• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Deaths Related To Video Games / Gamers / Gaming

ogopogo3

Gone But Not Forgotten
(ACCOUNT RETIRED)
Joined
Oct 25, 2001
Messages
1,371
http://www.jsonline.com/news/State/mar02/31536.asp

Death of a game addict
Ill Hudson man took own life after long hours on Web

By STANLEY A. MILLER II
of the Journal Sentinel staff

Shawn Woolley loved an online computer game so much that he played it just minutes before his suicide.

The 21-year-old Hudson man was addicted to EverQuest, says his mother, Elizabeth Woolley of Osceola. He sacrificed everything so he could play for hours, ignoring his family, quitting his job and losing himself in a 3-D virtual world where more than 400,000 people worldwide adventure in a never-ending fantasy.

On Thanksgiving morning last year, Shawn Woolley shot himself to death at his apartment in Hudson. His mother blames the game for her son's suicide. She is angry that Sony Online Entertainment, which owns EverQuest, won't give her the answers she desires. She has hired an attorney who plans to sue the company in an effort to get warning labels put on the games.

"It's like any other addiction," Elizabeth Woolley said last week. "Either you die, go insane or you quit. My son died."

In the virtual world of EverQuest, players control their characters through treasure-gathering, monster-slaying missions called quests. Success makes the characters stronger as they interact with other players from all over the real world.

Woolley has tried tracing her son's EverQuest identity to discover what might have pushed him over the edge. Sony Online cites its privacy policy in refusing to unlock the secrets held in her son's account.

She has a list of names her son scrawled while playing the game: "Phargun." "Occuler." "Cybernine." But Woolley is not sure if they are names of online friends, places he explored in the game or treasures his character may have captured in quests.

"Shawn was playing 12 hours a day, and he wasn't supposed to because he was epileptic, and the game would cause seizures," she said. "Probably the last eight times he had seizures were because of stints on the computer."

Woolley knows her son had problems beyond EverQuest, and she tried to get him help by contacting a mental health program and trying to get him to live in a group home. A psychologist diagnosed him with depression and schizoid personality disorder, symptoms of which include a lack of desire for social relationships, little or no sex drive and a limited range of emotions in social settings.

"This fed right into the EverQuest playing," Woolley said. "It was the perfect escape."

Jay Parker, a chemical dependency counselor and co-founder of Internet/Computer Addiction Services in Redmond, Wash., said Woolley's mental health problems put him in a category of people more likely to be at risk of getting addicted to online games.

Parker said people who are isolated, prone to boredom, lonely or sexually anorexic are much more susceptible to becoming addicted to online games. Having low self-esteem or poor body image are also important factors, he said.

"The manufacturer of EverQuest purposely made it in such a way that it is more intriguing to the addict," Parker said. "It could be created in a less addictive way, but (that) would be the difference between powdered cocaine and crack cocaine."

Parker doesn't make the narcotics analogy lightly. One client - a 21-year-old college student - stopped going to class within eight weeks after he started playing EverQuest his senior year.

After playing the game for 36 hours straight, he had a psychotic break because of sleep deprivation, Parker said.

"He thought the characters had come out of the game and were chasing him," Parker said. "He was running through his neighborhood having hallucinations. I can't think of a drug he could have taken where he would have disintegrated in 15 weeks."

There are several questions people who think they are addicted to computers and the Internet can ask themselves to see whether they might have a problem, Parker said, including whether they can predict the amount of time they spend on the computer or have failed trying to control their computer use for an extended period of time.

Parker said that any traumatic setback to Shawn Woolley's character in EverQuest could have traumatized an already vulnerable young man.

It may be that the character was slain in combat and Woolley had trouble recovering him. Or, he could have lost a treasured artifact or massive wealth, or been cast out of one of the game's social clubs, called guilds.

"The social component is big because it gives players a false sense of relationships and identity," Parker said. "They say they have friends, but they don't know their names."

Elizabeth Woolley remembers when her son was betrayed by an EverQuest associate he had been adventuring with for six months. Shawn's online brother-in-arms stole all the money from his character and refused to give it back.

"He was so upset, he was in tears," she said. "He was so depressed, and I was trying to say, 'Shawn, it's only a game.' I said he couldn't trust those people."

Sony Online Entertainment declined to comment for this story, but EverQuest fans say the game is a fun diversion that is much better than watching television.

Donna Cox of Schaumburg, Ill., has played for about two years and enjoys the adventuring and socializing. Cox and her husband, Bob, play together and team up against the game's challenges.

"It's like an adult playground," said Donna Cox, a professional who manages a team of computer programmers. "You can become anything you want. People only see the side of you that you want them to see."

Cox played about 40 hours a week at the height of her gaming but now plays only a couple of times a week. "Once you get into the high-end game, it takes a a lot of time," she said.

Dody Gonzales of Milwaukee has played the game for about three years and has more than a dozen characters spread across the EverQuest realm. Gonzales, who plays about four hours a night, knows EverQuest has been blamed for people's problems because it's a topic discussed in the online community.

Said player Vincent Frederico of Rochester, N.Y.: "It's almost like a drug. If you are not happy with your real life, you can always go in. . . . Someone who lacks social skills, they could find it much easier just to play the game instead of going out to a bar."

One key component is that the game can be played indefinitely, and there are always people populating the online world. EverQuest and other online games also have a social structure.

"The graphics are absolutely thrilling. They just haul you in," said Parker, who has treated several people for EverQuest addiction. "The other piece is that it takes time to leave the game. You have to find a place to hide to get out, and that makes people want to play longer."

For people who are unhappy, socially awkward or feel unattractive, online games provide a way to reinvent themselves.

Shawn Woolley - who was overweight, worked in a pizza restaurant and lived alone in an apartment the last months of his life - may have depended on EverQuest to provide the life he really wanted to live.

"People like to create new personas," Parker said. "You see a lot of gender-bending."

Interest in online games grew in 1997 with Origin Systems' Ultima Online, now with about 225,000 players. Microsoft's Asheron's Call, with around 100,000 subscribers, provides a virtual world similar to EverQuest's. Most online games require an initial software purchase plus monthly fees of about $10.

The games have roots in Dungeons & Dragons, the role-playing game created in 1974 by TSR Games in Lake Geneva. But D&D requires human contact to play; its digital counterparts do not.

David Walsh, president of the National Institute on Media and the Family in Minneapolis, said many EverQuest players refer to it as "EverCrack."

Walsh, who didn't know the details of Woolley's suicide, thinks mental health problems linked to playing online games, especially EverQuest, are growing.

"Could a person get so engrossed that they become so distressed and distraught that it could put them over the edge?" Walsh said. "It probably has something to do with the game. But your average person or average gamer won't do this. It's a coming together of a number of circumstances."

Walsh and Parker both said online games as a whole are not inherently bad, and Walsh compared playing online games to drinking alcohol. Both can be harmful if abused.

"I've seen a lot of wreckage because of EverQuest," Parker said. "But they are all the same. It's like cigarettes. They need to come with a warning label. 'Warning, extensive playing could be hazardous to your health.' "

Warning labels are exactly what Jack Thompson, a Miami attorney and vocal critic of the entertainment industry, wants to result from a lawsuit he plans to file against Sony Online Entertainment for Elizabeth Woolley.

"We're trying to whack them with a verdict significantly large so that they, out of fiscal self-interest, will put warning labels on," he said. "We're trying to get them to act responsibly. They know this is an addictive game."

"I am sure we are going to find things akin to the tobacco industry memos where they say nicotine is addictive," he said. "There is a possibility of a class-action lawsuit."

John Kircher, a professor at Marquette University Law School and expert in personal injury law, said a negligence action might be won if plaintiffs could successfully argue EverQuest's publishers "should have foreseen an unreasonable risk of harm, that people could potentially hurt themselves.

"Then there is the issue of First Amendment rights," Kircher said. "Does the First Amendment right trump the rights of the plaintiff? If the Internet is a form of publication . . . there is a balance the courts try to strike, and it's not an easy question."
 
I've said before that I think there's a serious mental and physical risk in computer usage! Working alongside and knowing many, many professional computer users, many have disturbed body clocks caused by their habits and exhibit similar symptoms to "shift worker syndrome". Also, I believe people can become disassociated from "real" life after long periods of computer usage.

In modern times, the juggling of real and cyber lives can cause great stress - I tell you, this WILL be the next big, hyped modern malady, like RSI, SAD and the aforementioned Shift Worker Syndrome.

Damn... is it 2am already?
 
Game blamed for hammer murder

The parents of a boy who was murdered with a claw hammer by a friend have blamed a violent video game which the teenage killer was "obsessed" with.

Warren Leblanc, 17, repeatedly stabbed 14-year-old Stefan Pakeerah after luring him to a Leicester park to steal from him on 27 February.

He pleaded guilty to murder at Leicester Crown Court on Wednesday.

Stefan's mother described Leblanc, who confessed to police moments after the assault, as "inherently evil".

Video game 'obsession'

Stefan's mother, Giselle, a research nurse, had to leave court when the evidence in the case became too harrowing.

Following the hearing she said her son's killer had mimicked a game called Manhunt, developed by Edinburgh-based Rockstar North, in which the players score points for violent killings.

Leblanc armed himself with a claw hammer and a knife
Manhunt was banned six months ago in New Zealand by censorship officials.


Mrs Pakeerah said: "I heard some of Warren's friends say that he was obsessed by this game.

"To quote from the website that promotes it, it calls it a psychological experience, not a game, and it encourages brutal killing.

"If he was obsessed by it, it could well be that the boundaries for him became quite hazy."

Mrs Pakeerah, 36, called for violent video games to be banned.

Covered in blood

She said: "I can't believe that this sort of material is allowed in a society where anarchy is not that far removed.

"It should not be available and it should not be available to young people."

I don't play these games but if they are influencing kids to go out and kill people then you don't want them on the shelves
Patrick Pakeerah, victim's father

Leblanc, of Braunstone Frith, Leicester, persuaded his victim to go to nearby Stoke Woods Park, known locally as The Dumps - to meet two girls.

The court heard how he armed himself with a knife and claw hammer to carry out the attack.

He confessed to the killing moments later when he was found covered in blood by two police officers.

Outside court Stefan's father, Patrick, said: "They were playing a game called Manhunt.

"The way Warren committed the murder is how the game is set out - killing people using weapons like hammers and knives.

"There is some connection between the game and what he has done."

Game ban

Echoing his former partner, the civil servant said: "I don't play these games but if they are influencing kids to go out and kill people then you don't want them on the shelves."

When police discovered Stefan, they found he had sustained horrific and fatal injuries.

The boy had been hit so hard with the hammer he had suffered deep cuts to his head and neck. His head had been fractured in several places.

He had multiple stab wounds, with the knife being plunged so deep that it had caused serious injuries to his kidney and liver.

A spokesman for the Entertainment and Leisure Software Publishers' Association said: "We sympathise enormously with the family and parents of Stefan Pakeerah.

"However, we reject any suggestion or association between the tragic events and the sale of the video game Manhunt.

"The game in question is classified 18 by the British Board of Film Classification and therefore should not be in the possession of a juvenile.

"Simply being in someone's possession does not and should not lead to the conclusion that a game is responsible for these tragic events."

Judge Michael Stokes QC said Leblanc had carried out "a brutal, cold-blooded murder" and could expect a life sentence.

Sentencing was adjourned for reports.


BBCi News 29/07/04
 
Killer cmputer games

In a similar theme to people being inspired by films to kill:

Dixon pulls "Manhunt" after teen murder

Thu 29 July, 2004 13:18

LONDON (Reuters) - Britain's biggest electronics chain, Dixons, has pulled the graphically violent video game "Manhunt" from its shops after parents of a teenage murder victim blamed the game for the killing of their son.

The game, in which the player takes on the role of a convicted murderer ordered by a demented film director to kill people in as gruesome a fashion as possible, has stirred controversy even among fans of violent videos.

It awards extra points to players for carrying out murders in a particularly extreme and bloody way, while victims plead to be spared on behalf of their wives and children.

The parents of Stefan Pakeerah, 14, called this week for "Manhunt" to be banned after a 17-year-old admitted inviting their son into a park and murdering him.

Warren Le Blanc, a fan of the game, admitted he beat the younger teen to death with a claw hammer and stabbed him repeatedly with a knife. He could face life in prison.

"I didn't intend to kill him at first, but when I saw the blood I just let go and hit more times," he told police.

Stefan's father Patrick, 41, said: "Stefan's murder compares to how the game is set out, using weapons like hammers and knives. If games like this influence kids, they should be taken off the shelves."

The game is published by Rockstar Games, a division of New York's Take-Two Interactive Software known for its line-up of violent games like the hugely popular "Grand Theft Auto" series, which sees players run wild in high-speed crime sprees.

No comment from the company was immediately available.

A spokeswoman for Dixons said it was pulling the game from its shelves on Thursday with immediate effect as a result of the uproar.

The game has an "18" rating, which means it should not be sold to minors.

In a generally favourable review on the website totalvideogames.com, the reviewer wrote: "it has to be the most violent yet realistic videogame we've played" and described its "ability to unhinge the player and make you feel disturbed."

Another Web site, Game Zone Online, gave it an 8 out of 10 score for "solid gameplay" but wrote: "kids under 17 should not be allowed anywhere around this game, and it contains some of the most disgusting killings that I have seen either in movies or in a game".

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=topNews&storyID=556072&section=news
 
Manhunt banned following "copycat" Murder

Retailer bans Manhunt after murder link claim
By Tony Smith
Published Thursday 29th July 2004 15:29 GMT
UK consumer electronics retail chain has pulled the computer game Manhunt from its shelves after the parents of a murdered schoolboy blamed the title for their son's death.

Stefan Pakeerah, 14, was stabbed and beaten to death in a Leicester park in February. Warren Leblanc, 17, of Braunstone Frith, Leicester this week pleaded guilty to the lethal attack.

Pakeerah's parents alleged that Leblanc's fascination in the game, in which points are scored for committing grizzly killings, had influenced his actions.

Dixons today began removing Manhunt from its store shelves. Under UK law Manhunt must not be sold to anyone under the age of 18. Retailer W H Smith told the BBC that it was considering whether to continue stocking the title. Virgin Megastores, however, will continue to do so. "While we take a level of responsibility, ultimately, censorship decisions are up to the consumer," a spokesman said.

Computer games that depict 'realistic' imagery must be certified by the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) before release. The BBFC today stood by its certification, which indicates that the game should only be sold to adults. UK retailers are bound by the law to ensure that games are only sold to buyers of an appropriate age.

Of course, nothing prevents an adult buying such a game on a juvenile's behalf. And some kids do get hold of pirate copies.

We've been here before. Computer games have been claimed to influence other adolescent murders, most notably the Columbine High School killings, which some observers blamed on an obsessive interest in Doom. More recently, Grand Theft Auto has been blamed for a road killing.

Influences are easy to claim, but direct causality is harder to prove, whether the alleged cause are violent computer games or equally violent movies. Two decades or more ago, it was Dungeons and Dragons that was felt to be at fault.

But for every child psychologist claiming violent imagery leads to violent actions, there's another who believes games and movies provide an outlet for aggression that might otherwise be directed toward other kids.

Certainly, the vast majority of game players, comic readers and movie viewers do not act out in the real world violent content they've consumed on a PC or DVD. ®


I guess the same thing applies in this case as in every other case of this kind, a person with serious mental problems has their parent claim that "something" was to blame rather than their own child's problems. The point to note is that if the parent is blaming the game why were they letting their son play an 18 rated game in the first place? I have played Manhunt from beginning to end and yes the staged death scenes are pretty gruesome, hence the 18 rating but no more so than your average horror movie. The trouble with this title in particular is that the game makers court this particular kind of publicity because it sells computer games, they seem to have created a title that tries to shock by using the medium of the snuff film as a macguffin.
 
Hmm - that game has an '18' rating. His parents should've spotted that. 'Manhunt' is a crass, idiotic game - but if parents don't keep an eye on their kids getting hold of such stuff, their calls to ban such things fall a bit flat IMHO.
 
To blame the computer game for the murder is to say that without the computer game the murder would not have taken place. I don't believe that that is true.

If the parents believe that their son was so easily effected by pop culture surely they would have been very careful about what sort of media he was exposed to.

It seems that whenever something horrific like this happens, with no rhyme or reason, those affected by grief look for something tangible to blame- something that they are comfortable hitting out at. Rap music, horror films, Marilyn Manson, black metal, even the news have been blamed in the past and while I can understand the mechanism that makes someone want to make sense of such a tragedy and want to take control by attempting to ban or suppress their paticular scapegoat, I think that it is a very simplistic view to take. it would be very comforting to think that without A or B, C can never happen again, but real life just isn't like that.

I think that real life is far more complicated and chaotic. You can never predict what will make someone tip over the edge, you never know what is going on inside someone's mind until they either tell you or the outcome of their actions gives you some clues.

I think that they should tighten up on underage purchases and the like, but I don't think that banning this game will do anything to stop tragedies like this happening.
 
Because nobody on the face of the planet has ever looked at a hammer or a knife for use as a weapon before.
 
meh, this always happens. It couldn't have been down to the boy, it couldn't have been his fault, ooh no, it -must- have been the computer game. If at teh age of 17 the boy was still so impressionable as to be turned into a murderer by a computer game then there's something mentally wrong with him, a computer game couldn't have done that to him without anything to work with.


Although I thought it was a great game...hm, look out for me on crimewatch...
 
It's the parents of the murdered boy who are calling for the ban, not the parents of the murderer.
 
Ban banning

Cider said:
To blame the computer game for the murder is to say that without the computer game the murder would not have taken place. I don't believe that that is true.

If the parents believe that their son was so easily effected by pop culture surely they would have been very careful about what sort of media he was exposed to.

It seems that whenever something horrific like this happens, with no rhyme or reason, those affected by grief look for something tangible to blame- something ...


Very much so.

But lets not mention Ghost Watch.

The 18 rating is crucial, the thing was inteded for stable and consenting adults; though why anyone would want to buy that cr4p is beyond me.

The culture of blaming something tangible, I think, falls somewhat on the government's doorstep: They keep banning objects when clearly people are at fault, society will take the cue.
 
the front pages of tomorrows papers have just been shown on news night. the front page of the daily mail is "ban all thease murdurus computer games" didn't see that one coming :rolleyes:

It's odd how the daily mail and its like has always tryed to start campains to ban films and computer games that have 18 certificates on them getting into the hands of youngsters yet books don't have any form of control and have the potentule to be more dangerous if a person with a disposition to murder reads them. perhaps it's just the mails rampant technophobia that leads to their campains?
 
Surely the problem is with the boys mind and not the computer game? How, if 99.9% of the people buying the game play it, have a bit of fictional fun then go out and live happy normal lives can the game be blamed for its 'influence'.
 
Besides what difference dose it make if Dixons bans a game?

Dixons is overpriced and has a poor games selection who in their right mind buys games from there anyway? :confused:
 
Who in their right mind attacks people with a claw hammer?

Dixons it is then.
 
Here's my opinion:

I think blaiming videogames for real life violence (or tv, or movies, or radio, or books) is simple scapegoating because people don't want to:

admit we live in a world where violence can happen

&

admit that there are larger issues (like lack of extended families, lack of economic opportunity, parents more concerned with themselves and/or bewildered by our modern lifestyle to really care to raise their children) weighing in on the life of children these days.

These forces are so large though as to be untouchable, so railing against them won't give any imediate satisfaction. Maybe that's because of big business and government interest in maintaing the status quo, but acknoledgeing these issues would point out that nuclear families, governments and the businesses of the world are causing real problems.

Given that's how I see things, I think that people find it easier to say that one single object (a game, a book, a movie) led someone to kill, because isn't it easy to say "Game, book and movie, begone from my home; and if you do this your home will stay safe and your kids won't kill"?

It sure beats saying "I brought a child into the world and I didn't pay it any attention because it would interfere with my golf game and now I wonder why he's a killer", or "the economy is being controled by large corporate interests that keep me working long hours and the mind-numbing routine makes me just want to come home and drink, and I was too drunk to see what was really going on in the lives of my kids".
 
The whole banning idea is such a knee jerk reaction, as I'm sure most ppl here would agree. Trying not to sound like a mid-Western gun nut, "computer games don't kill people - people kill people".

I don't know if it's affected anyone else this way, but I am now more than considering going and buying the game, just to see what the fuss is all about.

And totally agree with the comment about literature being potentially more influential - Lord of the Flies? Catcher in the Rye? Anything by Jeffrey Archer (makes me want to end somebody's life, anyway ;) )
 
if computer games and TV are responsible for violence then a lot of world history is wrong as i don't think Cain had access to a playstation. ;)
 
Here's a thought

I picked up a book in WH Smiths the other day that contained graphic scenes of infantacide, genocide, severalthingselsecide, incest, masturbation, torture, you name it and apparently it's inspired millions of people to kill one another and continue to do so, openly sold and not on the top shelf, I think it's called the Bible. I intend to write to the Daily Mail immediately about this insidious threat in our hallowed local book shop.

The really sick thing is that yesterday villagers in Darfur (Sudan) were chained together and burned alive by militiamen in yet another atrocity in this region, yet this isn't front page news apparently to the Daily Mail, no they'd much rather bandwagon jump another pointless issue.

You know they might be right, this game has made me want to beat the intellectual light weights who write this drivel with a claw hammer, maybe I have been affected?
 
The reasons that a book or game or video is 'banned', ie withdrawn from sale by retailers in these cases are

a. to make the retailer appear sensible and compassionate

b. to protect the retailer from legal action, especially by the families of people affected by later similar crimes.

Retailers can't lose by 'banning' such stock.
And if anyone still wants to buy it, remember that it gets bought up by 'overstock' specialists and will be on market stalls before xmas. ;)

Cynical, moi? :)
 
Like I said earlier a lot of game companies court bad publicity (anyone remember Carmageddon about 8 or so years ago?) because any publicity even bad sells games.
 
Very true - it has a hint of the 'Taboo' effect (and no, I don't mean falling over and soiling yourself in the gutter after drinking a bottle of dreadful girlie spirit).
 
The one thing people don't seem to consider is that maybe the kid already had a personality disorder or was a latent psychopath. In which case the game may have allowed an outlet for his fantasies and it may in fact have prevented something far worse happening.

If 'ifs' and 'buts' were candied nuts...
 
Agent Buffy said:
Very true - it has a hint of the 'Taboo' effect (and no, I don't mean falling over and soiling yourself in the gutter after drinking a bottle of dreadful girlie spirit).

Going O/T for a moment another bandwagon that is currently doing the rounds is binge drinking. I went into my local off licence and tried to buy a bottle of this "Binge" and the guy hadn't a clue what I was talking about. Another case of the media fabricating I think. :D
 
I got bored with smoking cigarettes, and when I wanted to try something different my local tobacconist (which was not scratched) had none of these "Passives" in stock. He looked at me in a funny way, too.

However, to swing this vaguely back OT I think it's fairly safe to say that, in agreement with Physick, the person in question must have had some sort of mental disorder (or at the very least a propensity towards it). The question which then immediately springs to my mind would be "Was this known about?", and if so what (if anything) was being done about it?

All levity aside, and avoiding the unpleasant prospect of censorship and Uncle Tone's Nanny State (tm), it should not be forgotten that this was a tragic occurence.



**Edited to add closing bracket - oops!**
**and again to correct my incompetent HTML coding - dang!**
 
anyone else had the idea of buying up the entire stock of this game and then ebaying them when most the shops refuse to stock it?
 
I think the certificate system should be enforced. Even fantasy violence in the wrong context can impact the young who have trouble differentiating fantasy violence from real life actions. I deliberately refrain from putting an age on “young” as this varies according to the individual, but by 18 the vast majority of people should have these skills.

I must also dispute the idea that this adolescent must be mentally ill, just because he killed someone with a knife or a hammer. The majority of murders in the UK as elsewhere in the world are committed by someone known to the victim and with weapons of convenience. In the UK this will normally be a knife or blunt object. I do not know what the circumstances of the murder were, violent argument or premeditated, but neither of these point to a mental illness.

Always remember you are statistically more likely to die in an accident involving socks (6 people per year in the UK on average) than to be killed by a schizophrenic who is not in hospital (no statistics, but every one of these trials seems to get into the newspapers).

Calling for a ban will allow the family of the murdered boy to feel that something good has come from the death (a very common need in the grieving process) even though it has no positive impact on our society. The fact that the games company and the retailers who keep the product on the shelf will benefit financially from this notoriety has been missed though.

Censorship is 100% wrong as far as I can see, as long as no one is being hurt (against their will) in the production of the media (books, pictures, videos, games) then I can see no valid argument to prevent adult access to the media. If you want offensive violence that certainly makes me feel queasy look no further than William Shakespeare’s, Titus Andronicus.
 
Blaming the computer game is so much easier than having to face up to any of the real reasons why this boy did this.

H.
 
Never said that the kid had to have a mental illness, merely stated it as a possibility. And a more likely one than blaming the game.


Titus Andronicus - from Shakespeare's early Tarantino phase. along with Coriolanus.
 
Back
Top