Rampage Shooters, Video Games & Age

Rampage Shooters, Video Games & Age

March 5, 2008
Did you notice that no one raised the issue of video games following Monday's tragic shooting spree at a Wendy's in West Palm Beach, Florida?

That's likely because the shooter, Alburn Edward Blake, was a 60-year-old man.

I've written in the past (see: How Old is Too Old for Game Blame?) about my theory that if a rampage killer is 30 or younger, video games will be mentioned as a causal factor. If the shooter is older than 30, nothing will be heard about games.

This held up once again in the recent NIU campus shooting where the killer, Stephen Kazmierczak, was 27-years-old. No kid, for sure, but below the 30 threshold. And, as we know, games came under attack from a variety of directions, including the governor of Illinois, a state legislator, Jack Thompson and Lyndon Larouche.

While rampage shooters don't all play video games, they do share two traits: mental illness and access to weapons.

Comments

I saw a pretty good movie last night. It was called "If....," starring Malcom McDowell, and it was made in 1968. Needless to say, school shootings were involved, and I'm pretty sure this was around before video games.

(Yes, I know this article is about a Wendy's, not a school. I just thought it was interesting).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qesHn-CXFgY

im not really a fan of his stuff, he is a little too freaky for me, but i respect his intelligence and i think he sums this sort of thing up quite well. while manson isnt addressing video games specifically (from what i can tell he is more-so addressing just pop culture in general) but everything he is talking about can easily be applied to our case here.
@F**ked Up

Speaking as someone who's actually on medication for depression, I can honestly say, it's hard to know when it's relevant and when it isn't. People have this odd misconception of mental illness and related medications. They think it changes you. Somehow become a different person. I don't know that's true, I don't even feel that different, it just takes the edge off.

I think people have difficulty using the term only when it's relevant because people don't really understand it. I'm not trying to criticize, I don't understand it either. What I'm trying to say is that it's only human nature that people try to understand horrific acts and why they occur. In order to understand, they usually have to put it in some sort of framework they can relate to. Am I making any sense? People have a hard time understanding, "bad things happen to good people for no very good reason"; and it's easier for them to understand "bad things happen to good people because this person was "sick".
Over-sheltering kids is what creates childish freaks like Michael Jackson.
"Did you notice that no one raised the issue of video games following Monday’s tragic shooting spree at a Wendy’s in West Palm Beach, Florida?"

Nope but you seem to have no problem bringing it up.
It was not raised because it probably did not occur to reporters that 60-year-olds can also play video games. None of this, of course, says much about the effects of violent video games on players. The fact that there are ratings for violent films and that violent video games are like such films does. Otherwise, we should see the removal not only of ratings for video games but also for films and other media.
Pong made him do it. Or breakout, the violent cousin of pong.
It was Brain Age! That godddamn DS won't stop at TEH CHILDRENZ!!!
No Deus...

It had to be violent pinball games in the 60's - it just took a while for it to catch up!

lol
It was obviously Scrabble. That game allows you through the letters available to simulate violent words like "Kill", "gun" and "murder". The game rewards you by giving you points for longer, more violent words like "eviscerate" and "disembowel". You can even make racist and sexist terms in the game.

I demand that this game be banned as it's obvious that it effects the brains of those who play. Brain scans from Harvard show that the areas of the brain that process violent words in teens are completely different to those of adults. The words are processed in the "Do this now" section, so obviously, when the game gives them the letters "K-I-L-L" that's what they are going to do. You gamer idiots don't understand this, but I'll show you when I bring a lawsuit representing the parents of a mentally unstable 18 year old with access to guns who trained to kill by picking out the letters "A-I-M" and "R-E-L-O-A-D" from this murder dictionary!

Hack Johnson, has to show cause today and you don't!
Do gun stores in America even bother with background checks?
The problem is that no one in the mass media will come on and say "Look how no one blames videogames for this shooting". And the next time a school shooting occurs no one will bring this event up as a counter-point.
This is all biased bullshit. End of story. Humans that are pathetic, weak individuals always need something to blame something else on, no matter how illogical or stupid it sounds. Hey, I'm pointing my mouse at you guys! Oh, hey I'm clicking it! I'm ready to go on a school rampage now, with this neat gun I downloaded from the internet!

I wonder, does Pac-Man make people want to go around eating yellow dots?
mental illness and access to weapons.. so wouldn't it be a safer system if you had a mental health evaluation so you could then buy certain violent games depending on your mental stability? I'm not saying this is a workable solution, I wouldn't like to submit to a test like that.. but wouldn't it be more accurate than.. this age group and above approach?

Shouldn't firearms be banned in America? I know this is an unpopular thing to say in America but it works in the UK.. they tend to use knives instead :oP
SteveUK: Yes. Contrary to what our alarmist media would make you think, we aren't killing each other out of nowhere every second of every day.

BlackPhoenix: And the people in the UK that do stab each other have a per capita rate of twice the US. You're still trying to kill each other. It's not right to punish law abiding gun owners when a vast majority of the murders here (and I'm sure most of the stabbings in the UK) are violent criminals killing other violent criminals. If anything, the war on drugs is to blame for the violence, not access to weapons.
I also notice a "pick 'n choose" strategy to many of these situations.

For example:
The Oxnard School Shooting
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-oxnard15feb15,0,7663055.story

Hate Crime, but no mention of violent video games. Could it be fear that attention would be drawn away from the accusations of violent video games to what or who taught the kid bigotry and hate?

The recent Alabama case mentioned recently on GP.

Single victim. No other potential problems that could overshadow blaming video games, so they were blamed.

The mall shooting where a certain someone claims to have sued the police to obtain information on the shooter's gaming habits and exposures. Nothing else could surface to overshadow the claim as a controversy. So blaming games is "safe". The Truth will over shadow it, but that's a different story.

And the recent church shootings. People were claiming that he "hated Christians", but the backstory indicates that, among other issues, the shooter may have been abused verbally, mentally, and even physically throughout his life by, at the least, his Parents who did so using religion as a justification. So, since the potential for OTHER controversies that were not desired to be brought forth, little, if anything, was spoken about video games being to blame. And of course, plenty of blaming his "hate of Christians" and overshadowing WHY he may have developed such hate was pushed on the public.

So, there is a strategy behind it as well.

After all, Leland Yee, Mr. "I'm a child psychologist and violent video games are bad for kids", had nothing to say about that Oxnard shooting and the effects of teaching bigotry and hate to kids. And good 'ol Governor Arnie, Mr. "we'll defend the video game legislation to the top court", had nothing to say either.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Plain and simple,

It is all too easy to blame videogames if the shooter or stabber was a person under the age of 30,

However it is more harder to blame Videogames if the shooter or stabber is OVER to age of 40.

Simple truth is that 80 percent of the population want simple answers, so they blame Videogames.

20 percent of people know that there are no such things as simple answers, so they go to the efforts to DO the research and find that Videogames have no direct link to the murder,

Sadly 80 percent of people will believe simple answers because they can't understand the complicated language...

it's the 80/20 model that is working here...and the 80% model is governed by the Mass Media and what they can spew to the general population with little or no evidence at all.

If anyone has any better answers that they can add onto mine, please write and join in.
==================
Shouldn’t firearms be banned in America? I know this is an unpopular thing to say in America but it works in the UK.. they tend to use knives instead
==================

No, they shouldn't. And this is coming from someone that despite owning several guns, I have never kept one loaded in the house and have never carried them with me outside of the house, other than to go hunting or target shooting. Between the both thats like 4 times a year I'll even take out my guns.

When I do take them out, I generally have fun. I used to be a very avid hunter, but that has waned in recent years. In all honesty, I would not feel a very big loss if I was without guns.

But I would still refuse to let government take them away just on principle. I have no problem with them restricting me from carrying them on anyone's property that doesn't want them on their property, but to ban them, no. I don't care if it's a $1 rubber duck my dog has chewed up, the government will not come in and take it. Especially not guns that cost $400 or more.

We don't need more government control of guns, we need less stupid people (a better public education system would be the best start I can think of). If they did outlaw guns, and they became like drugs in this country, no one would have trouble finding them anyway. All the people that you really didn't want to have have guns would still have them, so there is really no point in gutting the constitution to allow such a thing to happen.
It was minesweeper... Microsoft should be to blame in this... or should it be Valve... or perhaps Apple. all those bombs really train your brain to kill and those games are played by older persons. I demand accebss to information regarding his gaming habits. I'm sure it has something to do... with something
@TboneTony

The 80/20 model exists because society and modern civilizations in general have reached the point of complexity where it's impossible to know anything about everything. How many people really know how the government works? If it weren't for the moles and rats we would all be ignorant about the politicians as the politicians are ignorant about video games.

Think of it like your own body. Your brain would the er, brains of the whole operation. It doesn't know exactly how your other organs work, it just sends "orders". It's a whole intricate system where each organ just has to "know" their own duty and nothing else. And if there's a serious problem with your body, you just go to the doctor and expect simplified answers without the all the medical mumbo-jumbo.

Same way with our society. The teachers don't have to give a crap about workers in Starbucks that give them their coffee, or the construction workers that help prop up their schools. Modern society is just too much to take in, and it will grow complex to the point where decay and dumbing down is the better option.
Also, sorry if I went too off on a tangent there, but Tbone, I hope that's a better answer.
@Steve

Less stupid people won't do much good. The article here claims that the shooter was 'very intelligent'--usually these kinds of killers are. I'd say that intelligence inflates their sense of self-importance and actually help leads to these killings.

The problem is that these people are mentally ill, screwed up in the head to the point that they need to be either locked up or undergo thorough treatment. And certainly not allowed to buy pistols or rifles, which is an issue of our background checks not being nearly thorough enough.
@Chalts

The problem with that is that often everyone is shocked that a person did such a thing. With most people, nobody knew they were batshit insane until they went and did something crazy. So I wouldn't expect that to solve many problems. Although, it would have stopped that VTech shooting, that kid was crazy.

BTW, I have trouble considering anyone who kills people smart. I think that's giving them too much credit.
@ SteveUK

There are background checks and waiting periods- I had to jump through all kinds of hoops when I bought a gun...and was happy to do so.

The fact that these nutjobs were able to get firearms suggests that either someone did something illegal, or the system itself is useless.
Part of the whole age and games thing, let's face it, is that knee-jerk, protect the kids, won't someone-think-of-the-children! reaction that most conservative parents get. I mean no disrespect to parents, I understand that when you become a parent, it literally changes everything. However, allot of parents get really irrational about that. I mean good lord, I actually saw somebody marketing a backpack for kids with a kevlar plate in it. Yes. Bulletproof backpacks.

I was talking to my father once. I'm the youngest and I'm in my 30's, so suffice it to say my parents have had the luxury of relaxing by and large for some time. He basically described it as something everyone goes through. There's a phase when kids are physically kids, and when they're teenagers they may not be kids anymore, but their parents still think they are. The point is, most parents eventually realize that their kids getting hurt isn't the end of the world. In fact, occasionally getting hurt is part of growing up. At which point they eventually relax a little bit. If you think about it, that explains 1-20. 20-30 is just statistical evidence people use to make their cases for legislation to protect 1-20.

That, to me, is a big part of why you tend to see a knee-jerk conservative reaction to violence among the young. However, it is irrational. Let's face it, most of us are more statistically likely to die in violent car accidents then we are to get shot by some wierdo who just snapped. There's only been one shooting that I can think of within 100 miles of where I live in the last two years, and that was at the new life church. (I know that means nothing to people who aren't in my area, but anyone who's even remotely familiar with new life shouldn't be the least bit surprised that somebody shot the place up. It's almost symbolic of the worst kind of conservative christian.)
Now, when it comes to the gun debate, I follow the logic of Washington who said, "A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."

Basically, the second amendment was in part created to allow people to protect their own liberties if the government were to become corrupt enough. It's more than just trying to protect your home. The issue is that the laws aren't being correctly enforced. The majority of these shootings involve guns acquired illegally.

But the issue of this article is how blame is shifted so much. The media seems to be unable to comprehend that young people are just as capable of killing as older people are without video games. People will kill, it's going to happen, it happens all of the time. But people always have a hard time accepting that someone they know is capable of doing something like this. They tend to look for a reason, and there are sadly too many people willing to point at video games when it is someone young.
@ jadedcritic

Don't forget that plenty of liberals are on this same bandwagon. The big-brother/nanny state folks are just as vocal in blaming games...the belief is that people aren't responsible for their actions and must be protected by the government.
Nutcases shouldn't be allowed access to guns. It's really that simple. That means that society needs to impose limits on gun access based on some sort of test that sorts the nutters from the sane.
Being an old school kind of guy, he needs an old school type of scapegoat. Seeing as he shot up a fast food joint, he must have been influenced by the fil "Falling Down". Michael Douglas made him do it.
Treatment for the mentally ill and gun control are just much more difficult subjects for politicians to talk about. Comic books, controversial music, D&D, and video games are much more convenient scapegoats. That's why those have all been scapegoats at one time or another, and the real problems continue to go unaddressed. It's a shame that so many of our elected officials lack the courage to tackle the truly pressing issues instead of raising moral panic smokescreens.
Nothing will stop someone from getting a gun if they want one. Even if all the loopholes are closed there's still a big enough blackmarket that will be more than happy to supply someone, at a much higher price of course.
I thought that Jack Thompson's court date was today. I was looking forward to coming onto GP to read about that. Not this stuff, it's pretty horrible about what happend, definately makes me feel bad for the four children who lost thier father.
This just makes me belive that we need to have stricter gun laws more than anything. Then again, this man had a clean criminal record and as far as we know no reported pyschological symptoms of something...So he could've passed it anyways.
@Cidas:

The decision gets handed down today, I think. It'll take time for it to be disseminated.

-P
I have a question about the gun check. I bought a shotgun about last year (after someone had kicked down my door). There was no waiting period, however, there was a background check. What I want to know is if the background check can see anything like mental illness? It would be my understanding that such information would be covered under HIPAA. Maybe they can check your criminal background, but the massacre/suicide type people won't always have a criminal background, it would be a "first and last" thing.

Also, I haven't heard of any of these guys having illegally obtained the guns. Some took them from their parents, others just purchased them. Some are saying that they COULD have gotten them illegally if they had been blocked, but if you are about to choot up a campus, you can't really ask around where you can buy a lot of guns.

I might be nieve, but I doubt I could find a black market around where I am, and it is considered a pretty violent city (as seens on COPS, fairly often [not that I ever watched COPS]).

There should be a flag somewhere as "Too crazy to buy a gun." I don't see how it could be implemented or kept up, may not even be a good idea. Banning guns won't work. For one, everyone here is paranoid. If you give up your gun, you don't have anything to protect you from someone who hasn't given up their gun.
I live in canada, where people are not supposed to have guns like in the US, but just the other night the swat team was at a house 3 doors down from me because some guys were holding another guy hostage at gun point.

My point is that people will find a way to get a gun if you want one.
When people talk about banning/increasing openly carrying weapons, especially on campus, I think of things like these:

House prohibits open carry on campus

http://media.www.dailyutahchronicle.com/media/storage/paper244/news/2008...

Imagine if there were MORE.

Then:

Preparation gone wrong

http://media.www.dailytarheel.com/media/storage/paper885/news/2008/03/03...

Yeah, having more guns around would have helped a lot.

Had it been real, some would say not enough guns.
Had there been more guns and they shot the fake gunman, there would be too many.

The old line about hindsight is never more true than in these situations. There can never be a real winning argument because there can never be a perfect outcome.

Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
just something i gotta say here - im mentally ill, have access to weapons, and play games. yet for some reason i do not feel a strong desire to kill people? what is wrong with me!!!
I know what done it! That new-fangled radio device! And swing music! It's the music of the devil I tells yah!
Banning guns won't help, these people are straight ahead intent on hurting and killing people, so they'll turn to other methods to do so, the idea of homemade bombs quickly comes to mind.

The only thing I can truly think of that would at least help to curb this kind of violence would be to require everyone who wants to purchase a gun to go through a simple psychological evaluation. But that would only cover the crazies who are trying to BUY guns, what about the crazies who already own guns?

Now, in order to own and fire a gun, in general, you'd need a gun license, right? But that's only in each state, correct? If I'm not, then someone please correct me.

Otherwise, there's only one real solution I can think of, though it would be opposed by gun advocates. Have each state have a gun license that would require, among other things, a short psychological evaluation, and renewal every 4 years or so, kinda like a driver's license. Of course, in order to get this done, the politicians would have to realize that it's not the "violent video games ZOMG Doom!" that are behind these shootings, but psychological illness and access to guns, like Dennis said.

The REAL reason politicians refuse to do this is because it would rile up the gun advocates, and videogames are played by the younger generations, which is a group that the politicians, and the narrow group of constituents that they really pay attention to, have fallen out of touch with and don't understand. And of course, if you don't understand it, then it must be evil and must be completely vaporized.
@a lurker

there's degrees of mental illness, and as such there are certain degrees where a person is more likely to slip further into the illness and "snap".

Nobody here is saying that everyone who has any kind of mental illness of any degree should not own a gun, and is liable to go on a rampage.

Look at the history of rampage killers. Most were mentally ill, some severely mentally ill. Most either took medication or went undiagnosed. Of course not all of them would have been labeled a threat, but there is a connection, and one that makes far more sense as at least part of a cause than violent videogames.
Whatever happened to the simple explanation that the person went off the deep end and wanted to go out in a blaze of sour grapes? Almost every asshole who goes on a rampage like this winds up shooting themselves anyway. Definitely NOT something you get from a video game.
I just like to point out that it seems like Mental Illness seems like the new "demonic Possession" (best thing I can think off the top of my head). For example, Way back when when someone started acting erratically, They said it was because the person became possessed. I see people are quick to say Mental Illness caused it, no different than people quick to blame video games.

But then people say psychology. Well my problem with psychology is that looks at the person mental health rather than looking at the course of events in his life. If you constantly provoke a dog, by hitting it with a stick and then it bites you, Dont tell me that the dog has a mental illness. Similarly with all these types of stories all we know is the part "the dog bit a human" aka "Person X committed Y."

All I am saying is this, use the Mental illness argument when it qualifies but not for every single damn time some horrific event occurs. Maybe in this case he did have a Mental Illness or maybe not. I bet all of you have rationalized or justified a reason to do something horrible to someone, School Hazing, Bullying, Pranks, getting revenge and etc. That doesnt mean all of you have a mental illness although many of you would claim to have one just use it as a scapegoat, "oh I have a mental illness" that is my excuse.
@jadedcritic

I understand


"bad things happen to good people because this person was “sick”.


I am just hoping people will stop throwing around mental illness every time something horrible happens. After all we are not calling every single person that is committing terrorist attacks in Iraq, mentally ill. Although I know some people wouldnt hesitate
If you're over seven, you can't blame a game for your misdeeds. Before games, people had to take personal responsibility for their actions and it worked. Now people can say ''I didn't know what I was doing, those(insert current pop culture pariah) made me do it, they indoctrinated me into a culture of violence!!"If people were that weak willed, we'd be long gone already.
@ GRIZZAM 512

Bad boy! No being allowed to be the voice of reason! :)

It's not fashionable to talk of personal responsibility because then you can't blame something you detest for someone's repulsive action. ;)
I don't think it was the fact that he was under 30. Lots and lots of shootings happen from people in the 20-30 range and video games are rarely blamed.

The difference here is that it happened at a SCHOOL. I think that the REAL age line is around 21, but because this incident happened at a school, very few people were educated about the actual age of the shooter.
Space Invaders made him do it.
I wonder what would happen if a pong fanatic shot up a school. how would they blame the game?
@Shaesyco

They'd say: All this person ever did was knock around that poor little pixle.It tailored him to be violent, and he unleashed his violence all over that school. Don't blame him; blame pong for driving him over the edge of sanity.
I dunno, pong is kinda hypnotic, I reckon they could probably whack in subliminal messages & make them more compelling with the hypnotic motion, back & forth, back & forth... sorry, was drifting off there but I have a sudden urge to buy stock in Atari...

@JadedCritic
Thank you, you've basically said what I was planning to. I'm not on medication but I've had extremely severe depression (currently only background) and frankly if it weren't for games, I'd be fucked up in every way rather than just most ways.
I also find it amusing whenever an anti-gamer watches someone commit "horrible" acts in a game, they freak out and go, "Why would you do that?" Well, for one thing, when you chainsaw a Locust in Gears of War, you have no empathy for him because you know it's just a pile of polygons. It has no feelings, no life. If it has a purpose, it would be to just wait to be chainsawed for the amusement of the player. But, well at least for me, I would NEVER think of actually using a gun to shoot someone, despite the fact I've played many shooters. Personally, I think that the idea of games teaching kids to be serial killers is bogus, and kids should probably just avoid violent games for the sake of of making the rating system mean something. Parents need to wake up to the 21st century, realize that new technologies make it easier for kids to gain access to what they shouldn't, and be stronger in their position. I find it sad that as the media is becoming more powerful, parents are becoming weaker. Yes, the standards of society are weakening, and were ALL GOING TO DIE HOLY CRAP AHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!

You suck, Jack Thompson
course that wasn't the only factor in that mess.
Shoehorn O'Plenty: HAHAHAHAhahahaha.... ouch, my sides hurt from laughing.


As for the "Guns or no Guns" argument, I personally have only used guns like 10 times in my life and it was always rifles or shotguns. The reason for that is that in Iceland (where I live) those are the only guns allowed. I know what some of you are thinking "well you can kill as easily with those" well we have had 1 gun victims in the last 5 years (also I should mention that there are only 300.000 people in Iceland) and I think that is becose, how are you going to conceal a SHOTGUN? it works here. Also those of you that hunt in America, they wont take all your rifles and shotguns, they will take the automatics rifles, pistols (witch b.t.w. are useless for hunting) and other obvious none hunting weapons.
@Shoehorn - LOL! :)

That was one of the funniest things I've read in a while.

:D
Im sure he had been playing too much Space Invaders...
HurricaneJesus Says:
I live in canada, where people are not supposed to have guns like in the US, but just the other night the swat team was at a house 3 doors down from me because some guys were holding another guy hostage at gun point.
My point is that people will find a way to get a gun if you ant one.

That's a very good point. It's truth these butchers have access to guns, but it can't always be assumed they got them through legal means. I live next to a city that just celebrated the milestore of going a month without a murder. Many (if not most) of the guns used were bought on the black market, in gang circles and for the drug trade. Trying to keep the those deemed dangerous from purchasing guns might help, but horribly it won't stop things like this from happening completely.
If they are 30 or younger?!? That's just total Bull!

If I were to go into a Wendy's right now, shoot up the place, and I were over 30, then I guess I can't accused af video games?

That's retarded. Gamers don't have an age limit. I'm not saying that we should accuse everyone, but that segragation in on global scale! There are millions of Gamers around the world, and only a very small percent of them have a mental illness or would even THINK aobut doing something like this!
@ DeusPayne
Real World Tennis? I blame Wimboldon.

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 11/23/09 at 10:08am
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: http://tinyurl.com/ye6x9nv
Posted 11/23/09 at 10:08am
Rodrigo Ybáñez García: The very definition of "Lucky Shot":
Posted 11/23/09 at 07:56am
DarkSaber: http://tinyurl.com/yl2vfw6 Here's the link, good for conspiracy theories.
Posted 11/23/09 at 07:42am
JDKJ: Leaders never follow. Followers never lead.
Posted 11/23/09 at 06:48am
DarkSaber: Anyone been following this Hadley Climatic Research Centre server hack story?
Posted 11/22/09 at 11:48pm
ZippyDSMlee: AE:they feeding you well? I am enjoying win7 and heading to bed...uhg I need to get up early and start back to cleaning/painting blahg >< need tog et stuff done befor thanksgiving....
Posted 11/22/09 at 11:41pm
Andrew Eisen: Just got home from an eight hour recording session at Capitol Records. A lot of fun but damn exhausting.
Posted 11/22/09 at 08:44pm
BearDogg-X: 10 N. O. Who Dat?
Posted 11/22/09 at 09:45am
ZippyDSMlee: JD:I think doc phill is still sout about the break up with his wife he dose not fill holes as much as make them bigger these day
Posted 11/22/09 at 12:06am
JDKJ: You should get Phil McCraken to help you spackle those banisters.
Posted 11/21/09 at 11:57pm
ZippyDSMlee: Oh in the pirate hunter article I need my song ieda heckled DS,JD,Beemon sic im !!!
Posted 11/21/09 at 11:56pm
ZippyDSMlee: JD:no I am tried from prepping the banisters for painting , worked on them from 12 to 4 and 6 to 8...after I got back from the store...got up early got ready...blah...been up all day..I need a nap...
Posted 11/21/09 at 11:42pm
JDKJ: No. You gonna stay up late tonight soldering?
Posted 11/21/09 at 11:41pm
ZippyDSMlee: JDKJ:Don't you mean Mctite?
Posted 11/21/09 at 11:33pm
JDKJ: @Zip: Neil, Bob, and Lik McTaint. The McTaint brothers. LOL!!!
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:44pm
Flamespeak: I still think military personell, killing other military personell, on a military complex should be handled by military courts.
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:43pm
Flamespeak: I could see this a mixture of the two charges rather than just one or the other.
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:43pm
Flamespeak: I think this was mainly a person who snapped, but evidence is showing he definitely had strong inlinations to islamic-extremism.
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:41pm
Flamespeak: People are trying to claim that Hasan's actions were not terrorism. I don't jump on the 'terror train' like others, however
Posted 11/21/09 at 09:38pm
mentor07825: Britain certainly does deserve it! And the French! God damn it, it was a hand ball!!!
Login or register to post shouts