I swear, anybody who thinks that bloody, violent video games incite violence against others really needs to review their territory. Most people who do the blaming have never played these games, like Senator Joe Liebermann. Granted, kids under the age of 15 shouldn't be touching these kind of games anyway. I say "shouldn't" because most kids that are under the age of 17 are likely impressionable and like to try and imitate what they see in these games. I'm not going to say that of everybody here, because I know that there are a bunch of people here who are 16 and younger and play these kind of games and not have a problem More power to ya. It was the same way with me when Wolfenstein 3D came out. I was about 10 or 11 years old when my dad brought that game home for me. The next game was Doom, a few years later. People have been blaming all forms of media and entertainment for the corruption of our kids. 50 years ago, it was Rock 'n Roll that was being blamed. I think it was about 30 years ago, it was TV that was being blamed. I might be wrong on the timeline so feel free to correct me. Now video games are the target. People need to realize that there are other, bigger problems in the real world that need to be dealt with. So....that's my perspective.

"Evil will always triumph because good is dumb!"

agreed kids that are 13-16 and older smoke weed at our skool. Personaly i think that video games are just somthing to target. There really are bigger fish to fry here. But everyone needs a scape goat, and as was said its been many things, games are just the next one.

---

skool

---

Excellent word use!

@meezookeewee: Well said, Video games is just another media form that isnt afraid of embracing the real world. Music, TV, Movies, theyve all grown up and become serious forms of expression and storytelling, and as each one does, society has a huge ducking problem with it. The way people (and im talking the layman, anyone partially educated in the way these things work has no problem with it) percieve these adult themed games, is that showing people the gritty reality of life will not make the world a better place. I can only imagine the perfect world where all forms of entertainment are so censored that nothing dangerous or hard hitting is ever shown. Where a utopia is displayed on tv, movies, games, music and the world's parents crossing their fingers hoping all this crap is raising their kids for them. Its really important to itterate that you can watch the most awful, depraved, violent, slasher film, or listen to some seriously disturbed heavy godddamn metal or whatever and NOT go out and take your bloody revenge on the cruel world because you've got that essential part of you that knows that its fecking insane.
Parenting is the absolute key here, and its the bad parents that are the ones out on the picket lines, calling for a ban on everything remotely risky and thinking that what theyre doing is 'good parenting'. All the REAL parents are back at home of course, taking care of their kids.


"Anna begins to toss and turn, and every word is just nonsense but i understand"

@Loc:

If you mean that in Roman times, the gladiatorial contests were a form of mass entertainment and stuff like that. Of course. History shows that people have revelled in violence, gore and mayhem. Ancient Celts celebrated victories in particularly barbaric ways. Even today, we have many exemplars of violence for, what appears to be, the sake of violence.

So what are you saying Loc? That because, in history, people have enjoyed a good bloodbath that it must NOT be twisted? That if we cater to our more base instincts and encourage it through means of entertaining depictions of it, this is perfectly right and good?

As I said, I think it is twisted and inherently perverse and I disagree that the lessons of history should justify that depictions or displays of real violence is good and beneficial to society.

These people need a scapegoat, and because videogames are nowehere near as mainstream as television, etc, then it makes attacking the industry that much easier. It is much easier to argue that "GTA made me do it", than "Demolition Man made me do it", because many more people have seen "Demolition Man" than have played GTA, and thus there is a far larger section of the population that was not affected by the violence in the movie in question. But since there was a minority who have played the game (GTA), it is easier for people who have not played it to judge it as "violent and influential".

See? It's perfectly logical to those poor people who are influenced by our violent society *rolls eyes*.

As it has been said before, videogames are just a target for slack parents. An example, two post-teens (18-19) went out to the highway and took potshots at the cars, injuring 7 people and killing 1. Eventually, they got caught, and it questioning admitted that they were bored and did their favourite thing from a videogame (GTA 3). The parents of the person killed sued Take 2 for making GTA, because I'd be angry if I were told my kid was killed out of boredom.

What most people do, however, is blame the game and ignore other signifigant criteria. For the above example, where did those two kids get the rifle ?
No-one asked that.

I like this topic allow me to put a rant I did years ago when Colombine just happened.
1. this is the article I saw.
Columbine victim families sue over violent games
AOL Time Warner, Nintendo of America, and Sony Computer Entertainment are among 25 companies that face a lawsuit filed by the families of the victims of the Columbine massacre.

Some of the families of those killed in the Columbine High School shootings are seeking $5 billion in punitive damages against the manufacturers and distributors of video technology. They say the massacre would not have occurred without the marketing of video games, particularly the game "Doom," which they say influenced the two gunmen

2. this is my rant
Subject: am i the next columbine?
Am I the next Columbine?

I must be because not only do I play violent video games, I play the dreaded Dungeons and Dragons (yes moral majority 80's you didn't kill us all). And we cant forget the murderous urges that OZZY and BLACK SABBATH music must create in me.
I must be a lunatic because I own guns.

All of this is okay, however, because to make everything okay you can sue the following companies:
1. IBM for creating the first computer
2. TSR for Dungeons and Dragons
3. Microsoft and Apple and IBM again for making software to actually play the video games
4. PBS, yes that's right PBS, for Sesame Street. Sesame Street taught us to enjoy looking at bright colorful images while hearing music. This obviously made us predisposed to video games - which cause us to kill.

Every company that ever existed can be sued in actuality.

5. Every weapons manufacturer in the world.....


come to think about it how about the good ol USA for Fighting for their independence....
I'm sure if we were still part of the empire....wait no...England has a violent history as well.....
Rome ...no same thing...
Greece - yeah we can blame Greece for all our troubles...
no wait...Babylonians???
naahhhh they can blame the Egyptians....Egyptians of course we can ....
oh wait violence before that too huh???

can we sue GOD ???? YEAH that's it - lets sue God.
He is the one who gave us free will for all those things hmmm yes god ????
oh drat we cant how will we ever collect?

What's that you say???
Blame the parents for not considering their kids enough to see that there were problems or at attempting to try and care??
NAHHHH!!!!
Silly person... blame can only be affixed to things that have large bank accounts.
Sheesh. Blame the parents? What are we gonna do next? Try and be in our children's lives? Teach them right from wrong like mine did ??
What are you in a fantasy land?

I Am Sharp like Bowling Ball


Edited by - ssjgarretjax on 4/14/2004 1:22:35 PM

You listen to rock music and you own guns? We have a live one here guys...

but of course! I thought that was one of the criteria to join

Ed, No my point was not that our history of Bloodshed and Mayhem condones the realistic violence now. My point was, That in the namesake of Violence, violence has allways meant fun, The Dutch saying of: Het Beste vermaak is altijd leedvermaak, which translates as The best form of Humour is allways the Physical (Violent and sadistic) one. all those examples I mentioned were in some way allways an entertainment, The executions, They all literally laugh their asses off, The Roman Gladiatorial games, man how long has that tradition endured?? 400 years?? all for fun, I can understand why you feel sick about it, but if you look at it objectively you will see that humans allways had Blood and Gore as entertainment. I don't exactly revell in Violence l the way, But I do condone a high degree of Violence by myself, but only if justified, I can watch and enjoy a man slaughter a group of ten while in perimeter view, I would most probably then proceed to kill the killer with my bare hands for slaughtering the men ( ) so invain even before he killed the second or third. The point of this being the difference in men alike, you are obviously appauled by violence at all, while I condone a high degree.

Point to above: This is not actually happening, nor has it happened, I like firearms because they present a Pinnacle in Projectile Technology, but to kill, I Despise Firearms all together, as I said earlier: To use a Blade correctly you must know what you are doing, and to use a Blade wrong is to commit Murder, This goes for any weapon!

Edited by - Locutus on 4/15/2004 1:53:10 PM

Boxing

@ssjgarretjax: why do you have a gun, if you dont mind me asking?


"Some folks will never eat a skunk, but then again some folks'll
like cletus, the slack-jawed yokel"

Edited by - Arcon on 4/15/2004 2:28:20 PM

@Dick,

Not so sure I follow you. Mainly because I think you are drawing a distinction that I am unable to grasp. In your example about witnessing a slaughter and then killing the slaughterer yourself, my problem would be that while your retributive action may in some way be laudable, the fact that you let the slaughter happen first takes away from any merit to your subsequent act.

I am not against the use of necessary and justified force.

Anyway I think we'll just have to agree to disagree on this.

@Arcon nope dont mind at all. I had this big long winded ramble I was going to put down but decided to erase for more simple (and hopefully more understandable reasons)
I hunt I also used to target shoot for fun,
I keep them for protection of my loved ones and my home.
just as a side note. I am fully trained in firearms safety and threat response. I took hunters safety courses and I was in the military and a Military Policeman to boot.
and another side note I have other weapons as well and would be inclined to use them over firearms in most cases (quieter less chance for tragedy beyond your target)
Is that what you were looking for? or did I miss the point entirely (I could you know sometimes I am like my sig)
edited to add. saying all this I hope I never EVER have to use any weapon in its true capacity .... But I would not hesitate to if i had to.




I Am Sharp like Bowling Ball


Edited by - ssjgarretjax on 4/16/2004 6:58:19 AM