14 Year Old Attempts to Rape, then Kills Mother for Taking Away Call of Duty

[The Milkman]

My little brother has been FPSs since about 6, and he's now 13.
I've been playing FPSs since about 10 and I'm now 21.

Neither of us have violent outbursts.
Neither of us have raped people.
Neither of us have been desensitized to real life, "in our face" violence by these games.

There's a notable difference between being some Joe who is otherwise a responsible, reasonable, fairly sane individual who has been playing games a large portion of his life, violent or otherwise, and has not been affected by it than someone who has been playing the same but has some kind of mental or behavioral disorder.

Just because peanut butter causes fatal allergic reactions in a percentage of the population does not mean it does for everyone. See what I am getting at?

Exactly! Not only that, but people always want to say Vidya causes this shit by de-sensitizing people to indirect violence and want to ban it, mean while you got mainstream media that puts out shit like this on a daily basis yet its perfectly fine and its helping us as a people.

-snip-

God dammit, you sure know how to take a thread and make it awkward as hell.

 

[the_randomizer]

Why is this sick twisted SOB still alive? What happened to his mother happens to him in prison. What an pathetic excuse of a human being, I hope he burns in hell.

 

[JoostinOnline]

Did he rape her in a sexual way, or is it just that he is 14 and plays lots of CoD so that he says rape instead of owned/pwned?

Neither. He didn't rape her and he isn't 14. It seems the OP didn't read the article, and the staff still haven't fixed it.

 

[The Milkman]

Why is this sick twisted SOB still alive? What happened to his mother happens to him in prison. What an pathetic excuse of a human being, I hope he burns in hell.

Because we have something called the judicial system. Look, calm down. The kid has to live with what hes done for his entire life. If it doesnt hit now, its going to hit sometime down the road. Sometime, in a few years, when kids his age are picking out universities and deciding what to do for the rest of their life, hes going to be in a prison. When those same kids are looking for homes to settle in, hes going to be in a prison. And even if he gets out, when he does, hes going to have no experience, no education, no real future or path to follow in life, and thats all going to be on top of the remorse of what he did. If the kid is sentenced to death after 18 (Im not even sure if thats possible) then hes getting off easy.

 

[ouch123]

[The mother] was the one who bought the .22 caliber Ruger as a present for Noah in 2010 when he was about 11 years old.

I feel both impressed that this was (presumably) the first time he misused the pistol (or carbine or revolver, .22 caliber could be any of the above) and disturbed that someone thought it a good idea to give an 11 year old a pistol. I somewhat feel like saying more, but at the risk of trivializing what is undoubtedly a horrible tragedy, I'll just stop here. I can only hope that this family will overcome this difficult period in their lives, and I wish them the best.

 

[JoostinOnline]

I feel both impressed that this was (presumably) the first time he misused the pistol (or carbine or revolver, .22 caliber could be any of the above)

It wasn't. The neighbors reported shots fired a couple years ago or something.

 

[Veho]

Neither. He didn't rape her and he isn't 14. It seems the OP didn't read the article, and the staff still haven't fixed it.

The article is unsure about the age as well, the title says 13, but the subtitle says "Noah Crooks, 14".

 

[JoostinOnline]

The article is unsure about the age as well, the title says 13, but the subtitle says "Noah Crooks, 14".

The spelling throughout the article isn't very good either. Maybe the UK hasn't discovered Spell Check.

The title is still incorrect. He didn't attempt to rape her (that suggests he tried and failed), he started to but changed his mind.

 

[ElYubiYubi]

Neither. He didn't rape her and he isn't 14. It seems the OP didn't read the article, and the staff still haven't fixed it.

He wanted to rape her

Anyway

How 13 Year Old Shooting Mother Over Video Game Will Fuel The Ban on Violent Video Games

 

[Foxi4]

How 13 Year Old Shooting Mother Over Video Game Will Fuel The Ban on Violent Video Games

...because the United States have distinctively different versions of Call of Duty than the rest of the world, which is why the American teens are almost exclusively affected with very little exceptions from the rule.

 

[pwsincd]

...because the United States have distinctively different versions of Call of Duty than the rest of the world, which is why the American teens are almost exclusively affected with very little exceptions from the rule.

Is that a fact ? how do they differ ? I can see our UK version has my sons running round shooting other ppl , almost frenzied gameplay . What else is included in the US version ? Subliminal "shoot yer mom" messages ?

he started to but changed his mind.

If anyone started to rape you , would it be ok if they stopped ?

 

[Foxi4]

Is that a fact ? how do they differ ? I can see our UK version has my sons running round shooting other ppl , almost frenzied gameplay . What else is included in the US version ? Subliminal "shoot yer mom" messages ?

Uhh... no, that's the joke. I was being sarcastic.

Most countries have the exact same Call of Duty releases (with some exceptions - there's the occasional ban or in some countries characters "bleed money" due to censorship, which is a fun instance of the creators doing a literal "play on words" with "blood money") but when it comes down to the core games, they're the same... and yet, we're seeing a whole lot of massacres in the U.S. and not a whole lot of'em elsewhere, which somewhat nullifies the "It's the game's fault" argument.

 

[pwsincd]

Most countries have the exact same Call of Duty releases (with some exceptions - there's the occasional ban or in some countries characters "bleed money" due to censorship, which is a fun instance of the creators going doing a play on words of "blood money") but when it comes down to the core games, they're the same... and yet, we're seeing a whole lot of massacres in the U.S. and not a whole lot of'em elsewhere, which somewhat nullifies the "It's the game's fault" argument.

Figured it was ,,, but also figured there coulda been some truth in it , ya never know in the US

I think i takes a little more courage / Madness call it what you will to stick a knife into someone or beat em with some blunt instrument , that it would to point and shoot with " user friendly weapons" .

 

[Foxi4]

Figured it was ,,, but also figured there coulda been some truth in it , ya never know in the US

Well... it is *slightly* different since...

"Online Play not rated by ESRB - beware, angsty teens ahead!"

 

[J-Machine]

People without backgrounds in psychology really shouldn't use anecdotal evidence to prove their opinion on an issue as delicate as this. Believe it or not video games, as with many other forms of media, have the ability to shape future reactions in anybody, especially those with still developing minds like a 13 year old boy. Sure COD was only a small part of the puzzle but a family that so casually initiates their child into gun culture as to have him surrounded by an enthusiast and given his own at an age, where he would have no reason to have one, is clearly dysfunctional. He was specifically molded into this reaction and the way he treated the situation proves his ability to rationalize his decision even if morally he felt bad about it in hindsight.

Another thing to consider is the aspect of online play communities. Those of us who grew up before this became mainstream in gaming have an advantage where it was easier for us to differentiate between the fantasy and reality. sure golden eye and others gave us 4 player but it was amongst friends and sporadic. Now we have clans and other groupings that give us a sense of camaraderie that relies solely on simulated warfare. It reinforces the actions in game and with time and sheer ease of getting the rewards of playing together, desensitization outside of the game becomes easier.

Let's face it; today's children just aren't well equipped to handle these responsibilities on their own and with parents less engaged with the child than complete strangers online are, the child becomes raised by the online community and his school. I'm not saying this breeds sociopaths or gun wielding meat heads with insecurities; rather it certainly helps in breeding people who can be more prone to using violence as a natural reaction to the negatives in their lives.

Also. What's with this whole "intermittent explosive disorder" nonsense? Are they just making this crap up now? I'm pretty sure just about everyone who can make a fist or lift a leg can be given that shoddy piece of diagnosis.

 

[Foxi4]

People without backgrounds in psychology really shouldn't use anecdotal evidence to prove their opinion on an issue as delicate as this. Believe it or not video games, as with many other forms of media, have the ability to shape future reactions in anybody, especially those with still developing minds like a 13 year old boy. (...)

Provided the subject in question is easy to persuade. It's fair to assume that most parents instill basic moral values in their children and if a video game is enough to make someone commit murder, it is equally fair to assume that said person was unstable to begin with.

You call it anecdotal evidence, I say it's history repeating itself. A few generations back, science books were the works of Satan and were mass burned, later Rock 'n Roll was the music of the Devil that made teens commit adultery, even later violent movies made teens act agressively, a bit more recently Hip Hop and Rap was believed to raise a generation of pot-smoking gangsters (...and that belief is still alive and well in some places) and now it's video games that turn you into a serial killer.

People fear what is unknown to them, they fear things that are unfamiliar. Moreover, objects are easily blamed for people's shortcomings as they cannot defend themselves - it's easier to say that a video game caused your kid to go on a killing spree, easier to say that your child smokes pot because of the music he or she listens to or that he or she had sex because the TV shows these days are so oversexualized.

No. No, no, no - screw that noise. These things happen because parents are not paying enough attention to their children or fail to instill moral values in them - it happens because the computer, console or television set is treated like a nanny and those are the effects. A video game can piss the player off, yes, but if someone goes as far as to killing or raping another person over it, especially their own mother, I'm willing to wager that said person is already a bit screwed in the head. Games, songs, books or films could just be triggers - that's the truth. It's infinitely easier to blame something rather than take the blame.

EDIT: Now, just to clarify, I'm not saying that the parents are always the guilty party - sometimes we're just dealing with a sick person who snapped all of a sudden without doing anything that could alarm the parents, teachers or neighbours previously. 99% of the times it's the parents who are to blame - children who are neglected or abused can get wonky and it's no suprise if they snap at some point. I mean, this boy was given an actual firearm at the age of 11, he was shooting in the house earlier - that sounds like reasonable parenting, right?

 

[Gahars]

Another thing to consider is the aspect of online play communities. Those of us who grew up before this became mainstream in gaming have an advantage where it was easier for us to differentiate between the fantasy and reality. sure golden eye and others gave us 4 player but it was amongst friends and sporadic. Now we have clans and other groupings that give us a sense of camaraderie that relies solely on simulated warfare. It reinforces the actions in game and with time and sheer ease of getting the rewards of playing together, desensitization outside of the game becomes easier.

...Do have anything to prove this, or is this just an assumption? Because this seems like quite the conclusion to leap to.

Besides, as I've mentioned before, video game violence is so separate and distinct from actual violence that you'd have to be disturbed in the first place to confuse the two. I'm not usually one to link to Jim Sterling, but he made a video that tackled the topic pretty well.

Let's face it; today's children just aren't well equipped to handle these responsibilities on their own and with parents less engaged with the child than complete strangers online are, the child becomes raised by the online community and his school. I'm not saying this breeds sociopaths or gun wielding meat heads with insecurities; rather it certainly helps in breeding people who can be more prone to using violence as a natural reaction to the negatives in their lives.

Yeah, I don't buy this.

First of all, do you have any proof that children are more engaged with online gaming than with their parents? I don't doubt it can happen in some cases, but claiming that it's a consistent, nationwide trend requires some evidence.

Secondly, if this is producing people more prone to violence... well, why is violent crime still on the decline? If your claim was true, shouldn't we be seeing more violence, not less? Here's just one graph illustrating this point.

As awful as this crime was, I think it's worth remembering that it's an increasingly rare exception, not the rule.

 

[J-Machine]

Provided the subject in question is easy to persuade. It's fair to assume that most parents instill basic moral values in their children and if a video game is enough to make someone commit murder, it is equally fair to assume that said person was unstable to begin with.

You call it anecdotal evidence, I say it's history repeating itself. A few generations back, science books were the works of Satan and were mass burned, later Rock 'n Roll was the music of the Devil that made teens commit adultery, even later violent movies made teens act agressively, a bit more recently Hip Hop and Rap was believed to raise a generation of pot-smoking gangsters (...and that belief is still alive and well in some places) and now it's video games that turn you into a serial killer.

People fear what is unknown to them, they fear things that are unfamiliar. Moreover, objects are easily blamed for people's shortcomings as they cannot defend themselves - it's easier to say that a video game caused your kid to go on a killing spree, easier to say that your child smokes pot because of the music he or she listens to or that he or she had sex because the TV shows these days are so oversexualized.

No. No, no, no - screw that noise. These things happen because parents are not paying enough attention to their children or fail to instill moral values in them - it happens because the computer, console or television set is treated like a nanny and those are the effects. A video game can piss the player off, yes, but if someone goes as far as to killing or raping another person over it, especially their own mother, I'm willing to wager that said person is already a bit screwed in the head. Games, songs, books or films could just be triggers - that's the truth. It's infinitely easier to blame something rather than take the blame.

EDIT: Now, just to clarify, I'm not saying that the parents are always the guilty party - sometimes we're just dealing with a sick person who snapped all of a sudden without doing anything that could alarm the parents, teachers or neighbours previously. 99% of the times it's the parents who are to blame - children who are neglected or abused can get wonky and it's no suprise if they snap at some point. I mean, this boy was given an actual firearm at the age of 11, he was shooting in the house earlier - that sounds like reasonable parenting, right?

I agree with the parent thing and it can cause greater influence from other, less than wholesome people and delivery methods like the media. However, we need to realize these aren't just games anymore. These are communities that use games as a way to interact with each other. the chance to mold a mind and influence decisions is greater when the individual is no longer the only person engaged in the activity that can cause these changes to occur. Parent's more then ever need to monitor and raise their children than ever before but due to how our current society works the exact opposite is happening. You have a group of people raising each other who may or may not have the experiences to impart their knowledge in hindsight or are developed or learned enough to make informed, moral decisions based on past experiences and those who raised them. people are starting to buy games, not to play them so much as they are to hang out with like minded individuals and we need to take the people they play with into account when instances like these happen.

 

[Chary]

Okay. In a weird way, I could understand the kid react to his game being taken away, (Humans themselves have hot tempers, and not to mention, Im sure this kid has some sort of insanity disorder) and in the heat of the moment grabbed a gun and shot the mother. (I'm shocked that he was given a gun at age 11) But then there's the whole 'failed rape' thing, and I just can't make sense of it. He's a freak, plain and simple.

 

[The Milkman]

You know what I dont understand, even if people want to relentlessly blame games for all tihs violence, why do they need to ban it? If parents think the games are the problem, dont fucking buy your kids those kinds of games. Its that simple.

The governments job isnt to raise your kids. Its yours.