Manhunt blamed!


this whole 18 year old thing is crap.

the guy was 17? so basically if he had played it a few months later he would have been ok to play the game? thats total BS. the only defence a kid could have is “I didnt know killing was a bad thing” and thats when their about 4 or 5. at 17 your an adult you should be able to know between right and wrong.

a 17 year old killing someone is not a child missguided by evil video games (Damn you video games!!!) he is like all the other killers out there

I have been playing violent video games as long as I can remember. I am 17 now and played mortal combat when it came out, the original doom, doom 2, Unreal tournament, and numerous others.

more often than not video games stop murders. consider this:

person A gets mad at person B. person A feals like killing person B. person A goes to play Unreal tournament 2004. person A uses emotion of anger to become best of the map (person A is happy and totally forgot about person B.


oh yeah that to, forgot about that “killing is bad thingy!”.



walshbem, i’m sorry. i understand that forms of entertainment will affect each person differently. and…i guess i kinda went off on some wild tangent, but that’s what i was trying to say.

<To all>
Each person is affected differently, and my question is, “if each person is affected differently by this stimuli, then why are some blaming it solely on the game?”…this WILL be my last post to this thread…not because i fear being proven wrong, but because this is a topic that can go on forever. I hope that we all realize that this is just beating a dead horse (or however that saying goes). i also hope that there are no hard feelings between members in this great site. i personally will hold no grudges.:slight_smile:


workin in blockbusters ive jus had to sign some paper stating that i am not allowed to express my own opinion or view to any form of outside media about the whole manhunt issue…


my point exactly. if people are affected differently and one person snaps and kills people after playing a game then their brain is the problem not the game.

and since every is affected diferently why put everybody in the same category. you can’t say “kids” are affected in this way. and you cant just say no one can play this game.



And heres the twist.


blame before the whole story is known…mabey the mother is even covering up info that could utterly crush her prosecution.

and, looking back at that post i made, GOD DAMN but its long…


“As for the link between Manhunt and the crime, the police are clear. Pooni said: “We haven’t connected the game with the murder and we’ve already made that statement, but some sections of the media chose to ignore it
the motive was robbery”

"…Whilst we cannot comment on behalf of the publisher of the game in question, the procedures that it adopted were entirely responsible and in line with legal and industry codes of practice.”
Tsc tsc … these damn stupid and irresponsible cops … where would we be if not the well-informed media? :rolleyes:


I am in awe of your mad ranting skillz… :bowdown:


thank you i really try. rants are my life :scream:

if there was nothing for me to argue about in the world, id argue how such a travesty could be.


Heh, check this out.

"Police involved in the Stefan Pakeerah murder case have revealed that the copy of Manhunt at the centre of a tabloid media frenzy last week was found in the possession of the victim, not the killer.

Newspapers and TV news channels gave significant coverage to the case last week, when the mother of the victim claimed that 17-year-old killer Warren LeBlanc had been “obsessed” with the ultra-violent Rockstar game.

However, according to a spokesperson for Leicestershire Constabulary, the police division which investigated the murder, the link is even more tenuous than was reported previously - with the game being found not in the room of the murderer, but of the victim."


I imagine alot of posters are going

“…oh pymigies…”

right about now.


Nah, my stuff was probabbly too off-topic to make any difference anyways… :wink:


Maibe its ok sueing the games company for having a violent game that influences a kid who indirectly influences another kid into murder? I mean, its preety direct. Its just one more little step in the causal chain… :rolleyes:


Well then you could sue any film that was violent and any person the kid saw being violent and any violent sounding music, Like the main point is the game was meant for 18 year olds and so he shouldnt have been allowed to play it, if anyones to blame its the shop that sold it (if they sold it to him) or the person who bought it for him.

violent images dont make violent people. Otherwise every single person in the world is probably a bunny boiler waiting to explode into a fit of murderous rage, cause at some point we must have all seen some form of violence.


Not real direct:

The game belonged to the victim. He was assaulted by a friend who wanted money to buy drugs. Nothing to do with the game at all.


humm… thought the :rolleyes: would be expressive enough … but … since it wasn’t … i was being sarcastic, as in “Roll Eyes (Sarcastic)” .

The post was ment to express the little to none at all causality chain between the events reported. PLAYING A GAME CAN NOT MAKE U KILL SOMEONE. The indirect influence was a sarcastic remark about the weak links on this chain of events.


omg god people some of you sure write some looong posts

enough already with this

its going to be here because its been here all the time. I have seen more violent movies -irreversible being the latest one.The only solution being that be a good parent and educate your kids on the rights and the wrongs.

Believe me it all starts from the family and how well everybody communicates with each other.


This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.