Hasselbeck Thinks It Is Video Games We Should Monitor, Not Guns

Fox_Friends_Same_Gun_Different_Slay

We already knew that Elizabeth Hasselbeck was out of place with the rather progressive ladies of The View. Well, she has found a new home with- surprise, surprise- Fox and Friends. She hasn’t wasted any time in making her mark there, either. Just as we expected, she fits right in, and has shown it with a humdinger of a remark regarding the Navy yard shooting in Washington.

Hesselbeck, like all gun nuts, takes these tragedies and twists them into a way to somehow make the nation think we don’t need tighter gun regulations. She suggests from her post on Fox and Friends that this particular incident means we need not a gun registry, but a registry of people purchasing video games. Yep, you read that right. Hasselbeck said:

You know, certainly, this topic has already taken a turn again, the left’s already making this about gun control.

Yep, go ahead and say that “the left” is using a tragedy as an opportunity for political gain on a key issue. Her co- host, Steve Doocy, admitted that Aaron Alexis, the alleged shooter, had possibly taken a shotgun onto the yard and used to to acquire a handgun and an AR-15. The other co-host, Brian Kilmeade, said:

Is this about gun control or is this about a guy who has a history of drinking a lot, playing video games a lot and a few shooting incidents?

Hasselbeck replied:

One thing that happens often in a situation as tragic as this is we start to spread blame where it possibly doesn’t belong, right? I think we all know where the blame truly belongs, and that would be right in Alexis’ hands.

I’ll give her that one. The responsibility in this incident does belong in the shooter’s hands. It does not, however, mean that there isn’t a need for more gun regulations.

Then, the conversation turned to the shooter’s alleged video game habit. Kilmeade said:

But you talk about this guy’s background, as we look into it He’s got a friend, who said, ‘Yeah, he had an obsession with video games, shooting video games. In fact, he would come over and he would be playing so long — these video games, these shooting games — we’d have to give him dinner, we’d have to feed him while he continued to stay on them.’

Hasselbeck latched on to the video game line:

Are more people susceptible to playing video games? Is there a link between a certain age group or [demographic] in 20- to 34-year-old men, perhaps, that are playing these video games and their violent actions?

What about frequency testing? How often has this game been played? I’m not one to get in there and say, monitor everything, but if this, indeed, is a strong link, right, to mass killings then why aren’t we looking at frequency of purchases per person? And also, how often they’re playing and maybe they time out after a certain hour.

The above dialogue shows that Hasselbeck has zero knowledge of supposed links between violent video games and gun violence. Newsflash, Elizabeth- there is none. Zero. Zilch. Nada. Further, it is simply not reasonable to pry into what people do as perfectly legal entertainment. I suppose you’d say the same about guns, but there is one big difference: the only purpose of a gun is to kill. Games can’t kill anyone.

But I am not surprised at these musings. Just like all gun nuts, you want to pin these instances on everything but where they belong: the fact that America is awash in guns, with too few regulations on who gets to have them. The end.

Here’s the video: