Slashdot Mirror
Looking at Video Games and Violence
rootrider writes "Mark Rahner of the Seattle Times has written a great article discussing the recent trend here in the US to outlaw the purchase of violent video games by minors. I'm sure articles have been written in the past that refute the idea that video games lead to violence, but this is the first mainstream article I've seen that details the issue and does it well." The trend isn't really that new. In the past, Ozzy Osbourne and Dungeons and Dragons have been favorite scapegoats, and when I was in high school it was gangsta rap music. I can't wait until we can attribute violence to the nightly news.
PVP comic strip from yesterday
Does anybody doubt this?
Won't someone PLEASE think of the children!!!!
Behind most "well meaning" laws designed to protect children, is a facist who simply wants to limit your freedom.
Tequila: It's not just for breakfast anymore!
infuriated Slashdot reader takes sniper rifle and shoots clueless politicians.
Can I blame Denis Leary now?
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
As an concerned anti-american I watched "Bowling for Columbine". And everyone else who did knows that this topic is FUBAR.
I don't know what video games. And violence he was looking at.
:/
Because the only thing I noticed. In his article, were all the fragments.
Cover your eyes and click this link!
Here, the proof.
guru in training
I wrote a paper about this topic for my Intro to Communication Theory class, available for download in pdf ... note, the pdf is actually crappy quality compared to the original cwk file, since i couldn't track down a decent distiller program
09
During times of war I tend away from video games which involve killing people. Images in the news, particularly if you've gone to the Al-Jezeera site and looked at their un-censored images (yes, this is what war is really like, unlike what you see on US news broadcasts), disturb me and I tend to shift of to strategy games and D&D (where I'm hacking monsters to bits, rather than humans.)
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Behind every kid who "plays too many games for their own good" is a shitty parent. I think the mediamorons and other general arsholes are confusing the symptom with the cause.
"Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but not their own facts."
Speaking as a violont psychopath who has been dragged away to be held for obsvervation by a dozen cops after that whole AK-47 and the swat team incident.
I can say pretty much that video game violence is not so much an issue in real life violence. Unless you count foaming at the mouth and ranting because you keep getting pounded on the same mission in Delta Force, or the auto spawns on some parts of Age of Mythology get you irritated enough to go scrambling fr the cheat codes.
Now if they somehow captured the vileness of poor white trash and put it into a video game, then that might be the real test of if these games cause violence, or just provide a harmless outlet for it.
Will kids be forbidden to download it?
What ever will happen to our Government's new military recruiting tool?
(I suppose they'll go back to talking to real life recruiters and finding out.. oh nevermind!)
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
Actually, you ask an interesting question: what is the influence of news reporting when it comes to violence?
I see two kinds of influence:
* News reports may create copycats out of weak minds. Let's say you catch some cretins throwing rocks on cars from bridges over freeways. If you make too much publicity of the case, you'll have imbeciles doing the same thing all over.
* More importantly, news reporting may alter the way people perceive the world and human interactions.
Let us take international relations. If you're brought up in the idea that your country is the best in every domain and the rest of the world is just made of jealous jerks, you obviously have a different outlook on violence - specifically, you may not be reluctant to approve the use of violence by your government.
Oftentimes the issue of violence in videogames is approached with a black n' white mindset. There is already a rating system that one can use to determine how much violence a videogame has. I would suggest a sales law (as opposed to a parental law!) to enforce who can you sell a game to.
For example, I don't mind my kids to play Zelda: Wind Waker (which contains mild cartoonish violence). However, I would hate it if they get their hands on Vice City without my permission. For Vice City is a sick game.
I love how the article says that the Beltway Snipers supposedly practiced with Halo. If they said that or not... I don't know, but either way, even if they DID... how the HELL is a game any good practice for a real sniper rifle. True, you get hand eye coordination, or adjusted vision for it... But you don't line a target up in sights in the game like you would with a REAL gun in your hand. If Halo had a sniper gun attachment which you played with (Like Time Crisis' pistol), then maybe.... but not with that GIANT xbox controller.
[...] I can't wait until we can attribute violence to the nightly news.
The war in Iraq is more than enough violence for me.
Note to self: get smarter troll to guard door.
I don't put much stake in the whole "violent video games makes you eeeevil" thing either. It's sort of another source for ideas. Just how many murder mystery books have "inspired" murders? Think "Basic Instinct."
But kids don't read these days, so there've been fewer book-burnings...
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former." -- Albert Einstein
Half life and counterstrike didnt make me violent. I was a sick evil fuck long before that. ALl the antisocial dangerous stuff i know and think i learned the old fashoned way, From reading dead tree paper books. Yes folks, there was dangerous thoughts around before the internet.
What violent games have done is allwed me an amazingly simple venting system to get rid of stress. Get home from work, and go kill virtual people. Works wonders for relaxation. Exercise would probably work, but hey, im lazy. THey can have my video games over several dead bodies.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
However, I do myself play Soldier of Fortune II and so I can understand that some might be concerned that kids playing a game all day long that involves shooting your opponent might somehow be predisposed to shooting someone in real life.
But training, as the D.C. snipers have suggested? That's crazy. Even after playing so much that my right wrist aches, I can't imagine that I'm now more capable with an AK47 than I was before SOFII.
Furthermore, when I was a kid, trying not to get eaten by Tyrannosaurus Rex, we actually ran around outdoors with fake guns or BB guns and stalked each other. Those low-tech methods were surely more effective at grooming future killers than the sit-on-your-ass and get fat video alternatives.
and for the more clever of the minors out there, they will also be cracking down on minors warezing violent games.....oh, wait...nevermind
xao
xao
http://TheHillforum.hopto.org
The market for games in the EU is set to eclipse that of the US.
I wonder if this will lead to more socially acceptable games being produced (i.e. ones which do not glorify violence ?) it is well known that the Europeans have more sophisticated tastes than us Americans. Perhaps this will lead to the death of the gory 1st person shoot-em-ups like Quake and Doom (widely believed to be responsible for the Columbine tragedy).
The debate about the causal link between games and violence rages on. But it looks like the good old free market may be about to solve the problem once and for all.
Historically computer games have been designed to appeal to the American market, and so they have been basically violent, gory, and utterly tasteless. Almost all American PC games involve violence of one form or another. From Doom to Quake, to Unreal, it seems the American consumer wants only to kill and kill again. (albeit in simulated form).
With the news that Europe will soon be the largest market for games, this state of affairs may soon change.
Europeans on the whole have a well adjusted attitide toward violence and sex. They tend to abhorr the former and be tolerant of the latter. It is common on European network TV to see breasts, nipples, even sometimes pubic hair but programmes containing violence are subject to strict censorship rules.
Since the content of games is driven by the largest market, perhaps America can look forward to games with less violence, and more sex. With games such as Quake III Arena and Unreal Tournament being directly responsible for the Columbine massacre, I think this change in emphasis could only be a good thing. I've always been puzzled by our American morality whereby it is perfectly acceptable to show a person being violently physically assaulted, and yet to show two human beings making love is completely censored by our prudish tv networks.
How can games like Quake III which teaches kids how to slaughter their schoolfriends and promotes a satanistic agenda possibly be acceptable ? It doesn't make any sense to me - You don't have to be a Christian to see the dangers of Satanism. Let me know what you think about this important issue.
Since the average gamer, apparently, is 28, whose at fault for that? Themselves, or their parents?
--- Grow a pair, liberals... stop letting the Republicans bully you!
As long as RC tanks, tinsoldiers and other war toys are banned as well, banning violent videogames is just hypocritical activism.
Europeans have had violence selectively bred out of them for centuries, through emigration, genocide and mass starvation. Violence, self defense and gun ownership are all negative traits according to the Hague based New World Order, and Europe is the beta test in reducing humans to sheeple.
The initial secular humanist cabal was satisfied using the colonies as a safety valve to eliminate violence prone individuals, figuring that the natives in the colonies (Zulus, Iroquios, Bantu, Thugges, Pollywogs and Slantees) would kill most of them, and leave the more harmless ones in Europe. Not believing in God, they didn't take God into account, who so generously provided a fecund new Jerusalem in America, where right thinking God Fearing men could subdue and populate a whole continent, Kentucky long rifle in one hand, Bible in the other.
Once the colonies were full or free, the ruling cabal had to find another way to get rid of the free thinking men who worshipped God and not man. It's not a coincidence that the most fervent Christians in the British Empire suffered a British genrerated Potato Famine in the 1870's.
Finally, the humanists attempted genocide to purge Europe of men who would defend their rights with their lives. The Jews were the first to be targetted, one only needs a cursory glance at the history of Isreal to realize what a fierce opponent to soul degrading secular humanism the Jewish race would be.
Which pretty much brings us to today. The New World Order, based in the HAgue, is slowly grinding down Europenis into sub-humans, preventing them from fully achieving their full human potential, including the ability to fight for what you believe in. Teletubbies and happy, passive, non-violent vide games are part of the insidious conspiracy. Fortunately, there are enough God Fearing, right thinking men who will fight for the right for men to worship God instead of nebulous concepts like Gaia, ecology, feminism, astronomy and humanism in America, Israel and Saudi Arabia. For those of us blessed enough to live in one of God's chosen places, all we can do is pray for the poor souls being tortured in the soul crashing socialist hellhole that is Europe, and perhaps ship them a few handguns enclosed in the cases of Budweiser that we ship overseas to sate the European hunger for fine, beechwood aged corn beer.
and I'll believe this bullshit that somehow games teach kids to kill. People in the media (and our our own representatives) claim that these games are "murder trainers" but they can't even teach you to hold a gun properly. How to aim a gun. In the games, you don't even have to look down the sights on the gun to aim!
Thats just the starting point. The fact is, the only person who makes you do anything is YOU. I grew up on good ol' PBS. Monty Python didn't turn me into a drag racing nun. Or a nude pianist. Red Dwarf didn't turn me into a cat. The Red Green Show didn't make me very handy (I wish it had though, I'm not all that handsome). And that was all before I became a teenager. Add in the Atari 2600 I swapped in for a Nintendo in my 6th grade year, and later for a super nintendo, and according to these idiots, I've turned out to be some kind of saint or something since I haven't shot anyone or tried to fry them with Street Fighter 2 moves.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
#1, The government should have no say in what I buy /. land,
for my children, this is just rediculous. #2, Most
of the games I bought for my Playstation/Computer
were bought with the mindset I want something I'll
like just as much as my son will. So does this
mean that me buying resident evil and such and then
letting my son play make me a bad father?? I don't
know how many of you have kids out there in
but the ones who do I think will agree that kids now
don't quite fit into the old catagories. I mean my
son (age 6) already has better views on life, and
understands a lot more than most people that are
older than me. I don't think it's the fact that
video games teach them anything, I think it's the
fact that most parents buy kids video games to
"keep kids out of thier hair". I mean you take
the whole colombine shooting, these kids had all
kinds of stuff in the basement (pipe bombs/whatever),
so that just shows how much attention the parents
were paying to them. I think the parents of these
kids that go on shooting sprees just don't want to
admit that they weren't doing thier job, or that
maybe thier kids had some real issues. It's just
easier to blame a game company, and not to mention
that if you actually do win a case against a game
company you get a pretty good payment. These
people need to worry more about talking to thier
kids and less time trying to take thier rights.
Just my opinion
Scoobywan
were allowed to discipline their children every once in a while without being subject to the child abuse mogals, then perhaps children would actually grow up to know what's right and wrong.
Aside from that, most children do know the difference between fiction and real life, sometimes more so than adults...... That's just my experience....
"I can't wait until we can attribute violence to the nightly news.
Michael Moore has already accused news stations for violence in Bowling for Columbine,
Blaming the kids is a lie and a shame
You ought to know just who's to blame
The mother and the father
(Point of reference: this is when Veruca Salt and her father found exactly where the bad eggs went when they were disposed of out of the manufacturing facility. I have not read the book, but knowing what I do of the author it's fairly close.)
When are people going to remember that it's up to parents and not video games, or the TV, or the 'net, or (insert favorite automaton here), or clergy, or anything but the parents of those they bore to raise kids?!
This sig no verb.
Can you rap, Cowboyneal?
Buying resident evil for your kid does make you a bad father, simply because that game is just too lame. Buy your kid a racing game so he'll do better in those high speed chases.
Minors should be no more or less allowed to purchase adult video games as they are other adult products.
/. threads on this, with most thread authors sharing the opinion that violent video games don't hurt kids. While there is little evidence to prove this either way, I suspect allowing a 10 year old play 50 hours of Quake or Grand Theft Auto every week certainly "could" desensitize them to violence.
There have been a lot of
However I've yet to see any of these proponents of allowing minors to purchase M rated games answer the key question.
Why should video games be exempt from similar restrictions on other adult media? I can't think of a single good reason.
If a child is has violent tendencies, they are already well in place by the time they are a teen. Video games, movies, music, television, friends, family, school, animals, chat rooms, ... who knows what might set someone off? The argument is a typical shortsighted view of a problem, i.e. "Why are children violent? Oh, because they are surrounded by violence." NOPE! Well, sort of but because, in most cases, the are raised to be desensitized to violence. But no one wants to tell the parents that they fucked up raising their child so we blame it on anything and everything else that's an easy target. Bottom line is that parents need to be more active expressing unconditional love and compassion throughout a childs youth. The children that don't get that love and compassion will seek it elsewhere and will be influenced from those other than the parents which will potentially lead to antisocial behavior. End of story.
Look, I'm as liberal-hippie-pinko-commie-fag as they come, but I'm sick to death of people defending the manufacturers of ultra-violent media as if they were struggling artists in need of protection. It's easy enough to point an accusing finger at the parents for not insulating their children from the evils of the world (especially when the finger-pointer is not a parent), but the truth is that it takes a village to raise a child, and we all bear some responsibility for what our children grow up believing is acceptable bahaviour. If we bombard them with this dreck day in and out (and I'm not just referring to MA games, but all the other pointlessly violent garbage that Hollyweird shovels down our throats by the truckload), it seem to me to be rather obvious that this will have an adverse influence on their perception of violence. I find it ironic that the media is always the first to wave around stacks of studies that demonstrate no connection between media violence and human behaviour, yet turn around and spend millions every year on advertising...presumably because of it's ability to influence human behaviour.
A lot of the assumptions made in this particular article were clearly innacurate (anyone who has spent five minutes in an Electronic Boutique knows that the average age of a video game purchaser is less than 28) , and it struck me as simply another knee jerk reaction to protect our freedom to sell crap to kids. The media corporations rallying behind the banner of free speech could not give two bits for our freedom. They are simply defending their market.
Will it make kids killers? No. Evolution made us killers. Civilization is what keeps us from killing eachother.
Let's try to be more civilized.
I played a lot of violent games as a youth. I smashed balls, I beat people up, I violently ate ghosts , and I even engaged in animal cruelty.
And now I am an axe-murderer.
Don't be like me.
In the future, I would want to not be isolated from my friends in the Space Station.
..would be, that more children have ended up hurting themselves or others after watching non-violent films. i've heard quite a few stories about kids trying to (and failing miserably to) fly after watcing superman, or dropping bricks on other people's heads after watcing "home alone".
anyway, you can always find something/someone else to blame but you. i've read that in 1930's, comic books were blamed for causing agressive behaviour. in 1960's, this was already forgotten. in 10 or 20 years, we will probably have a new scapegoat. and if everything else fails - if you happen to live in the usa (i don't), you can always blame canada...
Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
I was looking through some old stuff the other day when I came across some AD&D manuals, etc.
Whilst browsing, I came across one of my old characters, a cleric who had chronic gastric problems that would most likely be fatal. I remember having that hobbled priest when I was 15, and thinking about how damn unlucky I was to have to play a virtual cripple.
Ten years later I was diagnosed with chronic ulcerative colitis (a bowel disease similar to Crohn's disease), exactly what that cleric had. And, similarly, my situation deteriorated over an 18-month period until the day came when I had to choose between major surgery and certain death - a seemingly obvious choice but one which was still the hardest decision I've ever had to make (believe me, if you're ever in the same boat then you'll understand why).
Now, I'm not saying that AD&D ruined my life, or that playing it cast some wicked curse on my life. But I do think that, any day now, I'm due to find a ring of invisibility, boots of speed and a +3 vorpal sword, and when that day comes, I'm gonna kick some major ass.
"Accept that some days you are the pigeon, and some days you are the statue." - David Brent, Wernham Hogg
So, Shock and Awe, the Sony videogame, will be responsible for corrupting youth, but Shock and Awe, the GWBushCorp's real-world enterprise of death and conquest is what, exactly? A beautiful inspiration of courage and restraint, suitable for the instruction and edification of all children? Please. We need to set up a detox center for all the people with Lee Greenwood-addled brains.
I think the cart has been put before the horse here. Instead of saying that the games inspire the violence, perhaps it is accurate to say that those with violent tendancies are attracted to these games. It sounds logical since only a small number of people/kids who play them participate in real-life violence. Of course, further conclusions can be drawn about other influences, i.e. parents' roles, etc. Saying the games inspire the violence is like saying masturbating causes rape.
A short introduction: My fridge kicked the bucket two weeks ago. I quickly started investigating where to buy a new and cheap fridge fast. The trip went to the Expert chain on the other side of the road and I inquired about the latest Whirpool fridges. I talked to the salesperson on the showroom floor and then went to the checkout to investigate the prices. I also started to look for a stove and a to-piece ceramic plate for later
There I saw a familiar sight. There was a poster of GTA3 along with a printed message saying "This store does not carry the following games: GTA3, GTA: Vice City and BMX XXX. because we don't sell violent games to youngsters. We boycott these games"
The really catered to the asshole in me and I asked exactly why they did not want to sell these games. The clerk stumbled out som answer like "We don't want young people to see graphic contents etc.". I asked her if she had actually read the covre of games like GTA:VC. The cover here is covered with a warning not to distribute to youngsters, approx 1/3 of the front in size. She had not.
I asked her if the store prevously had a practise of selling this game to children, thus ignoring the manufacturer's warning. She said no.
I then said that if you only sold the game to people 18 years of age, why boycott it? She could not give an answer to that.
I then spoke to the store manager and said: "I disagree to your boycott and have decided to cease all purchases from this store and all Expert stores until you let people think a bit for themselves. This wil cost you the following in lost sales in near future."
The owner really got something to think about then. He looked dumbfounded.
I walked out of that store and went to a mom-and-pop electronics storer that did not carry videogames at all and they were nicer and cheaper. After completing the purchases there I went to the Expert store and showed the manager the 3000USD reciept for sales he missed. I underlined that I would NEVER purchase anything there, but walk a click to the next store.
Again, I believe he started to think about the boycott.
This is simply yet another symptom in the inability of people today (especially in the good old USofA) to take any responsibility, either individually or as a society, for their own actions. Anyone else looking towards leaving the country?
How come more of our parents aren't one-eyed, or have serious damage to the back of their heads? I mean, look at all of the Laurel and Hardy movies, or the Three Stooges...they are filled with many sceens of people poking others eyes out, impacts upon their head usually in the back since they are looking the wrong way...and falls, impact with doors/windows/chairs/etc. headfirst...So, let's see a study of the injuries of our Parents and Grandparents in relation to the L&H, and Three Stooges...And I bet it will show that their was very little effect, except for those who already had sociopathic tendancies (a small percentage of today's society).
ttyl
Farrell
CAN-CON 2019 - Ottawa's only book oriented Science Fiction Convention! October 18-20, Sheraton Hotel, Ottawa, Canada h
From what I have seen of Doom 3, there will be a LOT of discussions surrounding gaming and graphic violence.
Intestinal gore anyone?
Oh yes, I will buy it. I am such a sucker for id products...
amen.
I watched thousands of Tom and Jerry cartoons as a kid but have never hit anyone in the face with a frying pan.
The truth doesn't care what I think.
it is the mentality behind the violence.
Having been immensely interested in and used my last 30 years to study people (without demented ideas about electricity, drugs or libido) I found the biggest sources of violence to stem from; people's insecurity, an attempt to hide or shift attention away from something they have done. And of course being really upset about some injustice or abuse.
The biggest creation of vilence seem to stem from many drugs popular with the (in my eyes) big scam of people running on chemicals and needing to be "repaired" with them. F.ex. Ritalin. These drugs are often known as killer drugs, see the school shootings. All those kids where on one or several psychotropic drugs. (Which are rated right up there with Cocain.)
News defintely can make you upset if you think it represents an average cut of life. It is after all custom made to try to create an as big effect as possible, to keep you interested in their programming.
War can even be a good "game" if all participants agreee to play. We love challenges! Boredom is to be avoided at all costs. To kill or be killed is the ultimate challenge. So if you can play that on a computer, totally engrossed, it can really make your adrenaline move.
Having played these type of games I've never had the urge to go out and shoot anyone. But of course, this is only me, maybe I'm the demented one!
Why not apply some electricity? Last year over $500,000 was paid by Medicare on electroshock! That's 180 to 460 volts through your brain! Yeeha, need a pointer to figure out if that can make you crazy? Or violent?!
Some people are demented, they will do demented things. Some people wants you to think you are too, so they can make money fixing you up again. Unfortunately, very few of them get better due to their treatment, but rather from just having someone who can listen, without evaluation, and acknowledge them. This in my opinion is the single best help you can give anyone who feels troubled. Simply listen.
Psychology in all its variations are based on you being basically evil and only kept honest through threat of fource. In my observations nothing could be further from the truth. We are inherently good with mostly a strong sense of right and wrong. The trick is to stay true to yourself, and not to someone you want to accept you.
Play your games and walk tall!
Oh you just reminded me of something else that makes
a good point. Because I was going to reply that
Resident Evil was just an example, that he does play
better games. One good example being, Final Fantasy
(take your pick on what part), I've been getting him
to play FF just because he's getting to the point
where the little engine that could is a little
boring on the learning to read perspective. So,
at night I'll help him read a little book before bed,
and durring the day when he wants to play PS2, he
play's games that require reading, and I make him
figure it out on his own (helping with the harder
words of course). So once again, in my opinion,
these games everyone hates can be a good thing,
if the parents are in fact parents and not just
people that give kids money and drive kids places.
Really, it is! Just like yesterday's PVP...
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/glance/cv2.htm
overall, violent crime in the US has been on the decline since 1993.
interesting coincidence: the decline started the year DOOM was released, one of the first widespread, graphically violent games.
and a proven statistic: the higher the unemployment, the higher the crime rate. does this mean we can make bad economic policy illegal too?
I know a lot of people on Slashdot really like video games (me included!), so it's easy for us to have disdain for something that looks at them in a negative light. But if video games really do cause violence, then we need to overlook our feelings for a moment and take the subject seriously. I for one can sympathize, because right after I showed my little brother how to play Commander Keen, he started running around on a rampage of pogo-stick-and-ray-gun related violence. I finally had to take his neural stunner away from him because he was causing so much trouble. I'm not even going to mention what happened after he got addicted to Gauntlet and then got his hands on a magical flask of liquid. It took me hours to clean the mess up.
http://www.paulgraham.com/nerds.html
Also spracht CowboyNeal: I can't wait until we can attribute violence to the nightly news.
Current, mainstream TV news coverage of the invasion of Iraq is nothing more than pornography. No analysis. Simply as many different angles of view of the same act repeated over and over until it just is. I have cow-orkers who talk about nothing else couching what they could never understand in so many CNN/FoxNewsisms. Look at the way Chemical Ali was done on MSNBC: he face was plastered beside a Sid Meyersesque character description. His real name wasn't even used:
Name: Chemical Ali
Atrocities: Gassed his own people
Relation: Saddam's brother-in-law
Threat Level: High on US list of wanted Iraqis
What's next?
Name: CmdrTaco
Atrocities: Repeated Dupes; Applied Mind Clips to own people
Relation: Preternatural with John Katz
Threat Level: Eh, he's a pushover.
Comparing it to Windows will be a moot point, since El Dorado is going to have a 40% larger code base than XP.
quite recently, there was a scandal in russia about a movie called "the brigade". the movie was about some teenagers (i think), who beat up people for fun - teachers, random people in discoes etc. the movie was a success, the actors became youth idols - teenagers started beating up random people, too. now, the actors are having a hard time explaining that violence is bad and you shouldn't beat up people just because you're bored...
[as a side note, a long time ago in soviet russia, it happened that those actors who played germans in a world war two movie, were thought of as nazis after this by the majority of people. they never got any parts in movies again...]
i wonder if something like this could happen in some other country. what influence did the "clockwork orange" have other than that delinguants started listening to beethoven?
Hell is not other people; it is yourself. - Ludwig Wittgenstein
This is unreal. As if the fact that the United States Army employs a video game in order to lure youngsters into its ranks isnt enough evidence.
Have you guys EVER studied behavioral sciences at ALL?
How is it that you people feel you are apt to comment on such a complex issue as learning and attitude formation?
Theres a reason movies have ratings. And its not because kids cry. Developing minds are extremely susceptible to suggestion. Attitudes and emotions are extremely fragile.
There is a concept in behaviorism called association, best described in 1898 by Thorndike as the Law of Effect: "Behavior leading to satisfactory states is likely, behavior leading to unsatisfactory states, less likely."
There is a difference between consciously engaging the lyrics of a song or words in a book and actively reliving experiences (remember, observations and sensations are experiences) involving violence and death.
You internalize (naturalize) the behavior and the resulting states of mind that occur. It will NOT affect your conscious thought. You will not suddenly be overcome with a desire to kill. That is just sillyness.
Instead, your thoughts and actions will be characterized by these associations you have made in your mind. They will evoke a reflexive, emotional response. your attitudes will be underlined by the extreme levels of violence you are submerged in.
Its great for the warmongering USA, thats why the law will never pass. A nation whose attitudes are stereotyped by violence will not object to : War in Vietnam, War in Iraq, War in Afghanistan, War in Iraq again, War on Drugs, War on Poverty, War on your fucking mind. Even if war after war after war after war after war FAILS TO ACHIEVE THE STATED OBJECTIVES.
think about it.
before you speak.
-- "Man is born free, and everywhere he is in chains." Jean Jacques Rousseau
Does an adult have the right to choose to buy/play/watch any movie or game he wants? Sure.
Does a 10 year old? No. The 10 year olds legal guardian does. People constantly blame the parents, but then decide that they can usurp the parents and market sex and violence to little kids for the sake of the almighty buck.
It would be nice if there was some voluntary corporate policy, and some larger chains have caved to public pressure the way the MPAA did decades ago. They decided they wont sell content rated mature to a 10 year old. They have the right to not sell anything to a 10 year old if they choose, but the current compromise is good enough.
A violent video game does not in itself make a murderer. But constantly bombarding kids with violence has a desensitizing affect, and just plain vulgarity is having a negative effect on society as a whole.
The problem with "gangsta rap" is that now you have 8 year olds calling little girls hos and bitches, and they think its acceptable to do so.
It's had a terrible effect on black society, as it's been teaching the children that the only possible role models are basketball stars and rappers, that education is unimportant, and that any sign of class or intelligence is a bad thing.
Couple that with the liberal shift to some sort of mindset where it's wrong to punish children at all, and you have a recipe for a decaying society.
I wonder what the country will look like in a few decades, when these kids have grown up with a sense of entitlement, a lack of respect for others, no education, and completely oblivious of the fact that there are consequences for their actions.
I dont agree with government controls in principle. But the corporations continue to bombard kids with crap, and theres a growing segment of the population saying enough is enough.
I mean, if someone comes into my home and starts swearing and acting like a jerk in front of my kids, I'll tell him to stop, or boot his ass out. MediaCorp should get the same treatment. You just dont do some things because its just wrong.
Corporate america will learn these lessons via boycotts and angry consumers, but they're slow to learn anything. NBC learnt the hard way what happens when they decide to put gangsta/pornographer Snoop Dogg into a Muppets special. (The fucking Muppets - and Snoop Dogg, I mean what the fuck were they thinking besides making a cheap buck?) People got pissed. People stopped watching them. It hit their pocketbooks, they smartened up and apologized. Pepsi learned the same way that using Ludacris to hock soda to kids would get the same reaction.
Short of that, or a government rule (which I wouldnt want), they wouldnt care. They'd base a saturday morning cartoon on Charles Manson if they thought it would sell some more Play Doh ads.
Anyhow, I'm pretty confident this whole issue will just slowly resolve itself. All people have to do is not be dickheads. Make your tittie porno BMX video game, but dont sell it to little kids. Not because some law got passed, because it's just an ignorant thing to do.
You know the funny thing is.. when i play GTA2 (my favorite one) for extended periods of time it really does affect my thinking a little. I live in Jersey and don't have a car so I always think about how cool it would be to snatch the next asshole out of his car and get home faster. This wouldn't bother me so much except for the fact that I keep finding myself thinking those thoughts (how would these people react if i just started mowing them down in an icecream truck right now?) involuntarily.
However, at the same time I also acknowledge that I frequently involuntarily will apply racial stereotypes to people. However I was taught in a psychology class that although racial stereotypes were a bad thing, not being a racist didn't mean not possessing racial stereotypes. It meant being aware of the fact that you were percieving a stereotype that probably wasn't true and actively counterring that in your head. This is a working technique to reduce your level of racism but certainly not preferable to never having the stereotype in the first place (which is very possible if you weren't raised in the US).
Video game violence is similar. If you're exposed to it, IT WILL AFFECT YOUR THINKING. But it won't affect your behavior if you're mature enough to counter it actively.
My brother and 3 of his friends stole a car. After stealing it they drove down the highway screaming "GTA baby! yeah!". My brother and his friends are equally young but he was the only one who chose not to get into the car, reminding them that in reality this was a felony. He possessed the mental faculties to stop him from doing what he was tempted to do. They didn't steal it for money (they returned the car when they were finished) but because games like GTA made ALL of them think it was cool. However it was not a foregone conclusion that it would make all of them do it.
The point is, which is preferable? Having the racial stereotypes or violent inclinations in your head and counterring them logically or never having them in the first place?
I have two daughters, ages 13 & 9. While usually selective about what games are in the house for the PS2, I went out of my way to pick up Vice City. Their mother passed away about four years ago (related to drug abuse) and I think it educational that, as they reach an age where they can grasp the reprocussions, it is good for them to experience negative-reinforcement that Vice City provides.
Things do not work out well for all of the drug abusers and whores in the game and my daughters see that as I bring justice upon the sinners. In essence I think it is a matter of perspective and quite a few folks at my church agree. In fact, many of the scenes in Vice City are not unlike the reprocussions described by the Southern Baptist Convention for those sinners who do not accept Christ and choose to live a life of sin despite the alternatives.
Oh, but D&D does corrupt, as proven by this highly factual publication: Dark Dungeons.
:)
I rest my case.
I remember when Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles first came on TV.
The boys changed overnight.
All the males at school (I was 6 or 7 at the time I think) had a totally ninja-turtlised makeover overnight. They became violent in mentalitiy and actions, punching, kicking and being macho. That single cartoon affected a whole generation for life where I live. I can only imagine what is it TV now is doing to the next.
But one of the things I rarely see mentioned is this - not terribly unlike the JFK consipracy theorists of the world, people who make the bold sweeping claim that video game violence caused things like Columbine do like to hang on to the tiny shreds of evidence that support their theory and ignore the mountains of evidence against it.
The lawyer mentioned in the article has attempted to make a living off of suing video game makers. His Kip Kinkle and Columbine cases were thrown out, so either he's making money either way or he's getting really frustrated right now. In addition to the Beltway Sniper case, he's suing the government over the America's Army game. His mentality is that of a spammer - it doesn't matter how sleazy and slimy what he does is, so long as he gets paid.
And the fact is that all you have to do is bring a picture of a dead kid and a waving finger to Congress and you can get any law in the world you want passed.
But think about it - how many violent kid incidents do you ever hear about? Columbine, Kip Kinkle, those kids in Arkansas, that kid in Flint. That's what, four? And what did they all have in common? Well three of them were white kids shooting white kids (the kid in Flint was a black kid shooting a white kid - significant since the kids were six years old). But what about black kids shooting black kids? It happens all the time, but the news never centers on it. Similarly, when Elizabeth Smart went missing it was Chandra Levy Part II, but the same week a black girl from a poor neighboorhood was kidnapped and no one outside of her state cared.
So the parents groups, mostly white people terrified of this happening to them, use this handful of incidents and blow them out of proportion. The game industry is growing while the overall crime rate is dropping. We haven't had a big school shooting since Columbine. And the biggest retailers (Wal-Mart, Target, GameStop) won't sell M-rated games to minors.
Personally I support not selling M-rated games to minors, but not at the point of law. The movie industry hasn't needed laws to enfore R-rated movies. Do kids still see them? Sure. But they can't just walk in. And consider this - kids can't pirate cigarettes, but if you make it to where kids can't buy M-rated games by law they'll just hit up the newsgroups.
Schnapple
Why do we restrict the purchase of pr0n by minors? I am yet to see a gram of evidence that that watching some pr0n is going to harm the little buggers in any conceivable way.
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
.."But MTV's "Jackass" doesn't make kids try dangerous stunts"..
Actually it does... There are lots' of teenages performing jackass stunts nowadays.
bolwing for columbine is chock full of errors, fabrications, and lies. moore is an absolute idiot. if you choose to agree with his political perspective, fine, he is certainly "entertaining". but as a source of information, he is not. for example, stupid white men is also full of more lies, etc.
My problem? I was perfectly gruntled, until some numbnuts came by and dissed me.
Don't try and quote Bowling for Columbine (or any Michael Moore film for that matter) as a point of factual reference. Thought provoking it certianly is, but accurate it is not.
fuck censorship and fuck you
Where I live, there was never any moral outrage over D&D.
I almost wish there was. Maybe I wouldn't have wasted so much time on it then.
Makes you think, eh?
If you see a sucker, cut 'em - don't like perpetrators.
How small a thought it takes to fill a whole life
Some people say the the problem is that parents arn't paying attention to what games the kids are playing.
I think the problem is that the parents arn't paying attention to the kids at all.
Just recently I watched a show on Court TV about a 12 year old killing his baby cousin (one or two years old) using a WWF wrestling move. He was left to babysit his cousin alone as well. The show also talked about video game violence in brief, basically saying that it's on of the mediums that kids may want to immitate in real life.
The question that comes to my mind is: Are video games/wrestling/media/etc causing the violence, or are the kids?
Well, that's a no-brainer, kids are committing the acts. I've known many young boys who really look up to WWF wrestlers and immitate violent acts such as those in video games. Not because they want to hurt anybody, but because they want to immitate their idols and what they see. With wresling, the see a guy get a beatdown, and magically get back up, and after the show is over, they walk out of the ring unscathed. With video games, I think it's the player's interaction, coupled with the glamorization of violence that would make some kids want to try it out in real life.
Kids *are* impressionable like that. Which on one hand makes this topic understandable. But what is the media in general supposed to do about it? Make everything sugar-coated and soft for the sake of preventing some deaths? Should the world go on a censor-spree because one kid may pick up a gun and decide to go on a killing spree while exclaiming "I'll bury you in a lunckbox!"?
Every parent wants to blame video games, the gun manufacters, the internet, movies, you name it. It's easier to pass the buck then it is to accept the responsibilty. Oh parents are taking responsibility because they banded together and got a bill passed in to law? How exactly does that help?
"Because just as parents don't want retailers to sell beer or wine to their children or tobacco to our children because it's bad for them, they're saying 'Help us. Don't make this stuff available to our kids.' Parents absolutely do need to take responsibility, but in society today, you and I both know that it's pretty easy for kids to go next door and get hold of something that parents won't allow them to have."
This is understadable as well. Retailers shouldn't be selling alcohol or tobacco to minors, just as gun manufacters shouldn't be selling guns to minors. There are laws to prevent that, and they do help the problem. However, these are things that directly harm children. With video games and the media, they're more passive, so the direct link isn't as clear.
In any case, there's something about American parents not wanting to take responsibility for their children. You shouldn't leave a 2 year old in the care of a 12 year old, period. Or if your child gets a hold of your gun and kills someone, who's at fault, you or the kid?
Most of these cases are directly linked to the parents inability or laziness. It's true, parents can't keep an eye on their kids 24/7, but they can take steps and get more involved in their kids lives. "Let me read the box on that video game", or "what are you watching on tv?" Just don't leave them to do whatever they want. Spend time with them and what they're doing, be their moral conscious and guide while their playing that video game, or cheering their favorite wrestler on.
The more you get involved with what you're kids do, the more you can instill in them what is acceptable in real life, and what is not.
A Penny for my thoughts? Here's my two cents. I got ripped off!
Thompson has said that "Halo" publisher Microsoft should be sued and held liable for money damages by victims of the Beltway Snipers; the two accused of the shootings said they practiced with it. Oh yes, I can definately see the relation here. You practice for sniping someone by using an Xbox controller to aim laser rifles at aliens. How does that even translate to using a real gun to snipe people. I play Counter-Strike all the time, which uses realistic weapons, and I know that I would not be anywhere near proficient in the use of any of those guns in real life. I wouldn't have any hope of being able to control an M4 or and AK-47.
I'm not anti-American; I've got numerous American friends and colleagues, I've worked in the US for a while, I was in New York last January and will come back to the US for business purposes at least once more this year.
Of course, my message was alluding partly to the American media. My opinion on these is that even alleged serious newspapers such as the New-York Times have degraded standards when it comes to international news. All too often, the international news articles would be more appropriately moved to a "commentary" or "opinion" section.
One troubling fact, for instance, is that all too often these articles dwell on alleged motivations, often implying that actions by foreign people or leaders are motivated by anti-Americanism or envy. Let me given you an example: in a recent article commenting on the opposition from several judicial bodies to a proposal to change French criminal procedure to include plea bargain, the journalist commented: "In France, perceived concessions to English-American forms of law, no matter how slight, have run into strong resistance.". Now, of course, this implies this resistance is motivated by anti-Americanism, ignoring real concerns about constitutional rights such as the right to a fair trial. In short, the journalist attributes motivations to people who cannot defend themselves. Is that reporting, or partisan comment?
I won't even mention the moral judgments routinely doled out as facts. The point is that such so-called reporting is bound to shape the impressions of the reader in a certain direction, in this case to believe that any opposition to the policies of the United States government is motivated by dubious issues.
Now you can understand better what happens in countries such as Saudi Arabia. In those countries, the media and the education system are even more biased. People are taught from their infancy that, say, the Jews are cunning liars. They are taught about the moral superiority of their religion compared to the "immoral" West.
The parallel is striking. Self-righteous biased reporting replacing facts and objective analysis. Of course, the situation in Saudi Arabia is far worse than in any Western countries, but still one should always pay attention to the agendas of the media outlets.
The link to violence? Why do all these people sponsors terrorist groups through so-called "charities"? Where do they find the terrorists? Part of the explanation seems to be that prejudice ingrained from infancy breeds violence.
Yeah, that was, like my favorite game ever and I never...is he modding me down? SHOOOOOORYUKEN!
-----
Score 3? For what? Being wrong, at length? - smirkleton
Your son is 6, and you are 23? You must be a spy! No nerd gets laid in highschool!
:)
The National Rifle Association insists that minors, unless they have a criminal record, be allowed to purchase guns. So just package your violent video game with a real gun. Call the game a "training aid".
Mystery Science Theatre 3000 meets Dark Dungeons
It's only dangerous if 'weird' kids listen to it. Same deal with Dungeons and Dragons, and Ozzy Osbourne. Weird stuff generates paranoia, when there are kids out there who draw pictures of Iraqi's/Saddam getting slaughtered in detail, and their teachers and friends commend them for it, calling them patriots. Kids go around beating the shit out of weaker kids, and the weaker kids go into stuff like D&D, or violent videogames, and suddenly the parents think they're gonna shoot up the school. Perhaps they should try solving the problem at the root. If anything, violent videogames are good, because they help kids vent. I had times in high school where I was pissed off and instead of trying to go and beat the crap out of someone, I would sit down and play Doom or Half life, and bam, all my problems would die down. But does the older generation understand? No... they love demonizing the children's generation so they can take away from their own faults. */rant*
A friend of mine said that shortly after 9/11, and it's stuck with me ever since.
This is where I keep my clever quotes "" Yup I only got a pair, so I better not waste em!
My $0.02 USD worth....
Disclamer-- I do not yet have any children of my own.
I actually wish more parents had your mentality. Way too often parents/schools/the government/others assume that children are mindless blank-slates which need to be programed just like that spare athlon and that without programming, the child is nothing...
Children are amazing, inquisitive, and social. They like it when others take the time to share with them, and love is one of the most powerful emotions for a child. I think that sharing things that one enjoys with a child (within reason) is important. This should include hobbies, foods, general interests (provided that they are not ones that will damage the child's sense of self).
While obviously proactively sharing some things with a child should not be done (for example things appealing to the purient interest). But regarding violent games-- kids play violent games, and they always have. How many of the crusaders against violent video games played war-type games as children?
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Your unmatched formatting skills have me all hot and bothered. Take me now, you animal.
just think of me as that guy from american pie 2....
back then I was a nerd and didn't know it. (though
I think in american pie it was a band geek)
You've gotta be kidding me... next thing you know, there will be an age restriction on buying cigarettes, alcohol, and pr0n.
I agree the store's policy is stupid, but try checking every once in a while to see if they fixed the policy. You should end the boycott when they change their mind. There is no incentive for them to change if they think you'll never go back anyway.
There is a christian sect who make up the majority of people where I live. They have a very hard rule against doing business on sundays. (though they break it all the time.) One of the church leaders declared a boycott on a grocery store because they were open on sundays. (I don't agree they should tell others when to do business, but that is what they did.) At any rate, soon all the church goers started boycotting the store. After a while, the store changed its policy. It was now closed on sundays. (Sucks for me, BTW) To this day, some people still boycott this store--they probably don't even remember why. I noticed the other day, on one of their fliers, they still write CLOSED SUNDAY in big bold letters.
The moral of the story is: boycotts can be effective, but there is no point in continuing one if your target has fixed the problem. Well, unless they murder your family or something. Well, there is a second one: anyone who demands change in policy which is made to stop others from going about their own life is a friggin' bastard--that can apply to banning video games or forcing a store to close on sundays. Hmmm...maybe boycotting the boycotters is a good idea.
"Children are amazing, inquisitive, and social"
;o)
The autistic, the Aspie, the nerd & the geek kids aren't that social. We spend most of our time on the computer or in the library - parents hardly call reading a book sociable.
Video Game cheats, hints a
I thought kids bought their own games. Mind you - when I was a kid in the 80s - tapes of C64 games were only about the equivalent of between $1.50 and $7.50 (+ 20 years of inflation). These days games are more commercial and expensive (outside of the weekly pocket money allowance). Kids just play games for fun. There's the whole "edutainment" section too - computer aided learning etc etc etc. Schools started buying computer software to teach maths, foreign language vocabulary, english etc - before there really was a "gaming scene".
Video Game cheats, hints a
Whenever I see those reports about video games/D&D/gangsta rap, etc making teens violent, etc, I often wonder why it is that the people that say this (i.e. my parents, grandparents, etc) are not so messed up & violent.
Let's go back one generation (relative to me - I'm 24 years old, my father is 53). Many of the people my father knew were in the military fighting in Vietnam (he joined later and was posted in Germany). A good part of society thus experienced and were exposed to REAL violence. Not only that, they were also TRAINED to effectively kill & destroy as well as to blindly follow orders. Hmm... my father and his friends are not going around killing people or blowing up bridges.
Same thing goes with the generation previous to my father - my grandparents. They were part of a much bigger, worldwide war (WW2) that not only focused entire countries to supporting the war effort, but also sent massive numbers of people to fight. Most of these people managed to reintegrate into society and lead normal, non-violent lives.
Today, my father reads war/military books and watches war movies. This is his virtual world that he finds interesting; it's just an escape from reality. He might even dream, in his mind, of being in those situations and it might involve very violent actions. But, like any sane person, he can distinguish between reality and the imaginary and, as such, it's harmless. Living out parts of the imaginary is also perfectly fine since he, like everyone else, is aware of what is acceptable in society and law.
Same goes with computer games. Whenever we play a computer game, we are experiencing the imaginary world created by the game developer. What we do in this imaginary world may be of some use in the real world but, for the most part, it remains in the imaginary (Rainbow 6 does not make me an anti-terrorist specialist - nor would I ever concede myself to being one!). If we choose to live out part of the imaginary, virtually all people will do so in a way that is acceptable.
The very rare cases involving people that don't have this moral compass or cannot distinguish between reality - they are the people that give the rest of us a poor image. Specifically, it's the fault of the media for grossly oversimplifying the subset of society that we make up (i.e. all computer game users are violent).
The good news? As we get older, we will be the ones that control society. Computer games and their ilk are not going away either - infact they are getting more common & widespread (it's not just the domain of geeks). As such the nutcases today can say whatever they want today because in the future people will (hopefully) disregard their message since we know it's a load of crap.
Fin.
Seattle was also the city that had Rockstar place ads for Vice City on their buses and pulled them off once they realized it was an M rated game.
"Empty Pop Tart boxes were found in a search of the killer's apartment. One expert we talked to told us that junk food has been linked to many mass murderers in the past." Sure, this example is ridiculous but I wouldn't put it past a reporter trying to make a splash.
My disdain for these theories aside, though, I'm all for state/local laws - I don't buy federal jurisdiction and Herr Lieberman and his allies should take a look at the Constitution sometime - to restrict the sale of M-rated games to minors, mainly to shut the fools up. After all, we already restrict by law letting minors see naked bodies engaged in intercourse, a far more natural and socially acceptable activity than killing people. There's little reason not to do the same with M-rated video games. Stiff fines would force stores which currently have little or no sales policies in this regard to make them, and they would convince the anti-video game nuts out there that "something" is being done.
Minors don't have the same rights as adults, and I don't think that restricting the purchase of potentially objectionable video games is a big further infringement on what rights they do have. After all, they have parents and guardians who can easily buy the games and then let the kids play them.
Don't get me wrong - I think that parents should exercise more responsibility than they do in these matters, but I'm dog-tired of hearing about this issue and I think giving the reactionaries this particular inch is worth it if there's any chance of shutting them up.
reality is not based on the real world, rather on this dream world where i am rich and someone important, like an actor. our reality is feed to us by the media and they dont usually paint a pretty picture.
I know you are psychotic, but please make an effort.
Contrary to some of the comments here, a large body of research shows a link between exposure to media violence and aggressive behavior. There is a consensus among experts on this point (see this joint statement by the American Medical Association, American Psychological Association, and American Psychiatric Association, and American Academy of Pediatrics). Much of the research to date has concerned television and movies; not as much research has looked at video games. But there is growing evidence that the influence of video games is at least as strong and may be stronger. If you want to read some of the research for yourself, the Lion and Lamb advocacy group has a helpful page of links. (I am not affiliated with the group.) The research evidence is high-quality and includes longitudinal surveys showing long-lasting effects of early exposure to media violence on later aggressive behaviors. In showing a relationship between media violence and aggression, the studies rule out other factors that might be correlated with violent-media exposure, such as low socioeconomic status, poor parenting, low intellectual ability, etc. Of course, many of these things can also contribute to a person becoming violent, and no single risk factor is likely to make a person violent. Still, the evidence is strong that exposure to media violence is one risk factor. One study (Johnson and colleagues, 2001) noted that the effect of media violence on aggression is larger than the effects of calcium intake on bone mass and childhood lead exposure on IQ. As for video games per se, an analysis of the results of several published studies (Anderson and Bushman, 2001) showed that the size of the effect of violent video games on aggression is about the same size as the effect of condom use on the risk of HIV infection. (The Johnson and Anderson studies are linked at the LL site.)
Y'know, I do not think I've ever seen a troll like you not get modded troll or flamebait. Every one of your posts in this article thread so far has been anti-american and pretty imflammatory.
Yeah, the US has made mistakes. We've also done a lot of good, too - without us, you would either be speaking German or Russian.
My grandparents were Swedish immigrants. I'm ashamed by your behavior.
Competitiveness has gone too far in our society. It's good to compete, since it brings progress, but to compete so much ? from year 0, a child is in competition: in school, in college, in every day life. And it is a race in multiple levels: money, fame, happiness...kids are bombarded every day with images of what makes a person happy(cool!!!): being rich, having the latest sports car, the most beautiful man/woman, the best body...
Even in geekdom, there is too much competition. We all know it: who's the smartest and brightest kid in class, who's the know-all, play-all and reply-all kid, with the highest grades and with the best posibilities to study in MIT or Harvard.
All this pressure for success is too superficial though: there is no "race" for personal growth, for philoshophical questioning...one must first answer to the question "what is life", then go on to pursue happiness. Most people don't know what happiness is, and most of us confuse happiness with materialistic completeness.
On top of all this pressure, the constant bombardment of our youth from TV and mass media with death makes an explosive mix. Add a little spice of racial problems (since most people really don't want races mixed), and what is the result ? violence.
So, the videogames are generally not to blame in my opinion. First, we have to look at the kind of society we have built. We live in a violent society, where most adults duplicate and extend the violence through their every day actions.
An important note here: we live in a virtual world. We have entered the matrix. Most people live in big cities, totally cut off from nature. This is another big problem: we usually forget that the other persons are as human as we do; we live in our small private world, ignoring what is really out there; we loose the community touch; we get lonely; we see them as colleagues, friends(boy/girl), competitors, neighbours, enemies, christians, muslims...underneath, we are all the same color. Some people are smarter, some people are stupider, some people are stronger, some people are weaker...but, what the heck, we all live and do the same things!!! it is the same things that we are after, it is the same drive that keeps us all alive.
What I fear most though is that these words are not understood. I fear that the day will come that we see every other person as an enemy, as a vulture ready to get from us our belongings, our properties, even our air. And that would be a sad day for society indeed, because we would not be a society anymore: we would be a group of individuals strapped together on the same piece of land, but totally isolated from each other.
Don't forget that the closer people homes come together, the further away their hearts get. In the end, maybe humans are just beasts ready to self-destruct...
Unless all this changes, more and more violence we will have...and let the experts and "experts" say whatever they want about videogames...
than playing football in highschool(which i did). OR watching football, or basketball, or hockey, where watching two people fighting in the middle of a gameis the height of entertainment. Or better yet, a bench clearing brawl. How twisted is that?
Boxing dosent count, im my book, because they are both committing acts of controlled violence that are acceptable withn the realms of the rules that have been set out.
Meanwhile, most professional sports glorify the players that suddenly get angry, and start beating the shit out of their opposing teammates.
I would much rather associe my relaxing brain with the harmless make believe killing of the game, rather than the mindless brutality encouraged by most professional sports.
All Troll + "offtopic" mods are meta moderated as "Unfair", because you abused the system.
number of incidents of violence that you have heard about occuring at LAN parties. _________________
number of incidents of violence that you have heard about occuring at sporting events. _______________
which one seems more likely to spur violent reactions? ________________________
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
A long-running study from the University of Michigan's Institute for Social Research (published in the March issue of the journal Developmental Psychology) found that violence on TV did have a measurable, long-term effect both in males and females.
The study interviewed children between 6 and 9 years old, then checked back with them in their early 20s. It found "a heightened risk of agressive adult behavior, including spouse abuse and criminal offenses, no matter how they act in childhood."
While this study isn't about videogames, common sense says that the effect is inferred on related media. TV viewing is a passive medium; video games are much more immersive and probably have a larger effect. Sorry, but as a parent I'll continue to pay attention to game ratings.
"It remains to be seen if the human brain is powerful enough to solve the problems it has created." Dr. Richard Wallace
This newest instance of legislative idiocy makes me long for the day when an IQ test and a psychiatric evaluation will be required before a candidate makes a move for office. I played D&D, I listen to hard rock and metal, and I enjoy inflicting mass death on millions of virtual victims during video game. I did this in high school, in college, and now in law school. So did most of my friends. The funny thing is, most of us are successful and fairly well adjusted. Gee, I guess those "deviant" pursuits did not hurt us at all...
Sometimes when im angry, I like to have a good online game Quake III. It takes the anger out of me, because I can take my anger out on these "virtual people", if you will. I think computer games can have a theraputic effect as well as the mythical violent effect.
I totally agree. What I want more than anything is stricter buying of M rated games so that I can get a REAL mature game. You know a litle t & a here and there.
Clerics can't use vorpal swords. =P
this field intentionally left blank
"The idea is that this sort of news, and in general, this type of government policy, constantly shows that violence and killing are acceptable solutions"
No duh!!! I find it amazing that people are still amazed about that. They think violence, especially gun violence is something new. These are the same people that also believe Doritoes were invented a year or two ago. Violence has been with us from the beginning. As much as Moore liked to make fun of rural towns that have lot's of firearms he failed to mention that they also have nearly absent crime rates. Of course that has more to do with family and attitudes towards personal responsibility than the firearms in themselves.
Yes violence and killing are acceptable solutions to many of the world problems. Yes violence and killing is a very cruel and very final solution, but if any of the give peace a chance crowd can come up with a solution that goes beyond "there's got to be a better way" and "killing is bad" then I would love to hear it. Not everyone turns out to be a peace loving, productive member of planet Earth and it requires something more than a "talkin to" to make them change their ways after they start causing problems. If anything we need to keep a running tally of the number criminals "murdered" vs innocents so we can better keep score. I personally see a criminal death not as a murder, but as an act of public service, and keeping with being fiscally responsible. (A one time fee of $.50 for a bullet, $25 for LA cops, vs $30k a year for 5-10 years)
Oh yeh, almost forgot, Michael Moore is a filthy hippy.
Cause this one time.. in band camp..
Ahhhh! Shiruken!!!
This is just plain ignorant. You know, real people do get killed by busty women flipping upside down and spinning their legs like a pinwheel of death. A friend of mine died that way.
Just as tragic, I had a [different] friend who was trapped in a giant maze, pursued, and eventually devoured by a giant yellow blob with an enormous snapping jaw.
I don't ever want to hear you minimize the evils of video game violence again, understand?
You want the truthiness? You can't handle the truthiness!
If I remember correctly, he pointed the gun-shaped chicken wing at a teacher and said "Bang."
His suspension was still stupid and unwarranted, but at least it's stupid and unwarranted by an itty bitty bit less.
My legal education, in nifty podcast format
Are you actually saying that pr0n is worse than reality television?:)
Is this a sigs-optional kind of place? 'Cause I am totally down with that if you know what I mean.
That's right... The government doesn't care.
(And anyone who claims that emotional abuse or neglecting to show affection does not have a serious effect on a child is deluding themself).
Hardware, software, and blinking lights!
My friend and I played Halo (For two periods of near 10 hours straight) on his roommate's X-box.
..Go figure, when I go down to the shooting range, I can't hit the broad side of Rosie O'Donnel.
He was the mad crazy infantry type, I found a sniper rifle and became God. (Watch Navy Seals, ya wee bastads!)
Very rarely did I miss.
AD&D 2d Edition rules!
Just grab a God with the sphere of war or something as their main sphere of influence. Presto! Instant sword-wielding cleric!
God, I loved that game. They shoved a bunch of rules at you and said, "Okay, now do whatever the hell you want."
I grew up on good ol' PBS. Monty Python didn't turn me into a drag racing nun. Or a nude pianist.
:)
Let me tell you, you're really missing out.
deus does not exist but if he does
Midland High in Midland Michigan was quite accepting of most everything. It's the only suburban white school I know of where, after Columbine, nobody flipped out when we discussed violence and guns. Heck, we had a discussion about artistic suicide once without getting suspended, or even getting sent to the principles office.
Many studies have shown a correlation between violent pretend play and violent behavior. But what someone said above is key: real violence is very different from pretend violence, and much more harmful. Being beaten or living with a violent person is much more likely to lead one to violence than playing DOOM for hours on end (and yes, I know I dated myself there). What this brings up is that violence in the news is much worse than violence in James Bond. If I may briefly summarize the most excellent movie Bowling for Columbine (don't take my word for it, go see it!):
-the US is a country with lots of guns, and lots of people killed by guns. Americans are always scared of violence.
-Canada is a country with lots of guns, and very few people killed by guns. Canadians in major cities often don't lock their doors.
What is the difference? Some of it may well come from history (slavery, Civil War). But the most glaring symptom right now is the news: Canadian newscasts are relatively bland summaries of what's going on; they inform. US newscasts are crowded with images of disasters, death, and mayhem (even when there was no war); they provoke emotions, mainly fear and anger.
So back to violent video games: they are not good. But they are much less bad than violent reality in the news, which is itself less bad than getting beaten up. Perspective is important.
128,469,000 people
Population of England as of 2001
50,526,000
I'll have to take a mulligan on Europe as they don't consider themselves one country quite yet and I'm too lazy to add up all the numbers.
A quote
"Have you got a clue how many millions of people live in Japan? Or in Europe? The combined population of Europe has a lower murder and gun death rate than this entire country."
That all depends on what you consider "Europe" if you throw in the Eastern portion I highly doubt it.
I have a few numbers to help ease your alarm at our high murder rate, which is somewhere around 11-12 thousand people a year.
We kill nearly six times as many people with our cars "on accident". Imagine what we what we could do if it were on purpose.
Doctors kill nearly ten times as many people through malpractice every year.
Nearly thirty times that number kill themselves with smoking as are those murdered
Around 200-300 (I don't consider anyone over 16 to be a child) or so children where gunned down last year. An additional 50 or so were crushed to death by soda machines while rocking them, trying to get a free Coke.
Around 3,000 children drowned (many in a family or friends pool) and somewhere around 1,700 were killed while riding their bikes (traffic accidents)
Oh if that horrifies you. 879,000 children are abused. Of which 1200 die from said abuse, ussally by a family member or family friend.
So please tell me, why I or anyone else other than the stop the violence crowd, should even give the tiniest of shits over the 11,000 or so who were murdered with a firearm, a large portion of which were criminals killing other criminals. Especially when we kill or let die nearly 500,000 a year due to negligence and asinine behavior. Please tell me I'm dying to know!!
The rates for firearm deaths is the lowest it's been in fifteen years. We have plenty of other things to worry about and firearm related deaths are not very high on the list reguardless what the media hypes them up to be.
was a movie where aliens used a video game as a recruitment tool. Concept sounds good, but the movie sucked!
void
So I'm wondering... if the violent games don't have any effect on you, how do all the educational programs do any good?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Don't you think that the time to be able to blame violence on the nightly new has come long ago. War, riots, school snipings (13 more disgruntled H.S. students just went "Hey that looks like fun, I didn't like Mrs. Baxter anyway!"), terrorist attacks, and unexplained virus outbreaks. Hell it sounds like the race riots and your ever growing Tom Clancy book collection mixed into an eye-candy cocktail and poured down your retinas, which leaves you shaken not stirred.
Not only that but there was one part in the article in particular that I thought was a little over the edge. In regards to Halo,"the two accused of the shootings said they practiced with it.", even if the did "practice" with it, how much do you think their aim improved? Yeah sure there are triggers on teh X Box controller and certainly you are intended to shoot at things but come on. There is a big difference between a lining up a dot on a CRT, mashing a button and looking through a scope or sights, timing your breathing, perfecting the gentle squeeze of a trigger with 8-12 lbs. of pull and correctly executing and executing at distance. Not to mention the sorta cute half gremlin half kirby aliens (that shoot green and purple guns) in Halo and the image of a human with a hole in their head or blood so dark it looks black pouring from torn flesh. They may have claimed they "practiced" with it but in reality, Halo wouldn't have given them any practice of the real thing, nothing was close enough to even be considered similar let alone to qualify as practice. I would think they should sue Al Capone and whoever designed the original ally shooter game for the 1920's and 1930's speak-easy's (if you are curious as to what I am talking about pay a visit to your nearest Dave & Buster's as the still operate them), that and carnies with the BB Gun games at fairs and carnivals. At least these use acctual guns.
Because its one thing to teach someone how to count to five, and another thing entirely to teach someone how to clean, load, aim, and fire a firearm. First off, the first activity doesn't require extra materials, while the second one does. Secondly, the first activity is mostly a mental process, while the second is a physical process. Finally, (actually an extension of the first one) both of them require practice in order for the lessons to settle in... shooting a gun requires ammo, a target, and somewhere to shoot.
Plus, there is no purple muppet to laugh when you shoot a round.
If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.
All that hitting animals on the head with nets is probably making my son and I really dangerous individuals. And I can't think how dangerous using pit-holes to trap animals is ...
> --- All Of The Above --- >
"Won't someone PLEASE think of the children!!!!" Yeah, they're hard to hit, cause they're small enough to duck behind bushes and make for smaller targets ...
> --- All Of The Above --- >
Bowling for Columbine is completely wrong about the causes of violence in America. I'm not sure if it's willfully wrong, but it very well may be given Mr. Moore's radical agenda and track record of lies. I'm sick and tired of hearing people praise him and his foolish movie just because it agrees with their political agenda and therefore validates their own beliefs. Not to mention that Michael Moore is an asshole for verbally abusing a clearly senile Charlton Heston after using deception to enter the man's house. We're supposed to applaud him for such childish, greedy, self-serving behavior just because he confronts the Evil NRA?
Bowling for Columbine also selectively chooses anecdotal evidence to make its case for this mythical "climate of fear" that Moore says pervades America but actually only exists in his fantasy world. He doesn't present any real evidence proving his assertation about "Canadians not locking their doors", not to mention that such data would be fiendishly difficult to collect in any sort of reliable way. Are we simply supposed to take Mr. Moore's word for it that this is true? I'm personally not inclined to believe a proven serial liar with a stated radical political bias.
Even if the evidence above were really true (which I doubt), there is NO evidence to suggest the link between violence and the media that is being postulated. This is obviously a case where the "documentary" film maker came in with a preconceived notion of what he wanted to prove and tried to collect anecdotal evidence supporting his conclusion rather than following any sort of scientific methodology. Rather than immediately concluding that the media is responsible, I would look at OTHER much more significant ways that the US and Canada are different culturally, economically, or socially. Some big ones off the top of my head are heightened racial tensions, much more significant poverty (for instance in the American South), more gang activities, and the fear of oppressive police officers in US cities.
What was the real tragedy of Columbine had nothing to do with guns and nothing to do with the media. People who suggest that, like Michael Moore, are shamelessly using the tragedy to promote their radical anti-human-responsibility agenda. Columbine was about an abusive youth culture at the school, and it was about the poor choice of two mentally disturbed young people. Guns were simply the tool, not the root problem. Media exposure was simply a coincidence, not the cause. I think that people need to suck it up and stop blaming anyone other than those two boys and the classmates who pissed them off to the point that they were pushed off the edged.
These public figures denouncing video games would get a lot farther if they didn't seem to think that games provided actual skill training. Another post in this thread correctly points out that using a gun in a computer game (with auto-aim and mouselook) is infintely different from using a gun in real life.
However, take a game like Hitman, or more recently Hitman 2. In this game, you're trying to figure out how to kill someone without arousing suspicion, and maybe even without being noticed. If you already possess skills with a gun, the mentality you adopt for Hitman would be a bad mix out in the world. I admit it takes a disturbed person to play a game and then start viewing the world that way. As a gamer, I also have to admit that it's much easier in a game than in real life to find situations in real life where you can practice
- walking around knocking people out and taking their clothes
- planting a car bomb in the sewer under someone's limousine
- sneaking up on someone and garrotting them
without fear of any real consequences. I think it's the interaction that differentiates a game from a violent movie.But the person has to already be somewhat disturbed. So I think it's irresponsible to make games with increasing violence and gore, and sad that those are the games that sell so big, but it shouldn't be illegal.
But...I can't imagine any politician getting up there and saying, "this is irresponsible; I'm not saying it should be illegal though."
Ravi
When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
You've obviously never done Extreme Sesame Street.
If you're going to criticise something, at least do something worthwhile. Did you even read my comment? I tried to point out that averages are one way of representing data, and they can be rather misleading. Also, don't forget that it's a statistic about buyers.
What the HELL could you mis-construe about my comment? It's pretty straightforward, and it's apparent to me you're just trying to start a meaningless fight about semantics.
± 29 dB
The world is your exercise-book, the pages on which you do your sums.
It is not reality, although you can express reality there if you wish.
You are also free to write nonsense, or lies, or to tear the pages.
-- Messiah's Handbook : Reminders for the Advanced Soul
- this post brought to you by the Automated Last Post Generator...