Today's Pet Peeve

An article's headline caught my eye today, and the way it is phrased always irritates me. The headline reads: Video racing games may spur risky driving: study. Once and for all, inanimate objects can't do anything on their own. Without human interaction, they just sit there. The video game does not make you drive recklessly; poor decision-making on your part is to blame. The game doesn't hop into the passenger seat of your car and "spur" you on saying, "Faster, faster!"

This is the exact same misleading headline we see when it comes to gun violence. The typical headline reads, Man killed by assault rifle. So we're suppose to believe the gun sprung from the table and started shooting wildly into the room? I don't think so. Someone killed the man... and he used a gun to do it. Blame the man for his actions, not his tools.

So, what are we to make of this article? What's the purpose of it being printed? I quote Joerg Kubitzki of the Allianz Center for Technology, who conducted the study along with researchers at Munich's Ludwig-Maximilians University:

The question of age restrictions, legally or voluntary, should be discussed not only for "shooter" games but also for this kind of games, which have an impact on traffic safety.

Nice. More regulation. Just what we need: to be saved from ourselves.

Unplugged

This is just a quick note that I'm migrating to a new computer. I've finally made the switch to XP (who says I don't like change?). Anyway, the process will take awhile so I might not post for a day or two... or three. We'll see.

Two quick notes:

1. Did you see the article where wealthy Venezualians are moving to Florida to escape Hugo Chavez's new socialist government? I wonder why? Mabey because socialism means taking from the "haves" and giving to the "have-nots". Didn't see that one coming, did ya?!? Chavez is going to end up with a country where the only people left will be wanting to feed off the government. It can only end badly.
2. Did you see the article about the two Kuwaiti men who were finally released from Gitmo after the U.S. determined these guys were in Afganistan doing charity work, only to have to stand trial in Kuwait on charges of basically embarrassing the Kuwaiti government? They were eventually found not guilty. They were held at Gitmo for about five years. Their crime: being at the wrong place at the wrong time. This, my friends, is exactly why Habeas Corpus is so important. Innocent people need to have an avenue to contest their imprisonment. Who'll give them back five years of their life? I know I can't.