An interesting, but ultimately useless video for the simple fact that no training is required to simply kill.

To fire an actual firearm ACCURATELY, however, one needs to train and practice often because there are a multitude of factors that no video game (or Hollywood) will ever show you--sight alignment, proper grip, trigger pull, and the actual ballistics of a projectile. And that's assuming that the weapon will function properly--it may fail to feed a round from the magazine, or fail to eject the fired casing, forcing the user to fix the malfunction before he can resume firing (this is a much bigger problem in a gunfight than on the firing range, obviously). Bullets don't travel in a straight line--they actually take a slight parabolic trajectory in-flight and will drop to the ground as they lose velocity. This means that snipers are essentially dropping bullets ONTO a target from great distances as they are forced to aim their rifle above the target in order for the bullet to land where they want it to. Barriers, such as the laminated safety glass used for automobile windshields and indoor walls, can affect the trajectory and performance of the bullet in question--windshields can actually cause a bullet to shed its copper jacket, since they're forced to penetrate the layer of laminated plastic that holds the windshield together in the event of a crash or object penetration (like the bullet).

What games like GTA V or RDR CAN do, given time and the right (or would that be wrong?) mind, is desensitize a person to the act of killing and slowly improve aspects of hand-eye coordination. Personally, I found the death animations in RDR to have the opposite effect to the point where I began to regret shooting anyone I didn't have to (and sometimes even when I did). But that's just my uninvited two cents.

I can see the PS4 and Wii U gaining great strides against a $500-priced console. I have not personally purchased any console over $350, and I don't care for all the "social" media being shoehorned into them of late. I don't want Amazon, Netflix, or Youtube or any of that stuff on the consoles. I buy them to play the games, not shop online or watch movies.

Beginning to wonder if this "next generation" will be the last.

@UltimateBastard @Jerrei An unfortunate reality of liberty is that it can be readily and easily abused by those who desire to harm others. You are correct in that the majority of these incidents were committed by young adults (20-30 year range) who, prior to committing their murder sprees, had no prior convictions or were committed to any kind of mental health services for treatment. In America one is presumed innocent until proven guilty (though it often feels as though the reverse is more true), and while stockpiling large amounts of ammunition and firearms may seem unusual to those looking at from the outside, simply purchasing these items is in of itself not sufficient enough evidence to warrant arresting the individual.

I've noticed, however, that in the aftermath of these incidents, many of those interviewed afterward who knew the suspects in question report similar observations--that the suspect was the "odd one out", the loner who rarely socialized. In some cases, there were signs that the individual was undergoing great stress or problems, but most made no efforts to talk to the suspect or contact authorities to voice their concerns. The Aurora, Colorado shooter, for instance, was reported to be a neuroscience student at a college in Denver, but had begun to slip in his academic performance and withdrew from the university several weeks before the infamous incident for which he has garnered international attention. Several students at his university who knew him suspected as late as two weeks before the incident that he might have been suffering from some degree of mental illness or stress, but as of yet I've not heard of any attempts to relay this information to authorities or a local mental health service.

The Tuscon, Arizona shooter was often talked about as that "weird kid" in his neighborhood, and suffered from substance abuse for a period of time. He was noted to be very withdrawn, exhibiting "odd" or "bizarre" behavior at his university in the Tuscon area which was thought by several teachers and professors to be a sign of mental illness. He was eventually suspended by the university with the condition that if he wanted to return he would need to settle his conduct violations and obtain a mental health clearance vouching that he was not a danger to himself or others. Because this latter option was voluntary, he never submitted himself for mental evaluation and treatment, and his behavior more or less went "under the radar" until his shooting spree in January 2011, though the few friends who knew of him still observated unusual or strange behavior as late as the night before the shooting. He was able to legally purchase the GLOCK 19 pistol he used in the incident despite his unsound state of mind because he was never committed to any kind of mental health institute, and if he had been these records would have shown up in any NICS check performed by a gun dealer and stopped the sale.

The Newton, Connecticut shooter was a troubled young man, described by teachers at his school as "brilliant but nervous and fidgety", often avoided socializing, and was eventually withdrawn from the school by his mother and homeschooled thereafter. The firearms he used in the incident were legally owned by his mother, who was a firearms enthusiast herself, and often took her sons out to shooting sessions with her. He was believed to have suffered from mental illness or stress (according to his brother), though to date I've not heard if he was on medication or if there had been plans to have him admitted for treatment. There are unconfirmed reports that he attempted to purchase a rifle from a sporting goods store two days before the incident, but backed out because he did not want to undergo the background check or the state of Connecticut's mandatory waiting period for firearms purchases. The morning of the incident, the shooter murdered his mother as she was asleep in bed with four shots to the head from one of her firearms before embarking to the school to begin the second deadliest school shooting in U.S. history. To date police have not disclosed any information regarding motive for any of his actions that day--no reports of a suicide note or evidence of pre-planning have surfaced, he took measures to impede investigation of his background by damaging the hard drive from his computer, and he committed suicide at the scene as police began to arrive at the school roughly fifteen minutes after he began his shooting spree, so there's little hope of any clear motive coming to light. It's likely he murdered his mother to prevent her from trying to stop him from carrying out his actions, but this is just speculation on my part.

All three of these cases are immensely tragic on their own, but the underlying mental troubles suffered by the suspects is too striking a commonality to ignore. With the absymal mental health care services available in the U.S., however, effective and prompt treatment of affected individuals is difficult if not impossible, and many relatives of these troubled souls have often remarked how frustrated or helpless they've felt as they sought out any available means to have their loved ones get the help they need. Some have commented that responding authorities from law enforcement or the medical community suggested that the only way they would get help was to have criminal charges pressed against the individual in question before any intervention could even be attempted. Prison is the LAST place we need to be sending our mentally ill and disturbed, but is quite often the one place they end up for lack of willingess to address the conditions. The random spats of excessive violence and murder we've witnessed in this country in the last two years could be a result of two decades of declining mental health care finally coming back to bite us in the ass. Video games and movies have very little, if anything, to do with the issues this misguided state legislator is attempting to address.

Apologies for the massive walls of text I've been putting up. ;)

@UltimateBastard In order to purchase a firearm in America, you must be at least 18 years of age (21 if purchasing a handgun), and fill out ATF Form 4473, which requires among other things your full name, address, height/weight, eye and hair color. Social Security Numbers, while not required, can be written on the form as well and can help prevent one from being mis-identified as a prohibited person (felon, non-U.S. citizen, etc.). A photo I.D. is required, typically a driver's license, and the number on the license is written on the dealer's portion of the form as well as the make, model, caliber, and serial number of the weapon being purchased. In addition, one must answer a series of questions, the first being "Are you the actual purchaser of the firearm?". The remaining ten questions all purport to whether or not you have ever renounced your U.S. citizenship, been convicted of any crime with a prison sentence longer than one year, been discharged under less than honorable conditions from the military, convicted of a felony, or a drug charge, or a domestic violence charge, are subject to a restraining order on a domestic violence complaint or charge, illegally using a controlled substance, been judged mentally defective or disturbed by your state of resident and forcefully committed to a mental insitution, or whether you are a "fugitive from justice" (I'm not kidding about that one). A false answer on any of these questions is a felony. In addition, purchasing a firearm on behalf of someone who is prohibited from doing so themselves will also, on conviction, land you a ten-year federal prison sentence. After answering these questions and signing your portion of the form, the dealer will use a dedicated phone line to contact the NICS (National Instant Criminal Background Check System), which is operated by the FBI and uses information databases maintained by that agency so it can be quite thorough. In most cases the dealer will usually receive an immediate response on the phone as to whether or not the buyer is listed on NICS as a prohibited buyer. It's exceptionally rare for such a person to attempt to purchase a firearm at a gun store, but it does happen. In most cases, the person purchasing the firearm is a law-abiding citizen and has no trouble. This is all federally mandated--the only exception is for the NICS check. If a buyer has a concealed carry license from his state of residence and state government allows it, the dealer can forgo the NICS phone call but is required to also add the license number of the CCL on the 4473 Form. This is mainly because a concealed carry license generally requires more thorough background checks typically conducted by both the state and the FBI (in my case, the Arkansas State Police conducts the background investigation for the state's half of the process).

I've never had to do any of this to buy a Snickers bar off the "impulse aisle" at Wal-Mart. There IS some concern as to whether our media today is contributing to the spats of extreme violence that gets so much media attention, but the truth is that violent crime has been declining in the U.S. since the 1990s. And cars kill far more people in America per year than firearms. What's changed is the number of mental health institutions supported or run by the states--most, if not all states, have drastically cut funding and support for mental health services in the last two decades. And virtually all of these recent mass shooting sprees have been conducted by lone individuals with conditions and issues that could have been treated, or at the very least have been committed to an institution for the more extreme cases, and who might not have slipped through the widening cracks in the system if state governments weren't constantly whittling away at the quality of mental health care.

Before clueless state and federal legislators start jumping the gun and demanding further restriction and surrendering of law-abiding citizens' constitutionally-protected, naturally-born rights and freedoms (such as the 1st through 10th Amendments), perhaps they should take a serious look at how we treat those with a serious need for mental health treatment. An elected official chiding any segment of his constituents that he serves that they "need to quiet down" or "lack creditability in the argument" is exceptionally insulting and disrespectful to EVERY voting citizen he represents, and a clear indicator that he does not honor the oath of his office. Citizens are not sheep to be herded, corralled, and controlled--they are the source of an elected official's authority, and he is elected to serve his particular function in the people's place as their representative. The government works for US, we don't SERVE THEM.

The VP is correct in one regard--the requirement for always-online DRM has benefited me in making it easy to disregard the product altogether and put my limited free time and attention to other things. One other high-profile release within the last year also went with "always-online DRM", even for single-player mode, and guess what? It was found that many players were not even playing multiplayer to start with, and single-player mode can and has been beset with latency and server maintenance issues that render the product completely unusable to the purchasing customer. But since companies are moving towards the "games as services" business model to maximize their control over how and when their customers can utilize their purchases, I doubt any degree of vocal outcry will have much impact on this saddening development.