[Anders Breivik] Trained on dem Vidya Gaemz!

Donnicton

As if the politicians needed more excuses to blame that convenient universal scapegoat for corruptin' our youths, Norwegian mass murderer Abders Breivik has made the claim that Modern Warfare 2 provided training for his murder spree.

And...World of Warcraft helped in some way.

....VIDYA GAEMZ.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/19/world/europe/norway-breivik-trial/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Anders Behring Breivik, who admits killing 77 people in Norway last summer, used a video game as training for his shooting spree, he testified Thursday at his trial for homicide and terrorism.

He played the game "Modern Warfare 2" for practice, he said.

Breivik, who boasts of being an ultranationalist who killed his victims to fight multiculturalism in Norway, also went through a period of playing the game "World of Warcraft" up to 16 hours a day, he testified.

Winky

Dude played WoW 16 hours a day? No wonder he snapped and started killing people.

With any luck Blizzard will stand trial for their crimes.

Mild Confusion

/sigh

I hope people don't try to buy into that bullshit. Modern Warfare teaches as much about combat as My Little Pony teaches about horse breeding.

KalTorak

I appreciate this headline: Norway Killer Played World of Warcraft, Which Probably Means Nothing At All

either,or

He didn't say WoW helped though. He said the opposite - that the game had nothing to do with the attacks and that there were more important things for the prosecution to focus on than how long he played it.

Also, what is the 'holographic aiming device' he talks about using with Call of Duty to practice aiming? Is he talking about some kind of light gun? How would that work?

Donnicton

KalTorak wrote: »

I appreciate this headline: Norway Killer Played World of Warcraft, Which Probably Means Nothing At All

Yeah, no, that's not how you properly "journalism". You have to make it the focal point of the entire headline, and then devote only three sentences of the article to it. Time, you're doin' it wrong.

Absalon

Mild Confusion wrote: »

/sigh

I hope people don't try to buy into that bullshit. Modern Warfare teaches as much about combat as My Little Pony teaches about horse breeding.

Say that again. Two earth ponies producing a unicorn and a pegasus. Mmmhm.

Nightslyr

either,or wrote: »

Also, what is the 'holographic aiming device' he talks about using with Call of Duty to practice aiming? Is he talking about some kind of light gun? How would that work?

Dunno exactly what he's referring to, but a lot of modern targeting systems on rifles are 'holographic'. Example:

http://www.google.com/products/catalog?q=holographic+sight&oe=utf-8&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a&um=1&ie=UTF-8&tbm=shop&cid=3161854511012527406&sa=X&ei=LRCQT5rdE-rx6AGo47CQBA&ved=0CJwBEPICMAU

My brother has a few on his rifles. You basically turn it on and look at it. The red circle with the red dot in the middle works just like you'd think it would.

Mild Confusion

either,or wrote: »

He didn't say WoW helped though. He said the opposite - that the game had nothing to do with the attacks and that there were more important things for the prosecution to focus on than how long he played it.

Also, what is the 'holographic aiming device' he talks about using with Call of Duty to practice aiming? Is he talking about some kind of light gun? How would that work?

He's probably referring to a reflex sight like an M68. Reflex sights make acquiring a target easier because it eliminates the need for sight alignment between the front and rear sights on a weapon. Great for rapid, close range engagements.

Here's a link http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflector_sight

TheBigEasy

Mild Confusion wrote: »

/sigh

I hope people don't try to buy into that bullshit. Modern Warfare teaches as much about combat as My Little Pony teaches about horse breeding.

Good luck with that. I don't know how the media reacts in the US after a shooting - but over here in Germany, when something like that happens, video games are usually one of the first things being brought up as a reason for the shooting. Soon after some politicians scream for harsher laws governing violent video games and the discussion only goes downhill from there.

either,or

Mild Confusion wrote: »

He's probably referring to a reflex sight like an M68. Reflex sights make acquiring a target easier because it eliminates the need for sight alignment between the front and rear sights on a weapon. Great for rapid, close range engagements.

Here's a link http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflector_sight

How does that tie into Call of Duty though? It sounded like he was talking about using something in conjunction with CoD 4 (like a peripheral), I must have misunderstood.

Donnicton

either,or wrote: »

Mild Confusion wrote: »

He's probably referring to a reflex sight like an M68. Reflex sights make acquiring a target easier because it eliminates the need for sight alignment between the front and rear sights on a weapon. Great for rapid, close range engagements.

Here's a link http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflector_sight

How does that tie into Call of Duty though? It sounded like he was talking about using something in conjunction with CoD 4 (like a peripheral), I must have misunderstood.

Sight attachments for in-game equipment.

Mild Confusion

either,or wrote: »

Mild Confusion wrote: »

He's probably referring to a reflex sight like an M68. Reflex sights make acquiring a target easier because it eliminates the need for sight alignment between the front and rear sights on a weapon. Great for rapid, close range engagements.

Here's a link http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reflector_sight

How does that tie into Call of Duty though? It sounded like he was talking about using something in conjunction with CoD 4 (like a peripheral), I must have misunderstood.

I don't know the details of the case, but I imagine he was using a holographic sight in the game, probably an Eotech, and says that helped him train how to use such a device in real life.

Malkor

Alternatively, he didn't know about holographic sites or the names of guns and now with his experience playing CoD he can name and identify guns, their parts, and such.

I played lots of Flight Simulator back-in-the-day, and I could name parts of the plane and the various toggles you would have to toggle, but that doesn't mean that I could actually fly a Learjet in real life absent being absolutely insane.

Mild Confusion

Malkor wrote: »

Alternatively, he didn't know about holographic sites or the names of guns and now with his experience playing CoD he can name and identify guns, their parts, and such.

I played lots of Flight Simulator back-in-the-day, and I could name parts of the plane and the various toggles you would have to toggle, but that doesn't mean that I could actually fly a Learjet in real life absent being absolutely insane.

This reminds me of kids who come up to me and start naming parts of my weapon. It's cute at first, until they get a minor detail wrong and I correct them. Then they get pissed at me and tell me I'm wrong!

They are obviously right because they played all three Modern Warfares and my 13 years of infantry experiance just doesn't hold up to that.

izzyb

I have played first-person shooters a bunch of times, but if I had a gun and was told to remove the safety, I wouldn't even know where to look.

Echo

RPS guns down mainstream media in cold blood. Great read.

Donnicton

Mild Confusion wrote: »

Malkor wrote: »

Alternatively, he didn't know about holographic sites or the names of guns and now with his experience playing CoD he can name and identify guns, their parts, and such.

I played lots of Flight Simulator back-in-the-day, and I could name parts of the plane and the various toggles you would have to toggle, but that doesn't mean that I could actually fly a Learjet in real life absent being absolutely insane.

This reminds me of kids who come up to me and start naming parts of my weapon. It's cute at first, until they get a minor detail wrong and I correct them. Then they get pissed at me and tell me I'm wrong!

They are obviously right because they played all three Modern Warfares and my 13 years of infantry experiance just doesn't hold up to that.

Everyone knows a decade of military experience is no substitute for sixteen hours of X-Box a week. O_o

Leitner

Mild Confusion wrote: »

/sigh

I hope people don't try to buy into that bullshit. Modern Warfare teaches as much about combat as My Little Pony teaches about horse breeding.

I'm curious how true this actually is.

It's obviously no patch on actual training and experience, but I imagine it will have some measure of effect or knowledge gleaned. There's a reason that militaries use human shaped targets now, not circular ones, and I find it hard to believe kids raised on a steady supply of glorification of war, and playing killing people in situation which are at least a modicum of true to life - is going to have no effect.

Mild Confusion

Leitner wrote: »

Mild Confusion wrote: »

/sigh

I hope people don't try to buy into that bullshit. Modern Warfare teaches as much about combat as My Little Pony teaches about horse breeding.

I'm curious how true this actually is.

It's obviously no patch on actual training and experience, but I imagine it will have some measure of effect or knowledge gleaned. There's a reason that militaries use human shaped targets now, not circular ones, and I find it hard to believe kids raised on a steady supply of glorification of war, and playing killing people in situation which are at least a modicum of true to life - is going to have no effect.

In terms of actual marksmanship and combat skills training? Modern Warfare gives as much training as an action movie: Point weapon at bad guy and achieve results. That may be true on a basic level, but you will never achieve an level of proficiency. It's more like the basic fundamental idea that anyone who played with water guns or nerf pistols as kids will have.

Actual marksmanship is something else entirely.

If you are referring to video games desensitizing him and giving him a predisposition towards violence. Maybe.

The Army does use human shaped silhouettes in conjunction to calling enemy 'targets' instead of 'people' to dehumanize our enemy.

Zephiran

"Trained" isn't really the right word.

A more proper way of phrasing it would be to say that Breivik "Lived out his violent phantasies on Xbox Live, turned into a racist piece of shit due to years of self-imposed isolation and then hooked up with the cunts at Stormfront".

CoD offers about as much practical insight into the operation of small arms as oogling at the stuff in a display case.

kolonel_kahlua

Here's the Guardian in the UK: Anders Breivik 'trained' for shooting attacks by playing Call of Duty

Article seems to centre around Breivik, CoD as well as his time on WoW.
Kinda cringe worthy reading. It might have been an attempt at being factual but I couldn't help get the impression that there was some 'stereotyping' going on?

Kipling217

They ignore the pages and pages of description in his "manifesto" where he explains how he procured his weapons. How he joined a gun club and spent time at a shooting range to lay the groundwork for getting a gun permit. How he traveled to Praha looking for weapons.

Part of the reason is that the gun club, which could have really shed some light on his gun history, clammed up after the attacks. No Comments from day one. Smart for the gun club, bad for the rest of us.

It will probably all come out in the next couple of weeks, but by then it will be too late to change the mainstream media story.

Magus`

If being good at it in a game makes it true in real life, I should really play The Witcher a lot more.

Mild Confusion

This kinda reminds me of the DC shooter whom everyone claimed it was dem vidjia gamez making him kill people. Ends up he was Army trained in BRM.

Feral

That TIME headline is great.

The Ender

Kipling217 wrote: »

They ignore the pages and pages of description in his "manifesto" where he explains how he procured his weapons. How he joined a gun club and spent time at a shooting range to lay the groundwork for getting a gun permit. How he traveled to Praha looking for weapons.

Part of the reason is that the gun club, which could have really shed some light on his gun history, clammed up after the attacks. No Comments from day one. Smart for the gun club, bad for the rest of us.

It will probably all come out in the next couple of weeks, but by then it will be too late to change the mainstream media story.

In fairness, I don't know that it's reasonable to blame the gun club either. Obviously, yes, an actual target range will improve your marksmanship, but:

1) He didn't need excellent marksmanship anyway, and he didn't demonstrate any extreme long-range proficiency with his weapon. He was shooting at children at pont-blank range most of the time.

2) My (admittedly pretty limited) experience with gun clubs is that their foremost objective is teaching you to respect the power of a firearm, then how to make effective use of it & maintain it. Assuming that this is the case with this gun club as well, Breivik, in essence, would've been abusing their trust / lessons.

Mild Confusion

I couldn't blame the gun clubs either really. The whole point of them is to provide a reasonably safe place for people to practice marksmanship or learn weapon safely.

I'm sure others would feel differently.

Donnicton

CNN posted a followup article a little while ago, and amazingly it's not hyperbolic, scapegoating fearmongering.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/04/19/tech/gaming-gadgets/games-violence-norway-react/index.html?hpt=hp_c2

(CNN) -- Norway's alleged mass killer testified on Thursday that he played video games as a way to train for a shooting spree that killed 77 people last summer. In particular, Anders Behring Breivik said at his trial that he played "Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2" as a means of shooting practice, according to CNN's report.

The confessed shooter also said he once played the online game "World of Warcraft," a role-playing adventure with multiple players from around the world, for as many as 16 hours a day.

For people who have long suspected that there is some link between violent video games and real-world violence, the statement offered frightening new evidence for why the video-game industry should be more strictly regulated.

Many gamers and columnists, however, rolled their eyes and collectively muttered "here we go again."

"How many times are we going to do this?" Paul Tassi wrote in a Forbes story, "The idiocy of blaming video games for the Norway massacre." "Really now, it's getting absurd."

"Norway Killer Played World of Warcraft, Which Probably Means Nothing At All," declared a headline on Time.com, which shares a parent company with CNN.

Whether shoot-'em-up video games can incite violence has been a long-running debate among the public as well as in clinical psychology. This type of discussion tends to come up every time it's revealed that a high-profile killer also played video games.

Perhaps the most memorable case study was the Columbine High School shooting in Colorado in 1999, during which experts speculated about the influence of the game "Doom" on the teenagers who carried out that crime.

And for years, the controversial "Grand Theft Auto" series, in which players can kill police officers, was targeted by critics who said it glamorizes criminals and promotes violence. The makers of the game were even sued by the attorney for a convicted cop killer in Alabama, who argued the game inspired his client.

Ultimately, it seems like science should judge whether playing violent video games can lead to a propensity for violence in the real world. A number of recent studies have cast doubts about the link between video games and violence, but there's no definitive answer.

Confusingly, a 2004 U.S. Secret Service and Department of Education report studied 24 cases of school violence and found: "Over half of the attackers demonstrated some interest in violence, through movies, video games, books and other media. However, there was no one common type of interest in violence indicated. Instead, the attackers' interest in violent themes took various forms."

The always-vocal jury of the Internet, meanwhile, rushed on Thursday to the defense of the video game industry. Here's a breakdown of the general argument, in case you want to be supercontrarian and appropriate these points for cocktail-party conversation this weekend.


Point 1: Lots of people play video games and don't kill people.

"How many subscribers do those two games have? Several million? And yet several million of us managed not to go bonkers with a gun," a commenter on my Google+ page. "Ridiculous argument."

Point 1.5: Lots of people who play "FarmVille" don't actually farm.

Here's a related point: People who play other kinds of video games don't usually (or ever) act out the things they do in the games. "Shooters do not create real-life killers. Neither does "FarmVille" create real-life farmers," another Google+ commenter said.

Point 2: The confessed Norway killer had other apparent influences.

"If we're looking for Breivik's influences and motivations, we'd better start with xenophobia, fundamentalist Christianity and right-wing ideology before even mentioning what was in his Xbox," a commenter wrote on CNN's story about the trial.

And from Lisa Smith on Google+: "If there were no violent video games or movies, would Breivek have shrugged off writing his manifesto [on] his irrational fear of Islam? No, then perhaps then if he'd been unable to watch the news? Oops, now we have to keep him from using the Internet, was that enough?"

Point 3: There are lots of ways to train for a shooting spree.

From a Forbes column: "Let's say he did use 'Call of Duty' to help him train in some way. So what? That may sound callous, but let's be real here. If he went to a gun range every single day for the past year, a place that actually trains you how to hit person-shaped targets with a real gun firing real bullets in your hands, would we be talking about how shooting ranges are to blame?

Would we want them all closed down for fear someone else might learn how to shoot a gun and kill someone? Some might, but they'd be shouted down by gun rights activists, ironically many of whom would like to blame games instead."

Point 3.5: And anyway, these games would be crappy for training.

"How can 'World of Warcraft' be considered 'training'? Unless he planned on looting gold and armor. Also, 'Modern Warfare' is hardly a training tool. Too linear and unrealistic," another Google+ commenter wrote. "Could the 'Armed Assault' series, with its more simulation based approach, have been more useful to create a mass murderer?"

Point 4: There's little scientific evidence to suggest video games actually make people violent.

From Time.com: "The most up-to-date research, according to academic and TIME contributor Christopher Ferguson, 'has not found that children who play VVG [violent video games] are more violent than other kids, nor harmed in any other identifiable fashion.'

In Ferguson's own longitudinal studies, recently published in the Journal of Psychiatric Research, he found 'no long-term link between VVG and youth aggression or dating violence.' And Ferguson references another recent longitudinal study involving German children, published in Media Psychology, which similarly found no links between increased aggression and violent video games."

Point 5: The Norway killer apparently saw "WoW" as a cover-up device.

I'll add this little factoid to the pile: If you search the manifesto that's attributed to Breivik, you'll only find a few references to "World of Warcraft." When he does mention the game, he appears to be explaining that by saying if you're playing "WoW" all the time, you can stop family members and friends from questioning what you're up to.

"Announce to your closest friends, co-workers and family that you are pursuing a 'project' that can at least partly justify your 'new pattern of activities' (isolation/travel) while in the planning phase," the manifesto says. "(For) example, tell them that you have started to play 'World of Warcraft' or any other online MMO game and that you wish to focus on this for the next months/year. This 'new project' can justify isolation and people will understand somewhat why you are not answering your phone over long periods."

Peter Ebel

Breivik is the comment section of every dumb ass news site made flesh. Fuck that guy and fuck those people. I wonder how it feels for them to have their own diatribe pelted at them by a mass murderer.

Feral

Donnicton wrote: »

Point 4: There's little scientific evidence to suggest video games actually make people violent.

From Time.com: "The most up-to-date research, according to academic and TIME contributor Christopher Ferguson, 'has not found that children who play VVG [violent video games] are more violent than other kids, nor harmed in any other identifiable fashion.'

In Ferguson's own longitudinal studies, recently published in the Journal of Psychiatric Research, he found 'no long-term link between VVG and youth aggression or dating violence.' And Ferguson references another recent longitudinal study involving German children, published in Media Psychology, which similarly found no links between increased aggression and violent video games."

Eh, Christopher Ferguson and another researcher named Craig Anderson have been going back and forth in the literature about this. (For example: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20192553 vs http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20192554).

I have a preference for Anderson's work. His publication list is extremely long, and his results are corroborated by other researchers (notably Rowell Huesmann) and are also consistent with prior investigation regarding television violence and violent behavior in kids.

Basically, many studies suggest that media violence (including video game violence) has a weak causal link with aggressive behavior - not enough to necessarily induce criminality in somebody with no criminal tendencies, but possibly enough to be a small contributory factor in somebody who is already at risk. The link is weak in effect strength, but that doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

I also don't feel that Anderson was being entirely honest in his comments in TIME. He made it sound as though his work is the final word in the matter, when in fact he has a minority viewpoint - a respectable minority viewpoint, I acknowledge, but a minority viewpoint nonetheless.

The Ender

We clearly need more content filters.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZACf2F1dQaU

Casual

ololzherewegoagainmurdersimulatorsarglebargle

Personally, I think rightwing politics and the toxic attitude it inspires toward our fellow humans had a bit more to do with Breviks shooting spree than WoW or CoD. I suggest we ban all rightwing parties and news outlets everywhere.

The main problem with this persistant argument (other than one side being made up entirely of cretinous luddites who won't be swayed by reason) is that no one listens to gamers. If you've actually played CoD you know it teaches you as much about combat as Die Hard or Letal Weapon movies do. But if you've played a video game in your life you're considered to be biased and your opinion is worthless in the debate. So we're in the position where the only people allowed to comment on video games are people who've never played one.

Echo

This is a rather vital point from that CNN article above:

"If we're looking for Breivik's influences and motivations, we'd better start with xenophobia, fundamentalist Christianity and right-wing ideology before even mentioning what was in his Xbox," a commenter wrote on CNN's story about the trial.

The Ender

Well, I think it's also reasonable to ask, "How did this man get his training and where did he get these guns?" so long as you're not asking it just as a loaded question.


Reading through his statements, this man completely blows my mind. He still thinks he was absolutely in the right to blast teenagers at a summer camp because they were 'traitors'.

Echo

The Ender wrote: »

Reading through his statements, this man completely blows my mind. He still thinks he was absolutely in the right to blast teenagers at a summer camp because they were 'traitors'.

He's a fascist. And I don't mean the watered-down current modern usage; I mean the original 1920s fascist. He's a modern-day squadristi, of the same kind that went out and murdered percieved "enemies of the state" in cold blood and then handed themselves over to authorities and quietly accepted a life-time sentence or a death penalty, because they believed they had done their duty.

The Ender

Well, yes, I understand that much - but I thought maybe upon reflection he'd have some remorse. Like, even Goebbels, at the very end, knew he would never be forgiven and ultimately defied his late Fuhrer's orders to bring what remained of Germany to ruin for it's 'failure'.

Jesus.

What a waste of a person.

Echo

Here's a part from a Swedish article, as fucked by Google Language Fucker.

- He is no leader of any movement, but Breivik has a political analysis of contemporary Europe. He believes it is in the hands of cowardly, liberal and politically correct powers that have allowed Europe to be invaded by an alien religious culture - Islam. It is Breiviks self perceived duty, on the basis that he assumed the identity as "true Norwegian" to start the crusade against these people. This is his attack on the Norwegian Social Democrats - who are not Muslims but the traitor who let in Muslims in Norway - a modern form of fascism.

Fascism is thus a political ideology that can be explained, not a mental illness. With knowledge of fascism's world of ideas will be Anders Breiviks mass murder logical and understandable. There will also be his behavior in the courtroom, which otherwise seem pathological.

If we understand Breiviks conviction we also understand why he is smiling in court why he "refuses to understand what he has done" as was incorrectly named in the press. The reality is the opposite; Breivik smiles because he very much understands what he has done. He has conducted the most beautiful thing a fascist can do: the action! Through its mass murder has Breivik seriously injured shot the younger "traitors" in the Norwegian "Marxism" of the future Norwegian Social Democratic leaders are most likely dead. The party is badly damaged.

Breivik has won. Therefore, he smiles.

The Ender

I disagree with that article.

Breivik didn't 'win' anymore than the Nazis 'won' via partial implementation of the Final Solution. He may well be smiling because he's delusional rather than psychotic, but killing 80 kids at one camp is not going to destroy the future of Norway's socialist parties.

Either this clearly hasn't registered for him yet (he's sitting in chains, an ugly ornament adorning one of the jails operated by the state he believes has been infiltrated by the Islamic Caliphate, and smiling? His precursors would've already made every attempt to kill themselves), or he's just flat-out psychopathic and his delusions are tangential (perhaps even just an excuse; this would seem to be somewhat in line with him having plagiarized portions of his manifesto).

Peter Ebel

The Ender wrote: »

I disagree with that article.

Breivik didn't 'win' anymore than the Nazis 'won' via partial implementation of the Final Solution. He may well be smiling because he's delusional rather than psychotic, but killing 80 kids at one camp is not going to destroy the future of Norway's socialist parties.

Either this clearly hasn't registered for him yet (he's sitting in chains, an ugly ornament adorning one of the jails operated by the state he believes has been infiltrated by the Islamic Caliphate, and smiling? His precursors would've already made every attempt to kill themselves), or he's just flat-out psychopathic and his delusions are tangential (perhaps even just an excuse; this would seem to be somewhat in line with him having plagiarized portions of his manifesto).

His self stated goal is to get people to read his "manifest" and spread the idea of cultural and ethnic isolationism. He maintains that the killings were mainly to garner attention and secondarily to wipe out the youth party.

notdroid

Echo wrote: »

This is a rather vital point from that CNN article above:

"If we're looking for Breivik's influences and motivations, we'd better start with xenophobia, fundamentalist Christianity and right-wing ideology before even mentioning what was in his Xbox," a commenter wrote on CNN's story about the trial.

But didn't you know that Nazis were gamers? I saw them in Wolfenstein!