1 edit
Originally posted by Remora91They were also blamed on Marilyn Manson.
I remember that the Columbine shootings were blamed on violent video games.
I'm sure there were plenty of other scapegoats
offered up as well. I have listened to Marilyn Manson,
and I even saw him perform once, but I have not,
however, taken part in any mass shootings.
So to say that this or that caused the shootings
is too simple. It is used because people tend to
need to find an explanation for things, so they
look for the easiest targets and place their
anger there.
Dr. Cribs
Originally posted by CribsYes in most cases you would be right, but the prisons and streets carry quite a few that could not assymilate.
I think war veterans are a solid counterexample.
They have lived in a real-world "violent video game"
with an extremely violent environment, many in the
most formative stages of their late teens and early
adulthood. But they are not a particulary violent
sector once they return to civilian life.
Dr. Cribs
Also it would depend on where they go back to. If they went back to a community that was very violent, they may adjust their violence to fit in.
I am a firm believer that we are violent by nature, right from child birth. I have had to correct my own children from the get go not to, bite, hit, kick, etc. If I was not their to correct them or if I was violent myself, it would be a pretty fair bet they would remain violent. I grew up playing violent video games, as well as my friends and not one of us has become ultra violent.
If there is no better example they will follow the poor example.
Mike
Originally posted by rapalla7this is about as right on as it gets!
You learn from your environment. If your environment is violent and everything around you talks about that violence, it is very likely you will as a human being adapt to the world around you.
this is why we try to bring up our children in a peaceful environment with compassionate values.
pawnokeyhole's information should be fairly self-evident:
"Psychologists have never been able to convincing replicate an experiment where being exposed to, or engaging in, aggression at Time 1 reduces aggression at Time 2; rather, the results have consistently pointed in the opposite direction"
you don't reduce violence by engaging in violence. while the "it is a release of pentup energy" has a certain amount of merit, there are plenty of ways to release that energy other than through violence.
while crib's statement:
"Video games don't cause violence."
is completely correct, though the intent of the hypothesis may not absurd at all in a pragmatic sense. exposing people to violent imagery reduces one's sensitivity to it, it becomes 'acceptable' because it is so commonplace, and it too, hampers the understanding the deeper issues troubling our youth or so called adult population.
in friendship,
prad
1 edit
Continual exposure to anything will ultimately influence people especially younger people who are more susceptible. Therefore violent video games can in some cases cause violence. The proof is so obvious that it stares us in the face every day. Why else would companies like Mcdonalds spend millions of dollars, bombarding us with advertisements for their products, if they didn't work ?
Originally posted by Jay PeateaThe evidence against the claim is more obvious!
The proof is so obvious that it stares us in the face every day.
How many kids play violent video games? Is
70% a fair estimate? And how many commit
violent crimes? Any more than 20%? I doubt
it. I hardly call that obvious proof that video
games are the cause.
Dr. Cribs
Originally posted by CribsHow many kids watchs TV 99.9%? How many kids, when asked where they want to go to lunch, will say Mcdonalds some where round 99.8 % I bet. Continual bombardment of images whether it is violent computer games or advertisements on TV will influence the behavour of a certain number of individuals. Adverts work thats why companies spend so much money on them. Violent images on computer games are in effect, like an advert for violence, it glamorises violence, making it cool, and more acceptable to run over an old granny or chop someones head off. I agree that they won't have the same % effect as adverts, but there are lots of other influences in childrens lives. Most of which will be under the " violence is wrong" mantra that will counter the effects. Another example of a powerful violent image influencing people is the Nunchukka sequence in "Enter the Dragon". This sequence was censored in the UK for many years because it influenced many a young male to take them up. As I understand it was band for two reasons:- one because of the increase cases of the Nunchukka being used/carried in the street and two because a large number of hospital admitances, which were self inflicted whilst the person was horning their skills.
The evidence against the claim is more obvious!
How many kids play violent video games? Is
70% a fair estimate? And how many commit
violent crimes? Any more than 20%? I doubt
it. I hardly call that obvious proof that video
games are the cause.
Dr. Cribs
Originally posted by ivanhoe
Do violent video games cause (stimulate) violence?
Yes.
These violent videogames should be for adults only as a first step forward to banning them altogether. It is spiritual junkfood.
Well yes Ivan. Kids of 7 should not play violent video games, much like they shouldn't be watching violent movies.
We are by nature violent. As kids we love to wrestle, fight, pretend space lego man is blasting the turds outa robin hood lego man ect. In nature even kittens fight until one starts crying. Its normal to fight and wrestle.
I don't think children should play FPS games , true, but that really is the responsibility of the parent.
Originally posted by CribsIf you can't see the similiarites between the continual exposure of images in both case, then perhaps you need to start thinking outside the X-box once in a while.😉
That's a very compelling argument. It's even better than
the "advertising works so video games cause violence"
argument because you are not hiding behind an
irrelevant analogy.
Dr. Cribs