the true fault lies with the father for his failure to properly indoctrinate his kid in the morality of the gun, when it is acceptable to use it, and when it is not. Shooting rampages are definitely unacceptable. Hunting is not. Instead of locking up the gun and hiding it form the kid, he should have taken his son hunting, teach him gun safety, etc.

To ban paintball and laser tag is a dumb move by the German government, and it's taking jobs away from many small businesses, not to mention party opportunities The true source of trivialization of violence is the gun itself. The enabler in this instance, is the father who failed to educate his son in the "way of the gun". Paintballers and laser taggers shouldn't suffer for this kid's and his father's mistakes.

[Tyndmyr]

Originally Posted by Mr X

I agree that the German government seems to be being stupid about this, but one thing:

I have one problem with this comment, it is that unlike the paintballing which is the thing the Germans are banning, guns and knives can genuinely be linked to shooting and stabbing. Yes it still happens, but not as much as in America where they don't regulate weapons so strictly. You don't notice the difference in the UK because instead of quite a few murders that get reported quite widely, we get a handful of murders that are prone to being national news.

Newspapers are not an accurate way of measuring crime, thanks to the extra awareness provided by newspapers the majority of the UK public seems to be under the impression that crime here is on the increase. The actual statistics, on the other hand, tell a completely different story with crime on a steady decrease since the 1990s.

Yes banning paintball and laser tag is silly, but you're being naive if you genuinely believe that banning actual weapons doesn't work.

It's equally silly to compare across cultures...Yes, the US has a high crime rate compared to a great many countries...but the swiss have weapons in essentially every household, and have low crime. On the other side of the fence, the japanese have strict gun control, and low crime.

What does this tell us? Weapons are, at best, only a single factor in violent crime. Culture is vastly more important.

Compare within the same culture...for example, if part of the country bans weapons and part does not, what happens to the crime rates in each part? This is a vastly better test. In the US, this test does not bode well for gun control advocates.


Banning video games, paintball, laser tag, etc is all stupid. It's not even addressing the problem itself, merely trying to address perceptions. They don't even attempt to show the chain of causality between what they are banning and the crime.

If you want to reduce violence, you can try reducing conflict in society. Poverty is a cause of crime. Mental illness is a cause of crime. Disagreements over property is a source of crime. Lack of law enforcement can allow crime to spread. Terribly written laws that are overly broad, or vague are a source of crime. How many of you know that it's a crime not to pay sales tax to your state when you buy something in another state(in most US states anyway)? Does anyone actually do that? Hell no.

Writing terrible laws to make criminals out of people that are, currently, generally normal, decent citizens is the exact opposite of helpful.

[Shas vre Tau kais]

There does seem to be a choice that governments must make, do you;

a) Try to remove the means to commit a crime.

or

b) Try to remove the desire to commit a crime

Personally I'd try to both restrict weapon ownership and remove the desire.

You can't shoot someone if you don't have a gun, and you also won't shoot someone if you don't want to.

[Wargamer]

In an act of historical irony, a country that witnessed the most appauling genocide performs stupidty that makes genocide seem a desirable option. :*

This desire to wrap us all up in cotton wool is not the way to solve the problems of violence and murder. If anything, it only makes it worse. Think back to the "Golden Age" of Europe; Britain ruled half the planet, and what we didn't own was mostly owned by the French, Germans and Spanish. We weren't afraid of anyone, because the biggest, meanest bastards on the planet were all wearing our uniforms. We taught ourselves that if you want something, you take it, and we taught the world if you want something that belongs to an Englishmen you're screwed because the Wrath of God is nothing compared to our combined police and armed forces.

Back in the day, serious criminals got jumped by the coppers, got the shit kicked out of them, flung in a cell and left to rot whilst we arranged to deport them to Australia. Now the police are too busy filing paperwork to catch criminals, and when they do convict people it's the victim, because he punched a would-be mugger (which is assault; far more serious a crime than theft).

We're being led to believe that everyone is out to get us; that every Muslim will bomb us, that every Black is a drug-dealer, and that everyone wearing a hoody, living on a council estate or under the age of 16 will rob us to fuel their drug-addition and binge drinking.

Any country that wants to curb the 'rising crime rate' can do so quite easily; instruct the police that whenever a concerned citizen drags a Chav in whose just been beaten half to death with a crowbar because he was taking a shit on someone's front lawn, write on the paperwork "fell down some stairs" and book him.

As to the more disturbing, but far less common cases of what can only be described as unhinged rampages, let me put it this way; no normal kid has ever gone on a killing spree because of violent movies, violent videogames, violent sports or the fact his parents never blocked Teen-Pussy-Party-Dot-Net. No normal kid does this. The answer, therefore, is these kids are not normal! No matter what you do, they are already unhinged. The answer isn't to ban everything that contains the letter L in the hope it'll magically make them better, the answer is to invest in ways to spot the psychopaths early enough to stop them from going crazy, and then invest in ways to try and treat them.


* = In the interests in cleansing the genepool, anyone who takes that line literally should consider taking a long walk of a short pier.

[Tyndmyr]

Originally Posted by Mr X

There does seem to be a choice that governments must make, do you;

a) Try to remove the means to commit a crime.

or

b) Try to remove the desire to commit a crime

Personally I'd try to both restrict weapon ownership and remove the desire.

You can't shoot someone if you don't have a gun, and you also won't shoot someone if you don't want to.

If I want to kill someone badly enough that I don't care about the rap for murder, I highly doubt that the fact that my weapons are also illegal will be a concern.