The "element" here is really teenagers, not "gamers," although these happen to be teenagers who are gamers. Robert Pugsley is even quoted in the article where it says "Cybercafes are 'the latest magnet for the very same social and criminal problems that other arenas of entertainment and socializing have been in the past, from soccer and football games to rock concerts and raves.'" Yes... that would be any place where a large number of teenagers accumulate.

Gangs are consisted largely of the teenager age group, and teens are often under a lot of peer pressure. Any organization that wants to promote itself to this age group to draw them to their premises for any extended period of time, in my opinion, needs to take on the responsibility of providing a safe environment for them, or for that matter, any organization targeting kids of any age. The problem isn't the fact that the cybercafe's provide violent games. The problem is these cybercafe's are being built on a shoestring, with no real safty and security measures, when they know they will have numerous unsupervised kids on their premises.

Now that won't stop what happens once the teens walk out the door, but the news article doesn't even claim to know the reasons for the two shootings. They could just have well been gang related and had nothing to do with the cybercafe's in any way other than the gang's target happened to go to the cybercafe. You can't blame cafes just because they are involved through circumstance. Reporters need to find some more concrete evidence before condemning valid businesses.