What's The Daily Mail's Problem with Video Games?

Here's the situation. A teenage boy winds up an older friend of his family during an online game. The older guy, who has noted mental health issues, goes around to the boy's house and assaults him. Who is to blame? If you're the Daily Mail, it's the game. It's always the game.

46-year old Mark Bradford of Plymouth was playing Call of Duty: Black Ops online with the unnamed 13-year old. The kid killed Bradford's character (which we all know happens reasonably often in such games) and we're led to believe that this single act triggered such rage that he stormed round to the house and strangled the child.

"He went on and on and I just lost it. I hold my hands up, I lost the plot," says Bradford. "In a moment of madness I went round to his house. I didn't know what I was going to do. It wasn't malice. I just grabbed him. I've seen him since and apologised. We've played online too. He's actually a decent kid."

A situation got out of hand and a troubled guy made an admittedly big mistake. So why is the game getting the blame? Questions should be asked, sure, but some things are missing from this story. Why is the child playing an 18-rated game anyway? If Bradford is such a dangerous and fragile example of humanity, why is he still allowed to play online with the unnamed kid? And finally, why does the Daily Mail have this ridiculous vendetta against gaming?

The full story (according to the Mail) is here. We can't help but feel that not everything has been said.