March 5, 2008
When 14-year-old Stefan Pakeerah (left) was brutally murdered in 2004, there were claims that his killer, 17-year-old Warren LeBlanc, was inspired to commit the crime by playing the original Manhunt video game.That position has largely been discredited over the years. A Scotland Yard investigation of the crime showed that, while Pakerrah himself owned a copy of the game, his killer did not.
Despite that finding, the Leicester Mercury reports that British Prime Minister Gordon Brown will meet with Stefan Pakeerah's mother today to discuss their mutual concerns over violent video games.
The game violence issue is very much front-and-center in British politics these days as the Prime Minister's government awaits the report of Dr. Tanya Byron, who has been studying the effects of games and the Internet on children. Byron's report is due later this month.
Also meeting with Brown today are a pair of video game critics from Parliament, Keith Vaz and Julian Brazier. Vaz spoke of the Pakeerah murder:
Stefan was a young, innocent boy with a promising future. This was snatched from him in a gruesome and horrific attack. I want to discuss with the Prime Minister what can be done to stop these games being sold.
Comments
If anyone knows, please pass it round.
thanks.
PS Browns from Labour Gov, though its hard to tell the difference anymore. Its more like the Tax Everyone Gov. I'm pretty sure this enquiry is merely an introduction - not to banning as that could impact business (taxes) and games being sold ( taxes ).
no, this is an intro to a new 'protect our children' tax. Kind of like the Green Tax which does nothing but stop the poorer of the country from being able to drive or fly - leaving the rich and gov officials nice empty roads and skies.
I'm thinking perhaps it will inflate the tax of 18+ games so that each game costs £100- (1/4 game, 3/4 Tax ), but its ok to tax this industry because we're protecting the children... no dont ask how... no no, just pay please......
Oxymoronic statement of the year award, talk about the first half of the sentence containing no connection whatsoever to the second half.
In politics, self promotion is worth more than pesky facts.
Not true. Thompson both looks and sounds like a wanker.. Oh wait, Vaz does too.
Of course, this is all publicity and politics. It should be interesting though, although I think we all know what they are going to say.
Of course, it would be a good idea to actually enforce the ratings. I'm pretty certain it would be a lot easier for a 12 year old to buy a copy of GTA than Deathwish. Clearer labelling isn't going to help. just a perception that games can be every bit as violent as movies.
This comes shortly on the report of one of these guys mentioning rapeing games and this murder together, and people in his own government shot him down on both.
I really hope the boy's mother slaps the guy and tells him to stop bringing up the games her child was playing as they don't have any effect on what the murderer did.
What are these people trying to distract people from that they keep wiggling the "violent gamer" puppet?
WTF? Can you push any agenda now just by referring to a tragedy that has nothing to do with it?
This is an incredibly stupid thing. I have every sympathy for the parents of Stefan Pakeerah, but they have no expertise or qualifications to give an opinion in this matter. Even worse, their view of the matter has been skewed by the fact that their loss has been tainted by all of the alarmists and anti-game brigade (one who shall remain nameles went so far as to contact them to point out the alleged connection). Their emotional baggage stops them from being able to look at this issue objectively and I'm concerned that this meeting is going to push the British Prime Minister into taking some kind of ill-considered action on the matter. If you were a politician, would you risk appearing to ignore the advice and feelings of 2 citizens who have lost their son?
This is why juries are screened. Personal opinion and experience will colour your perspective and affect your decisions. There is no way that the video game industry can get fair treatment when things like this happen.
It will boil down to the sympathy vote. Listening to the proper research, taking into account the police findings that the game had nothing to do with the murder and that the motive was robbery in order to fund a drug habit, or even common sense will unfortunately not win out in the public eye against the tears of a bereaved parent.
Perhaps I'm being a little callous here, these people have suffered a terrible loss. Put it this way however. Imagine that you are a tall black man who has been falsely accused of rape. The jury for your trial contains 12 women who have been victims of rape in the past by tall black men. Are you going to get a fair trial?
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/leicestershire/3538066.stm
Not so innocent now is he?
Unable to determine a causal link between violent video games and actual physical violence, members of Parliament are now suggesting that violent video games inherently possess an attractive force, similar to magnetism, that seems to attract physical violence.
When questioned, expert violent video game's experts, Jack Thompson and MP Keith Vaz, stated that they knew the attractive force always existed. Thompson and Vaz quoted one Dr. Leroy Jenkins of MIT, "get out of my office or I'll have you arrested" as the determining factor in their study. "The doctor didn't explicity state that violent video games can attract physical violence, but I believe he made his point" Thompson remarked after burning a "war bouquet" that video gamers around the world sent him. "Those flower were sent to harass me" Thompson glibbly remarked before skipping down the streets and holding hands with Vaz.
Not everyone agrees though, experts around the world have remarked that the claims made by Vaz and Thompson are dubious. Frequent GP poster Majestic_12_x stated "how the **** do you blame violent video games when it was the ****ing victim that owned the game"? Many others remain skeptical and simply blame this on PM Gordon Brown trying to brown nose his way in order to gain "public sympathy" despite the fact that the violent video game was an absolute non-factor in the crime.
Next Headline: Are Politicians Trying To Use False Sympathy To Gain Public Approval?
Yes, says Dr. Leroy Jenkins of MIT.
It's fairly obvious this is more a case of violent people liking violent things rather then vice versa. What this reminds me of is something from Dr. Who. People point out that wereever the Doctor goes, there is death and destruction. It's a valid observation, but draws entirely the wrong conclusion because you can't identify the relationship from a correlation.
It's tugging on your heart strings to obtain your sympathy. All I can relly say to this Brown meeting her is PR STUNT! PR STUNT!PR STUNT!
If violent games are bad then they are both bad too since they are trying to profit on Stefan's death. And I really hate Keith Vaz now, he wouldn't help me in my dissertation when I sent him questions over CAnis Canem Edit and the Stefan case.
Brown has bigger issues to worry about anyway.
like...
mental illness?
Ladied and gentlemen of the British games industry: you're screwed. Get out of the country while you can.
/b
Average Politician: "Facts that i don't like?? Those don't exist. That's funny."
1. they use his death to further both their's and the PM's cause,
&
2. the mother at least knew the kid had dealings with the older boy. If she knew he was dangerous, then I hope that teaches her a ****ing lesson.
The whole thing reeks of bad parenting, and the mother is just as guilty as LeBlanc.
This is the epitome of the ridiculousness of the whole video game violence "debate." Here we have the horrific murder of an innocent boy, with the whole violent video games debate seemingly tacked onto the end as if this Vaz guy is just using the murder as fodder for his platform.
It's like a schizophrenic conclusion. "Murder! Horror! Attack! Innocence snatched!
...Oh, and, uh, ban violent video games."
"Okay, I find it IMPOSSIBLE to believe nobody told these people the real “role” Manhunt played in this whole thing (the victim was the one who played the game). Why are these politicians still running with an angle THEY KNOW IS FALSE?"
Because facts and hard evidence mean nothing, absolutely nothing, to a politician. As long as they can keep their voting base in fear of some "great evil", and then claim that they want to "protect everyone from the great evil" to keep them voting, then nothing else is of any consequence to them.
One, I find it very hard to sympathise with Pakeerah's parents because they obviously weren't very good at their job. They let their son get involved with boys much older than him, play 18-rated videogames even though their son was 14 (I wonder if anyone's taken them to task for that yet? Maybe the point could be raised at the Commons) and overlook his situation to the point that he was actually killed because of how deep he was in with these drug dealers. They are hypocrites, because they supported violent games getting into the hands of underage children when they let their son play Manhunt.
Two, Pakeerah was not "a young, innocent boy with a promising future." He was up to his neck in drug dealing and other crimes at the age of just 14. God knows what he'd've been like once he'd hit 20. So no. I resent this whole episode being spun as an anti-videogame anecdote when really that's the last thing people should have been concentrating on.
kid was involved with crazy ass drug dealers, but this freakin' video game was to blame? if this were the sixties, it would be comics and elvis....if it were the eighties it would be heavy metal....people need to realize that bad people do bad things because life made them that way or because they chose to be that way. like i said before, it's a lack of faith in humanity and a lack of seeing the reality of things.
Unless they are able to put aside their entirely meaningless emotional response to things, the families and victims of crime, ANY crime, have no place in the discussions about the causes of it.
This is because they are unable, largely, to put aside the only natural desire for revenge and to "fix the problem".
This goes far beyond the video game debate and into the disturbing trend of law enforcement and criminal justice systems the world over to ensure that the victims understandable, natural, but irrelevant, emotional response to what has been done to them does not influence the outcome of trials and who is arrested, and the treatment they receive once they have paid their dues to society.
Am I the only one not getting this?
In the case of the victim's mother, I do understand it.. she is searching for a reason her son died, that is NOT her failing to raise a law abiding citizen, nor that her son was just a bad person involved with bad people.
Very few parents, anywhere in the world, in any situation, want to think that they have failed and their children are bad people.. it is hard wired into our brains to love our children on a level that means we find these concepts hard to deal with.
So, yeah, on a level I do understand why she is doing it... her feelings however, as I said above, are irrelevant in the debate and because she is unable to put them aside, she should not be part of it on any level.
I understand that her mother wouldn't want to blame her or her son(Notice, however that's exactly where the blame should be) and that a scapegoat would be the only way out of that.
But why not blame drugs? Would it not make more sense to crack down on them rather than something completely harmless?
I suppose, however, for that she would have to admit defeat, so to speak. But putting millions of people's happiness and entertainment in jeopardy just because you can't accept the fact that your deceased son brought about his own death isn't just idiotic, it's selfish.
Regardless of what I have said, though, I don't see this going anywhere.
It won't. It never does.
I feel for the UK and hope this doesn't effect their gaming.
When it comes to politics common sense along with evidence means absolutely nothing.
And by the way that lady is a bad parent for buying her 14 year old son Manhunt.
Like I have said before The UK is getting extremely anti-pop culture.
First hoodies and now this
I propose that we start staging peaceful public protests to combat this blatant idiocy. If ANONYMOUS, of all groups, can pull off a protest without a hitch, then SURELY us gamers can do it, too! What say you of this, GP?
Hate to ruin your joke, but the MIT Prof's name is HENRY Jenkins.
@Edward
Don't forget how the OFLC refused classification to that crap leisure suit larry game, apparently it was too sexual for public consumption. Now I played that initial version (just don't ask how) and I've literally seen stronger content in a PG rated teen grossout comedy that would insult the intelligence of the average 14 year old who would be legally allowed to see it...
Holy crap, I've just had an epiphany. I finished assassins creed the other day, are assassins going to come for me???