Slashdot Mirror
Games and Music, the New Book Burning
It seems that a Newport News, VA pastor finally got around to reading Fahrenheit 451 and has decided that it was a good idea. Despite several studies claiming the contrary, Rev. Richard Patrick is blaming violent video games and music for crimes that he say has affected 90% of his congregation in one way or another.
It's worth clicking through to this interview which is linked in tfa. It's not as bad as they are making it out to be, in my opinion. He talks a lot about reasons for the problems and doesn't talk about video games that I could tell. The closest was this question and answer:
Q: How significant a problem do you believe violent video games and violent rap music is?
A: It has a tremendous influence on young people and violence. That's basically all they see. Most of them try to emulate what they see, when in reality, the people they see don't even live in those communities. Some of the rappers they see on TV portraying crime don't live in the urban areas - they live in the suburbs somewhere. It's all a facade.
It sounds to me like he is responding to the rap music part of the question and never deals directly with the video game part. But ultimately that doesn't even matter. If people want to voluntarily burn their own property - more power to them. Where I live we call that freedom of speach.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
The original article is pretty tame. Nowhere does "Rev. Richard Patrick is blaming violent video games and music for crimes that he say has affected 90% of his congregation in one way or another". Rather he answers the question "Have you been affected personally by the violence", in which he responds, "Not only has it affected me, but, I would say, 90 percent of the congregation has been affected in some way by violence or crime."
The closest he comes to bringing games to violence is when he answeres the question "How significant a problem do you believe violent video games and violent rap music is" with "It has a tremendous influence on young people and violence. That's basically all they see. Most of them try to emulate what they see, when in reality, the people they see don't even live in those communities. Some of the rappers they see on TV portraying crime don't live in the urban areas -- they live in the suburbs somewhere. It's all a facade."
Where I think, to a point, he's straight on. Note, he never says "games cause violence". Rather he says the same thing most parents will tell you about kids, and most computer scientists will tell you about comptuers - garbage in, garbage out. What you surround yourself with is what you become familiar with. And the sad part is, like he says, it's all a facade.
Please, RTFA before blowing it out of proportions.
The rise of exceptionally violent and explicit media, starting in the early to mid 90's, is actually inversely related to the violent crime rates. That's right - as media has gotten more violent, actual violent crime has provably gone down.
Anybody trying to claim that violent media is responsible for any objective worsening of American society doesn't have a single iota of evidence in their favor.
Actual article: http://www.dailypress.com/news/dp-local_10questionspatrick_060jun09,0,2560847.story
/. and he said something about video games.
So, here's a guy trying to give kids a place to go after school and teaching them things like how to fill out job applications. You just wanna shit on him because this is
You wanna talk about being responsible for your actions? He may be misguided on the music/video game front, but at least he's trying to help people out. What have you ever done to help someone?
"Brain damaged caused by lead, mercury, fluoride and other chemicals do far more to increase crime rates than music and video games."
Fluoride? As in, "Precious bodily fluids" fluoride?
"the theory that lead poisoning causes crime is hard science."
I think you need to look up what "hard science" really means - physics, chemistry, and the like. The "soft sciences" are biology, sociology, medicine, economics (oops - that's the dismal science). Basically, anything where results are largely expressed statistically. There may be a strong correlation, but "cause" is a reach. From the articles you linked to, lead levels are associated with aggressive behavior - not crimes in and of themselves. It is how the individual, families, and institutions deal with those tendencies that make criminals.
"As God is my witness, I thought turkeys could fly." A. Carlson
While you support your argument about lead poisoning, you offer nothing about the other two elements.
I'm guessing you're one of those that didn't vaccinate your children and avoid fluorinated water, even though all the peer reviewed research shows you're just putting your children at greater risk of disease and tooth decay, rather than decreasing any risk of autism. But while it's a guess, I'm basing it on your trying to link lead research to mercury and fluoride without proof.
I also suspect that you'll next say "but mercury is toxic!" and show a bunch of links about mercury toxicity as a red herring. Fine. But you can't come up with one reputable peer-reviewed link against fluoride in drinking water. And don't you dare try to say MMR vaccinations caused autism, because the long-term results are in.
ADHA on Fluoride
ADA on Fluoride
23 studies refuting MMR and autism link
CDC's website on MMR and autism
If I've gotten you all wrong (which I doubt, based on your anti-fluoride stance), then you have my apologies. Next time, support your argument.
"MIT betrayed all of its basic principles."