It has been reported that a Russian teenager has been killed by his friend after beating him several times in Counter-Strike 1on1. The fourteen year old suspect waited for his opponent to finish playing to then beat him with a brick.
As reported on PlanetHalfLife, both boys met at an internet café to play Counter-Strike against each other where the 17 year old Alexei kept winning against 14 year old Alexander. Due to this they already had several fights inside of the café but after a while the 14 year old left only to wait for his opponent.
Outside of the building Alexander was waiting with a friend until Alexei finished playing which was reported to be at about 3.00 AM. The 14 year old then started beating up his rival with a brick until he broke down and died due to the injuries. The boy has been sentenced to four years of imprisonment also under the circumstance that he did not intend to kill his victim
what, like counterstrike is the cause of it? seriously who gives a fuck if he killed him over counterstrike, a poppyseed muffin, because he smelled bad, it doesn't matter at all. he killed him.
Jesus how can a kid be so irresponsible? I guess it's not that far fetched for a 14 year old to seek a fight, but myself and everyone I knew when I was 14 would have been scarred shitless to beat somebody THAT hard
Sorry to say but this sort of shit is hilarious. Proper game rage lol. Of course it's terrible for the guy getting killed. It's also imo a joke that he got 4. Though being a gamer he will probably be completely destroyed in Russian prison.
hahaha there was this story years ago you may remember specifically about SC in California, LA maybe. girl was owning some kid 1on1 LT style (hooah) and talking mad shit all throughout so this boy kid shot the girl in the face with a homemade gun after the game for it. people wanted to blame sc... really? the dude had a homemade gun. this kid had a brick. really?
On May 07 2009 05:09 travis wrote: great who gives a shit
what, like counterstrike is the cause of it? seriously who gives a fuck if he killed him over counterstrike, a poppyseed muffin, because he smelled bad, it doesn't matter at all. he killed him.
People generally like information and context in their news??
On May 07 2009 05:09 travis wrote: great who gives a shit
what, like counterstrike is the cause of it? seriously who gives a fuck if he killed him over counterstrike, a poppyseed muffin, because he smelled bad, it doesn't matter at all. he killed him.
People generally like information and context in their news??
lol srsly, and i think its pretty relevant that they were playing counterstrike. i mean how often does a 14year old kill a 17year old with a brick. of course the context is important
Oh no, what has this world degenerated into? It is all because of these things people play called video games. If it weren't for video games, the kid would have never beaten the other kid with a brick. Please, I hope the government wakes up and issues a worldwide ban on video games. They are doing our otherwise good kids no good
oh Holy shit Russia has some bad news coming out of it for the past couple weeks. First the "reverse" rape and now this. I suppose the Russians will look at the situation better than the US. I'm sure if this happened in the US people would want to do some crazy shit to ban CS.
Ya only 4 years is the most fucke dup thing about this story. Kid is clearly fucking apeshit if he beats someone to death with a brick over losing. No intent to murder is the dumbest thing I've ever heard. So just like EXTREME aggravated assault was the intent so thats okay only 4? Dumb =\
On May 07 2009 05:09 travis wrote: great who gives a shit
what, like counterstrike is the cause of it? seriously who gives a fuck if he killed him over counterstrike, a poppyseed muffin, because he smelled bad, it doesn't matter at all. he killed him.
ok i dont think anyone gives a shit if you guys dont care how he got killed, you can stop posting in this thread. if you guys dont give a shit then you shouldnt be posting?
On May 07 2009 06:51 leMaj24 wrote: ok i dont think anyone gives a shit if you guys dont care how he got killed, you can stop posting in this thread. if you guys dont give a shit then you shouldnt be posting?
my point is that this story would have never gotten posted if it was just "kid kills another kid with a brick"
On May 07 2009 06:51 leMaj24 wrote: ok i dont think anyone gives a shit if you guys dont care how he got killed, you can stop posting in this thread. if you guys dont give a shit then you shouldnt be posting?
my point is that this story would have never gotten posted if it was just "kid kills another kid with a brick"
A kid smashing the skull of another kid wouldn't make news, are you kidding me? And it would probably end up posted here as well.
And of course it's relevant that it was over Counterstrike. I mean, shit, they were at a lan center, arguing about the game just prior to the killing. It doesn't insinuate that the game made him some sick kinda psychopath, it's just what happened. I have no idea why you're like IT DOESNT MATTER THEY WERE PLAYING GAMES
On May 07 2009 06:57 caelym wrote: 14 year old out at 3AM? where are the parents?
Many countries have "internet cafes" due to lack of access to internet/computers among the populace. These cafes often times stay open all night and they have cheap deals for gamers to spend all night their gaming.
The crime is quite reflective of problems Russia is having with hyper-masculinity and violence. Also a 4 year prison sentence is quite interesting to me. This kid is 14 and in the USA I believe anyone under 18 goes to juvi and has their sentence severely mitigated. Is this kid being sent to 4 years of real prison? That will fuck him up even more...
fuck how do you only get 4 years for killing someone. I know he 14 but still 4 years wtf. If some 14 year old killed my 17 year old son i be so pissed if his killer only got 4 years "because he did not mean too kill him". Wtf
who uses a brick.. i bet it was source, only nubs do this kind of stupid shit
shame he only got 4 years. what must the parents of the 17 yr old think? the 14 yr old will be out and about free to do wat he likes at the age of 18, while the 17 yr's parents will live the rest of their life deeply troubled by the lack of their son. this is the kind of shit that drives me crazy. if this happened to my brother, i would find the dude a few years after he gets out of jail, fucking beat his ass to death with a brick and then live in some other country for the rest of the life . piece of shit scumbag. 4 fucking years...worst part is im sure the kid is a huge piece of shit. i mean what kind of 14 year old grabs a brcik and gets a friend to help him jump some kid so he can beat his face with a brick? just shoot this piece of shit in the back of the head, ugh
On May 07 2009 09:10 zizou21 wrote: who uses a brick.. i bet it was source, only nubs do this kind of stupid shit
shame he only got 4 years. what must the parents of the 17 yr old think? the 14 yr old will be out and about free to do wat he likes at the age of 18, while the 17 yr's parents will live the rest of their life deeply troubled by the lack of their son. this is the kind of shit that drives me crazy. if this happened to my brother, i would find the dude a few years after he gets out of jail, fucking beat his ass to death with a brick and then live in some other country for the rest of the life . piece of shit scumbag. 4 fucking years...worst part is im sure the kid is a huge piece of shit. i mean what kind of 14 year old grabs a brcik and gets a friend to help him jump some kid so he can beat his face with a brick? just shoot this piece of shit in the back of the head, ugh
Good to know you've got the whole situation figured out from what was written in the OP.
- since the raccoon news I don't believe anything printed in online in Russian.. even if it is from the prokuratura-nso.ru - guess my current profile is fitting for that kid lol
Only 4 years? I guess bashing people to death with bricks is pretty normal acceptable behavior these days.
Come on, this kid doesn't deserve to go on living. There are decent people struggling in our world, how can we tolerate this? We haven't sunk this low yet.
Can't we feed him to the homeless? Pleeeease? Kills two birds with one stone. I bet he's tasty.
On May 07 2009 06:51 leMaj24 wrote: ok i dont think anyone gives a shit if you guys dont care how he got killed, you can stop posting in this thread. if you guys dont give a shit then you shouldnt be posting?
my point is that this story would have never gotten posted if it was just "kid kills another kid with a brick"
A kid smashing the skull of another kid wouldn't make news, are you kidding me? And it would probably end up posted here as well.
first of all i was talking about posted here, not the news.
secondly, think about how many people there are in the world. how many murders do you think there are?
"An estimated 520,000 people were murdered in 2000 around the globe. Two-fifths of them were young people between the ages of 10 and 29 who were killed by other young people."
Mathematically, that would be 520,000 divided by 365.24, which would be roughly 1423 murders per day.
so what, we should be having hundreds to thousands of posts per day regarding murders?
And of course it's relevant that it was over Counterstrike. I mean, shit, they were at a lan center, arguing about the game just prior to the killing. It doesn't insinuate that the game made him some sick kinda psychopath, it's just what happened. I have no idea why you're like IT DOESNT MATTER THEY WERE PLAYING GAMES
Just saying that it doesn't does not make it so. The fact is that headlines like "teen killed over counter-strike" DO insinuate that the game has something to do with the murder. When in reality this murder, with these people, could happen over anything. It just so happens that it was counterstrike.
I'll concede that it is relevant to the setting. But so is what clothes they were wearing, how busy the cyber cafe was, their moods that day, and a million other details.
To reiterate my original point: counterstrike has nothing to do with the murder. It shouldn't be the focus of this story. And if it's not the focus of this story, it would not have been posted here.
On May 07 2009 05:14 CubEdIn wrote: ...so he went outside, waited for his friend to come out and beat him with a brick?
....fucking camper.
hahaha that was good
on a side note wtf!! a brick srsly, if ever killed someone a brick would not be the weapon of choice. how gruesome, but i guess if you're planing on killing someone you probably don't care... wait he didn't mean to...
edit- wtf waited till 3am, jeez how would you even keep yourself enraged over some cs losses for that long. sometimes i get mad pissT over games but for 10 min top lol
On May 07 2009 11:01 ulszz wrote: edit- wtf waited till 3am, jeez how would you even keep yourself enraged over some cs losses for that long. sometimes i get mad pissT over games but for 10 min top lol
Yeah, that's the thing I don't get too.
Like, if somebody got me really pissed, enough to wait around the corner to beat the shit out of them, I think I would last maybe 5 minutes before the rage subsided and I just laughed and went home.
Then again the kid was 14, maybe he got more emotional about it than I can understand.
he attacked him with a brick and didn't mean to kill him? Seriously? (and how could a 17 year old not fight off a 14 year old counter strike player - even if he had a brick)
God forbid a story involving a video game is posted in a forum dedicated to a video game. Regardless of how trivial the role of the video game is (in my opinion, it's pretty important), the rarity of such circumstances makes it a newsworthy post here.
The only clear-cut thing that can be determined from the replies in this thread is that there is no clear-cut judge (aside from moderator's discretion) on whether this thread belongs here or not. So unless there's concrete facts backing up your central argument of why a thread doesn't belong here, don't speak in such an authoritative manner.
PS: I think it's pretty fucking clear that Counter-strike served as the final, if not sole, trigger behind the murder and to suggest that the kid's clothings are just as important to the story is a pathetic attempt to defend a losing argument.
On May 07 2009 12:12 MayorITC wrote: God forbid a story involving a video game is posted in a forum dedicated to a video game. Regardless of how trivial the role of the video game is (in my opinion, it's pretty important), the rarity of such circumstances makes it a newsworthy post here.
the rarity of what circumstances?
The only clear-cut thing that can be determined from the replies in this thread is that there is no clear-cut judge (aside from moderator's discretion) on whether this thread belongs here or not. So unless there's concrete facts backing up your central argument of why a thread doesn't belong here, don't speak in such an authoritative manner.
concrete facts? where are your concrete facts? does what you are saying even make sense?
PS: I think it's pretty fucking clear that Counter-strike served as the final, if not sole, trigger behind the murder and to suggest that the kid's clothings are just as important to the story is a pathetic attempt to defend a losing argument.
really? why is that?
people like you are EXACTLY the reason these types of biased stories are so bad for society. you say "counter-strike served as the final, if not sole trigger". yes man, clearly this was the fault of counterstrike and had nothing to do with the fact that at least one of these 2 kids was totally fucking insane.
On May 07 2009 06:51 leMaj24 wrote: ok i dont think anyone gives a shit if you guys dont care how he got killed, you can stop posting in this thread. if you guys dont give a shit then you shouldnt be posting?
my point is that this story would have never gotten posted if it was just "kid kills another kid with a brick"
A kid smashing the skull of another kid wouldn't make news, are you kidding me? And it would probably end up posted here as well.
first of all i was talking about posted here, not the news.
secondly, think about how many people there are in the world. how many murders do you think there are?
"An estimated 520,000 people were murdered in 2000 around the globe. Two-fifths of them were young people between the ages of 10 and 29 who were killed by other young people."
Mathematically, that would be 520,000 divided by 365.24, which would be roughly 1423 murders per day.
so what, we should be having hundreds to thousands of posts per day regarding murders?
And of course it's relevant that it was over Counterstrike. I mean, shit, they were at a lan center, arguing about the game just prior to the killing. It doesn't insinuate that the game made him some sick kinda psychopath, it's just what happened. I have no idea why you're like IT DOESNT MATTER THEY WERE PLAYING GAMES
Just saying that it doesn't does not make it so. The fact is that headlines like "teen killed over counter-strike" DO insinuate that the game has something to do with the murder. When in reality this murder, with these people, could happen over anything. It just so happens that it was counterstrike.
I'll concede that it is relevant to the setting. But so is what clothes they were wearing, how busy the cyber cafe was, their moods that day, and a million other details.
To reiterate my original point: counterstrike has nothing to do with the murder. It shouldn't be the focus of this story. And if it's not the focus of this story, it would not have been posted here.
You do realize that they were arguing in a lan center about cs?
That's like getting in a car accident and killing the guy in a fit of rage, and failing to note that they were interacting because of the accident. Or a dude finds his wife cheating on him and kills them, and the headline is man murders husband.
On May 07 2009 06:51 leMaj24 wrote: ok i dont think anyone gives a shit if you guys dont care how he got killed, you can stop posting in this thread. if you guys dont give a shit then you shouldnt be posting?
my point is that this story would have never gotten posted if it was just "kid kills another kid with a brick"
A kid smashing the skull of another kid wouldn't make news, are you kidding me? And it would probably end up posted here as well.
first of all i was talking about posted here, not the news.
secondly, think about how many people there are in the world. how many murders do you think there are?
"An estimated 520,000 people were murdered in 2000 around the globe. Two-fifths of them were young people between the ages of 10 and 29 who were killed by other young people."
Mathematically, that would be 520,000 divided by 365.24, which would be roughly 1423 murders per day.
so what, we should be having hundreds to thousands of posts per day regarding murders?
And of course it's relevant that it was over Counterstrike. I mean, shit, they were at a lan center, arguing about the game just prior to the killing. It doesn't insinuate that the game made him some sick kinda psychopath, it's just what happened. I have no idea why you're like IT DOESNT MATTER THEY WERE PLAYING GAMES
Just saying that it doesn't does not make it so. The fact is that headlines like "teen killed over counter-strike" DO insinuate that the game has something to do with the murder. When in reality this murder, with these people, could happen over anything. It just so happens that it was counterstrike.
I'll concede that it is relevant to the setting. But so is what clothes they were wearing, how busy the cyber cafe was, their moods that day, and a million other details.
To reiterate my original point: counterstrike has nothing to do with the murder. It shouldn't be the focus of this story. And if it's not the focus of this story, it would not have been posted here.
You do realize that they were arguing in a lan center about cs?
That's like getting in a car accident and killing the guy in a fit of rage, and failing to note that they were interacting because of the accident. Or a dude finds his wife cheating on him and kills them, and the headline is man murders husband.
Well your post made me slow down and think about it some more. I genuinely still do think that this sort of reporting is heavily biased in shaping the way people think. I do still think that the murder is not caused by CS, and many people are going to think CS played a role in it after reading that.
However I understand the need for some specifics in the story, and if the game they were playing really is the most relevant detail then I guess I am wrong.
But... I still just don't think it is. I don't think there is any news here other than that "14 year old russian teen murders 17 year old russian teen".
It seems to me that saying he died "over counterstrike" is like throwing a rug on top of the real issue.
Also to be honest I just don't get the point of repeatedly posting these stories where 1 or 2 people get murdered. Or someone rapes a baby. Or someone starves a dog to death. I mean come on, we all know this stuff happens already. Do we really need to keep posting these stories?
Edit:
Actually I guess some of you might not know this stuff happens already. But I would think at least most of us do.
I would say that even if events such as this occur frequently, that does not make them less interesting to read every so often. People die, people become heroes, people break records, people lose money, people gain money, etc... It doesn't stop the fact that every piece of news (on the Internet, on the TV, on the front page) is just one of these instances.
On May 07 2009 12:54 travis wrote: the rarity of what circumstances?
Out of those 1423 deaths a day in the year 2000, how many of them involved video games? There was a few links provided in this thread, but that was a span over how many years? Clearly, it's not as high of a figure as you'd like many of us to believe.
concrete facts? where are your concrete facts? does what you are saying even make sense?[
I'm not the one going around trying to dictate what belongs in the General forum and what doesn't. If I ever did though, I would provide a link to the direct forum rule under question instead of spewing random bullshit. And I would also know to shut the fuck up if several other people were telling me that I was wrong. I didn't want to be blunt about it, but since you decided to question my logic, I'll return the favor and show that you're the one with a retarded thought process.
Counter-Strike was relevant to the murder. It was the trigger. Note that trigger does not mean the only fucking factor leading up to the murder. If you stopped acting like some kind of know-it-all, which would require a miracle in your case based on the numerous assumptions in your posts, then you'd realize I never stated my theory behind the kid's motive. I was merely criticizing yours, which brings me to my next point.
If you truly believe that Counter-Strike had nothing to do with the story except describing the setting of the story, then get the fuck out of here and any other English-based forum and buy yourself "Hooked on Phonics" so you can correctly learn English the second time around.
I perfectly understand your argument about how one's environmental upbringing and personality plays a part in the murder. But unlike you, I can also discern the difference between motive and capability. Counter-Strike played a huge fucking part behind the kid's motive to kill the 17-year old. His fucked up personality for whatever reasons made him capable of such an act.
And unlike you, Freud, Darwinists and a lot of other traditional psychologists, I take a more contemporary approach by arguing that there's a multitude of factors that lead to the development of a person's psyche. Some of the influences affect us gradually while some of them have instantaneous effects such as losing a Counter-Strike game 5 hours ago. But since you fucking fail at English, let me reiterate my point in a Q&A format so that even a simpleton like you can understand my viewpoint.
Is Counter-Strike part of the story? Yes. Is it the only factor behind the motive of the killer? Based on the story, I'd say yes. Is it the only factor behind the murder? No.
I doubt you'll bother digesting anything I wrote except for the sake of finding minor errors to nitpick on. If 4-5 other people disagreeing with you didn't have any effect, I doubt my post would either. So let's settle this like Russians and battle it out at an Internet cafe over a game of Counter-Strike. And seeing how you hate losing based on this asinine thread, I'll be ready for the brick after our match.
On May 07 2009 06:51 leMaj24 wrote: ok i dont think anyone gives a shit if you guys dont care how he got killed, you can stop posting in this thread. if you guys dont give a shit then you shouldnt be posting?
my point is that this story would have never gotten posted if it was just "kid kills another kid with a brick"
On May 07 2009 06:57 caelym wrote: 14 year old out at 3AM? where are the parents?
Many countries have "internet cafes" due to lack of access to internet/computers among the populace. These cafes often times stay open all night and they have cheap deals for gamers to spend all night their gaming.
that doesn't answer his question... wouldn't the parents fukin kill the child for being out so late? esp playing games?
i noe im korea u need some1 old than 18? 21? to be w/ u if u r gonna stay @ internet cafe that late...
On May 07 2009 09:59 Probe. wrote: The judge reduced the sentence because he was afraid the kid would smash his face with a brick too if unless he got on his good side.
Deranged weird people that are attracted to violence or fantastical violence play games that involve violence. This does not reflect poorly on the game, or insinuate that only those people play those games it is just a fact; people do things they like.
I don't think the fact that violent and insane people play video games that are violent is a big shocker for anyone. It also shouldn't shock anyone when someone acts out violently when they indulge in violent fantasy/thinking. This does not mean that counterstrike makes you violent, but simply that violent/crazy people feeding there insane-spankbank-brain with violence can produce violence.
How is any of this shocking or bad for gaming or society in anyway. What is the matter with video games being viewed as dangerous? Maybe that boy would be alive today if the other boys parents had never allowed him to play counterstrike in the first place .....
I think being a parent has really changed my opinion on alot of things. I do see a direct correlation between who my son is around/what he watches and how he talks and acts. This doesn't mean I wouldn't allow him to play certain games, but that I understand the implications of some things(At least I think I do)
I think there has to be something fundamentally wrong with a person when they can even consider beating someone with a brick. It's pretty scary to think we live in a world where things like this are so common place that they prompt jokes as opposed to simple shock.
Deranged weird people that are attracted to violence or fantastical violence play games that involve violence. This does not reflect poorly on the game, or insinuate that only those people play those games it is just a fact; people do things they like.
I don't think the fact that violent and insane people play video games that are violent is a big shocker for anyone. It also shouldn't shock anyone when someone acts out violently when they indulge in violent fantasy/thinking. This does not mean that counterstrike makes you violent, but simply that violent/crazy people feeding there insane-spankbank-brain with violence can produce violence.
How is any of this shocking or bad for gaming or society in anyway. What is the matter with video games being viewed as dangerous? Maybe that boy would be alive today if the other boys parents had never allowed him to play counterstrike in the first place .....
I think being a parent has really changed my opinion on alot of things. I do see a direct correlation between who my son is around/what he watches and how he talks and acts. This doesn't mean I wouldn't allow him to play certain games, but that I understand the implications of some things(At least I think I do)
Videogames should not be viewed as dangerous, that's ridiculous.
Insane people are dangerous. If this kid beat someone with a brick over a game of CS, then god only knows what would happen if someone called him names at school.
does the media affect us? sure. i watched the movie 300 and me and every other guy in the theatre felt like punching each other in the face.
but were not crazy, and the movie 300 isn't dangerous.
I didn't say video games are dangerous, I said what is the matter with them being viewed as dangerous, you didn't provide an arguement to why it is bad to view them cautiously or skeptically?
Like my post said, a person with an inclination, that feeds that inclination will do bad things. The thing feeding the inclination is not to blame for the persons actions but it definately is involved.
On May 07 2009 18:12 AttackZerg wrote: I didn't say video games are dangerous, I said what is the matter with them being viewed as dangerous, you didn't provide an arguement to why it is bad to view them cautiously or skeptically?
Like my post said, a person with an inclination, that feeds that inclination will do bad things. The thing feeding the inclination is not to blame for the persons actions but it definately is involved.
Because it's a double standard. If were going to argue that videogames should be viewed cautiously, then attention needs to be brought to other outlets as well.
although im sure you'd agree with this, just making sure.
On May 07 2009 17:29 NeverGG wrote: I think there has to be something fundamentally wrong with a person when they can even consider beating someone with a brick. It's pretty scary to think we live in a world where things like this are so common place that they prompt jokes as opposed to simple shock.
On May 07 2009 12:54 travis wrote: the rarity of what circumstances?
Out of those 1423 deaths a day in the year 2000, how many of them involved video games? There was a few links provided in this thread, but that was a span over how many years? Clearly, it's not as high of a figure as you'd like many of us to believe.
I'm not the one going around trying to dictate what belongs in the General forum and what doesn't. If I ever did though, I would provide a link to the direct forum rule under question instead of spewing random bullshit. And I would also know to shut the fuck up if several other people were telling me that I was wrong. I didn't want to be blunt about it, but since you decided to question my logic, I'll return the favor and show that you're the one with a retarded thought process.
Counter-Strike was relevant to the murder. It was the trigger. Note that trigger does not mean the only fucking factor leading up to the murder. If you stopped acting like some kind of know-it-all, which would require a miracle in your case based on the numerous assumptions in your posts, then you'd realize I never stated my theory behind the kid's motive. I was merely criticizing yours, which brings me to my next point.
If you truly believe that Counter-Strike had nothing to do with the story except describing the setting of the story, then get the fuck out of here and any other English-based forum and buy yourself "Hooked on Phonics" so you can correctly learn English the second time around.
I perfectly understand your argument about how one's environmental upbringing and personality plays a part in the murder. But unlike you, I can also discern the difference between motive and capability. Counter-Strike played a huge fucking part behind the kid's motive to kill the 17-year old. His fucked up personality for whatever reasons made him capable of such an act.
And unlike you, Freud, Darwinists and a lot of other traditional psychologists, I take a more contemporary approach by arguing that there's a multitude of factors that lead to the development of a person's psyche. Some of the influences affect us gradually while some of them have instantaneous effects such as losing a Counter-Strike game 5 hours ago. But since you fucking fail at English, let me reiterate my point in a Q&A format so that even a simpleton like you can understand my viewpoint.
Is Counter-Strike part of the story? Yes. Is it the only factor behind the motive of the killer? Based on the story, I'd say yes. Is it the only factor behind the murder? No.
I doubt you'll bother digesting anything I wrote except for the sake of finding minor errors to nitpick on. If 4-5 other people disagreeing with you didn't have any effect, I doubt my post would either. So let's settle this like Russians and battle it out at an Internet cafe over a game of Counter-Strike. And seeing how you hate losing based on this asinine thread, I'll be ready for the brick after our match.
he would have killed s1 else later on anyways, even if he was addicted to the game, if he had the instinct to kill if he loses something importnat he would have done anyways wtih a different scenario, like killing his wfie 10 years later when she cheated her... The thing is that nobody gives a shit if a russian man kills his wife, but if a russian ki kills another after a game that must be hyped
But, only 4 years, seriously? Being able to kill that easily and getting out of the prison at the age of 18... I don't understand why Russia is digging the grave of at least one other citizen of theirs.
It's really amazing the amount of people incapable of digesting the news here. There's nothing in the news article besides what happened based on the information available at the time... pretty standard stuff. There's not a word about blaming valvue, cstrike or anything. Just simply facts.
Honestly, if you don't think murders of virtually any kind make the news, you really, really need to start picking up a newspaper.
Wow.. He beat up the person cos he lost? I think he's trying to proof he's isnt that inferior to the victim though.. That was cruel, and is also quite unreasonable.. He should train up and win the guy back on the same platform, and not to fight in another platform..
But I imagine in the afterlife, whether you believe in it or not, the 17 year old will probably be waiting with some sort of celestial brick in HIS hand. See? Justice will surely even out.
lol are they retarded? they basically stick a 14 y/o with a largely unformed personality in prison for four years and let him out at the age of 18... Surely he will become a valuable member of society t.t
I don't think CS is directly responsible, HOWEVER... it would be time to think a bit about how theses stupid ultra-violent and ultra-realistic games affect teenagers.
"Violent games are not responsible", "violent movies are not responsible", "violent crap children see on TV is not responsible"... So why the fuck every 6 month there is 30 people killed in high schools in US, Finland, Germany...?
If my children were playing games were the goal is too shut in the head a fucking realistic way their friend, I would be a bit worried. That's just not good for a teenager, nor anybody mental health.
wow, this is.... wow. wtf. the 14 yr old mustve ambushed him or some shit. like i said. always use a fucking brick for everything. let me gently find this fucking video on youtube. *do lalala dododo*
Here's my outtake on the whole violence and video games/media controversy.
I think that normal people have a set of ethics that are instilled into them at an early age from appropriate role models (eg: parents, family, friends, religion). But people who are lacking these figures are left with an empty hole when it comes to moral behavior causing great psychological instability. The mind tries to reach a state of balance by attempting to fill this void. It adopts values from any other available sources. When these sources include violent video games, a person who does not know better will emulate the game in real life.
On May 07 2009 12:54 travis wrote: the rarity of what circumstances?
Out of those 1423 deaths a day in the year 2000, how many of them involved video games? There was a few links provided in this thread, but that was a span over how many years? Clearly, it's not as high of a figure as you'd like many of us to believe.
I don't know how many involved video games. That wasn't my point. I never thought that the mere mention of video games made a story so important on a video game site. But clearly most of you disagree with that, so fine I concede.
I'm not the one going around trying to dictate what belongs in the General forum and what doesn't. If I ever did though, I would provide a link to the direct forum rule under question instead of spewing random bullshit.
Am I not allowed to post my opinion? You should try re-reading my first post. Where in it do I dictate what belongs in the forum and what doesn't?
And I would also know to shut the fuck up if several other people were telling me that I was wrong. I didn't want to be blunt about it, but since you decided to question my logic, I'll return the favor and show that you're the one with a retarded thought process.
wtf does that mean? every time some people disagree with me I should just leave the thread and not come back?
Counter-Strike was relevant to the murder. It was the trigger. Note that trigger does not mean the only fucking factor leading up to the murder. If you stopped acting like some kind of know-it-all, which would require a miracle in your case based on the numerous assumptions in your posts, then you'd realize I never stated my theory behind the kid's motive. I was merely criticizing yours, which brings me to my next point.
alright
If you truly believe that Counter-Strike had nothing to do with the story except describing the setting of the story, then get the fuck out of here and any other English-based forum and buy yourself "Hooked on Phonics" so you can correctly learn English the second time around.
don't understand wtf u are talking about
I perfectly understand your argument about how one's environmental upbringing and personality plays a part in the murder. But unlike you, I can also discern the difference between motive and capability. Counter-Strike played a huge fucking part behind the kid's motive to kill the 17-year old. His fucked up personality for whatever reasons made him capable of such an act.
no, the motive was not counterstrike. that makes no sense.
the motive was revenge, or jealousy, or anger, etc etc. what you are saying makes no sense.
And unlike you, Freud, Darwinists and a lot of other traditional psychologists, I take a more contemporary approach by arguing that there's a multitude of factors that lead to the development of a person's psyche. Some of the influences affect us gradually while some of them have instantaneous effects such as losing a Counter-Strike game 5 hours ago. But since you fucking fail at English, let me reiterate my point in a Q&A format so that even a simpleton like you can understand my viewpoint.
dude i have no clue wtf u are talking about. when were we discussing the factors that lead to the development of a person's psyche?
Is Counter-Strike part of the story? Yes. Is it the only factor behind the motive of the killer? Based on the story, I'd say yes. Is it the only factor behind the murder? No.
I doubt you'll bother digesting anything I wrote except for the sake of finding minor errors to nitpick on. If 4-5 other people disagreeing with you didn't have any effect, I doubt my post would either. So let's settle this like Russians and battle it out at an Internet cafe over a game of Counter-Strike. And seeing how you hate losing based on this asinine thread, I'll be ready for the brick after our match.
alright dude, I don't know what has gotten you quite so upset, but I am sorry for any rudeness i showed in this thread. I really don't feel like spending more time on this. Maybe I don't understand some stuff here and I am just totally wrong. Or maybe other people don't understand what I am trying to say. Whatever.
On May 08 2009 11:05 Hawk wrote: How can you not understand that the motive was anger over counterstike? Is it really that hard of a concept? Holy shit
dude I understand that. I have understood that. Maybe you think I am arguing something other than what I am really arguing.
If a psychologist was to analyze the kid and have to make a report of what caused this murder - of the psychological reason for the murder, do you think the answer they came up with would be "counterstrike" ?
Or that counterstrike would even be included in the report? And if it is, should it be? Do you not think this exact situation could play out through countless mediums other than counterstrike? Other than games entirely? The issue isn't counterstrike, it's psychotic behavior. And the cause of that behavior isn't counterstrike.
Sure, if for some reason you like going through stories about a kid murdering another kid and you want some juicy details in your story, then the fact that they were playing counterstrike is a great and relevant detail to add to the story. But is it an important part of the story? Is it relevant to any sort of moral or wisdom we can glean from the story? No, and No.
I guess I am just too weird or retarded or whatever. The things I say make perfect sense to me. And it's not like I don't stop and think when a bunch of people are disagreeing with me.
Probably cause the guy was being a dick in the game or w/e. Which you cando with anything really. Counterstrike just happened to be the medium? O_Oll Oh never mind travis is already arguing this. lolfail -insert obligatory post about reading thread first-
On May 08 2009 11:42 BalliSLife wrote: I think you guys are arguing for no reason, travis is saying that if a kid is fucked up to begin with anything can trigger him to kill someone.
Everyone else is saying that in this PARTICULAR case it was counterstrike that triggered it.
And yes that is a joint in your hand.
Travis was arguing that it's not relevant in the story, which is hilarious
CS is relevant, but only because it was what made him finally snap. It did not make him the psycho that he is (well maybe a bit but along with a million other factors). He did not kill him because of CS, he did it because he's a psycho.
Everybody wanting to know what music were the kids listening to, or what movies were they watching. Who gives a fuck what they was watching! Whatever happened to crazy? What, you can't be crazy no more? Did we eliminate crazy from the dictionary? Fuck the record, fuck the movie. Crazy! -Chris Rock
On May 11 2009 14:57 ronno wrote: Sorry to say but this sort ottawa escort of shit is hilarious. Proper game rage lol. Of course it's terrible for the ottawa asian escort guy getting killed. It's also imo a joke that he got 4. Though being a gamer he will probably be completely destroyed in Russian ottawa asian escorts prison.that story is kind of sad...I guess the parents ottawa escorts never taught the kid anything about perspective.
so if i want to be a murderer and get away with it, move to russia?
yes it was because of the game. Kid gets mad, kid goes berserk, kid gg'd another one with a brick. No re? wtf tho! its just a game kid, i hope u get bumb rushed in prison by other brick wielders, hmm. Could be a new tactic in Counter Strike, can you pick up debris from destroyed buildings in that game? I also rofld at the no ammo joke lol. ahahah. I wonder if the bricker-boy was a brick layer and just got so mad at his brick, that he had to hit someone with it. O.o
No one is disagreeing that the kid had problems to begin with. No one is accusing Counter Strike of being the sole factor behind the murder.
The reason why people are bashing travis is because he argued that Counter Strike was irrelevant to the story and that the story didn't belong in the General forum. He re-worded his argument after several people told him off.
No one has any problems with his "new" argument. It's his old one that people found absurd.
On May 11 2009 15:37 MayorITC wrote: No one is disagreeing that the kid had problems to begin with. No one is accusing Counter Strike of being the sole factor behind the murder.
The reason why people are bashing travis is because he argued that Counter Strike was irrelevant to the story and that the story didn't belong in the General forum. He re-worded his argument after several people told him off.
No one has any problems with his "new" argument. It's his old one that people found absurd.
except that is at no point what I was saying. my "new" argument is the exact same as my old. I elaborated many times on what I meant, there was no old and new argument. In short what the hell are you talking about? My first 2 posts in the thread aren't even edited, so obviously they are my "old" argument.
hm my theory about kids getting more and more violent, because of games is true. Well i don't mean that the game causes the violence, but kids generally becoming more violent. Like 8 years ago, I was like ok this gaming is heading to people fighting each other after game and here we are. It is really sad, that something like this happens.
On May 07 2009 19:42 Racenilatr wrote: This is why people play starcraft, because it's not as stressful as cs
Tell that to HovZ
baaaaaaaaahahaha HovZ, what a nut.
This CS kid is obviously retarded. It doesn't matter if it's a game or whatever though, it's losing in a competitive environment that some people just can't control. I've seen it in all kinds of games, SC, CS, SF4, racing games, etc. SomeMost people just suck
I gotta say I completely agree with travis on his general point. Most of you are arguing with travis that he said the post does not belong here because it is not gaming related, but I think you guys are really missing travis's point.
If I for example investigated this murder, I wouldn't have began dug into the CS evironment, because it is in the long run irrelevant to the kid's purpose of killing the guy. The kid was fucked up, and ok, what they were doing atm was playing CS, but since the kid was capable of murder then it could be over anything else in the first place. If a person shot some guy in the head over a game of poker for example, I wouldn't looked into the gameplay of poker, but all of the other factors instead.
My second point is that the media always seem to grab onto something bad when it happens if it's gaming related, because of the old belief that a game can make you go psycho. I do not think this is the case. If that was the case, then there prolly would be any TL.net. :p
So as a summary, the kids motive in this case was CS, but it wasn't CS's fault as a game that he did it.
one of my friends also got almost beaten up by russians in an internet cafe when he was owning the crap out of them. he hear them saying "it's time to kick someones ass!" (in russian), he just got up and walked out of the place immediatley
Korea: Starcraft didn't work becasue of popularity, it worked because you couldn't get beat up people in cybercafes because girls are stronger than the average man.
EPT
.
![[image loading]](http://blstb.msn.com/i/2F/A1809E834AC75BB0F265501A553.jpg)
