So it starts. The game blame.

[Tastyfish]

Once again, attack everything BUT the problem.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller introduced legislation in the Senate “to arrange for the National Academy of Sciences to study the impact of violent video games and violent programming on children.”

http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2012/12/19/1360371/newtown-video-games-rockefeller/

[Cernunnos]

Video games dont make people violent. l a g d o e s.

[Palmatum]

Apparently there are studies that suggest shooting person-shaped figures in video games is similar to desensitization of soldiers shooting man-shaped targets.

It's interesting if it's true and I can see how it might be true, but still, even if it is, that's only ever going to be one part of the puzzle.

[Deleted]

A 75-year old stiff blaming computer games on violence? Nothing new here. It's easy to blame something you are hopelessly unable to ever understand.

[glorithan]

Once again, attack everything BUT the problem.

Sen. Jay Rockefeller introduced legislation in the Senate “to arrange for the National Academy of Sciences to study the impact of violent video games and violent programming on children.”

http://thinkprogress.org/alyssa/2012/12/19/1360371/newtown-video-games-rockefeller/

This is why the ESRB exists. To keep those types of games out of reach of children.

[Deleted]

This is why the ESRB exists.

Ahh, the ESRB...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enterta...rd#Controversy

[Deleted]

TotalBiscuit sums it all up pretty well:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uwAo...TawC-k7PVjHXKQ

[Deleted]

Games have nothing to do with it. Some people are fragile but they will suck in violence from wherever they can: Movies, books, games, sports... you name it. Games are just another form of media and happens to be the most recent part of popular media and thus is the thing that conservative shitheads rave on.

Edit: And I'm certain that in our time when there are less wars than there ever have been before in human history obviously video games are the problem. Because they sure played CoD back in the 18th century.

[Adam Jensen]

Violent video games don't make kids violent.

Clueless seventy five year old senators do.

[-Skye]

Video games dont make people violent. l a g d o e s.

It's true! My sig even says so.

[Remilia]

Delicious blame game to blame the game because game is to be blamed for ALL OF THE THINGS.

Anyways. Yeah.
It's always a proof by correlation than a proof by causation. Which basically because ______ was associated then it must cause it!
A serial killer eats red meat, therefore all red meat eaters are serial killers. Which is a retarded fallacy.
Causation will be if I eat rotten meat and then I get sick.

[Slowpoke is a Gamer]

Welcome to what happens when the nanny state goes out of control. Should we follow this thought process to its conclusion, here's what we get.

1. The fed establishes their own esrp, becomes bogged down in work, and games take a year or more to be rated.

2. Purchasing mature games is restricted. In Germany right now it's only from. 11pm-3am.

3. A ban on all mature games.

4. Repeat for next lowest ranking.

[philefluxx]

The truth is violent video games CAN promote violent behavior. The thing that keeps getting overlooked is that its up to the PARENTS to make a logical decision on whether their child should experience these games and at what age.

[Migey]

I don't think I can deny that games like Call of Duty, Spec Ops: The Line, Mortal Kombat, etc, and indulgently violent games, have an adverse effect on young children.

Neither is anyone else, I think. Thats why games are age restricted.

Although as someone who is themselves actually too young to play half the games he likes, I would personally like very much for the control on video games to be as lax as it is.

[barackopala]

Glad to know my close friends/family are not dumb enough to buy that bullshit.

The truth is violent video games CAN promote violent behavior. The thing that keeps getting overlooked is that its up to the PARENTS to make a logical decision on whether their child should experience these games and at what age.

I've played TONS of violent games before, that didn't even shape me into a violent person, I am somewhat a pacifist (even tho i do get a bit trolly and get to overheated discussions, it doesn't go far from that), used to do tae kwon do, reached black belt but never did it for fighting purposes but for learning and improving.

[The Ogdru Jahad]

I really don't get how people believe violent videogames like first person shooters have any lasting effect on people in the real world. If anything, it would be movies. American cinema is full of violence, moreso than other countries to my knowledge (not hating, just stating what I perceive to be a fact). When I play call of duty, I don't think of the "killing" fact of me shooting a gun and taking a guy out. It's just... part of the game. There isn't any thought to it, or drive. Or mental checknote that I "killed" a "person" in a videogame. I don't equate anything I do in game to something in real life. Everyone who plays a game knows it's just a game and isn't an actual representation of real life or anything related.

[Nero Duskwind]

This is why the ESRB exists. To keep those types of games out of reach of children.

Despite being in place for almost 20 years, vendors remain reluctant to enforce the ESRB's ratings at points-of-sale and parents continue to ignore them. The ESRB now serves as little more than a something companies can point to in order to escape liability. Still, it doesn't change the fact that parents need to be more proactive and mindful of what they're introducing to their children.

[Buckwald]

Violent games are not the problem, the person committing the crime is. Just like the gun isn't to blame, the person shooting it is. And no amount of bans or restrictions will stop violent games from being made or distributed.

[Ayonel]

Apparently there are studies that suggest shooting person-shaped figures in video games is similar to desensitization of soldiers shooting man-shaped targets.

It's interesting if it's true and I can see how it might be true, but still, even if it is, that's only ever going to be one part of the puzzle.

I made the mistake of starting a thread about the book On Killing, which is about training soldiers to kill, and includes a chapter on how FPS are similar to the techniques used by the military. I got pretty much flogged.

My point was not that I think that video games cause violent behavior, but rather that it requires a lot of effort to train the typical person to kill without hesitation. This may be an important distinction, because the military training is designed to eliminate the hesitation, it has little to do with intent or desire. It still comes down to the individual.

In any case, we can't hold individuals responsible for themselves, but we can take all of their freedoms away as long as it seems like we're doing something.

And let's be honest, given how feckless the government is with respect to running the country's business, anything that distracts us from the fact that they are useless is someone they gleefully jump on.

[ddsad2212]

First off, I think it is safe to say video games have next to no impact on a person behaviour. But that aside, I though someone who would lead these studies would generally be someone who did not care either way. From reading his statement his mind seems to already be set on what the conclusion will be. Should it not be run by someone who does not care either way? Ofc it is okay to go in with theories or predictions of what the results will be, but he seems to have an agenda.