Wow, popular topic.

“It seems that blaming games isn't enough; some places are starting to take action against them.  I do believe that kids should play games that are deemed appropriate for their age level, but that involves parents being educated, not video games and movies taking the fall for pieces of entertainment that were never deemed suitable for children in the first place.”

I agree, mostly… I feel you’ve left out a third part to this, however.  Video game developers, I believe, should take some personal responsibility in the development of their games.  After all, what’s the point in having all the blood and gore associated with these games?  Alfred Hitchcock said it best about using even fake blood in a scene; the preponderance of the violent act should be enough in a scene, making the blood unnecessary.

“By the logic that these people are using, I should be a violent person as well... but I am not. Even now, I like PvP in my games. I like killing things in games. Yet, I will admit that I am someone that couldn't even hurt a fly. I cry every time I see Old Yeller or Gladiator. I find that words are often exchanged for violence, but words are usually more effective than violence will ever be. I was taught to use my words wisely, not use my fists to bully others. I was taught to think of other's emotions and to think of how it will impact my future, not to just think of the here and now.”

The violent acts we see are not based on a single thing; there is no single trigger that makes this happen, it’s always a result of a buildup from multiple sources: video games, violent music, violent television and movies, personality or mood-enhancing prescription and/or non-prescription drugs, how an individual is raised, what they’re told about their self-worth from family, peers, and society in general, how they’re treated in school by teachers and students, alike, etc.  Eventually, all of this CAN pile on enough to cause an individual to snap.  However, since we’re taught we’re monkey’s from the beginning of school, these days, we feel like it’s permissible to act in that manner, like our perception of how monkey’s act.  So, Americans being the simple creatures we are, we tend to desire to choose ONE item to focus on, in the case of post-Sandy Hook, two, instead of focusing on and taking personal responsibility for all of the problems we have in our society.

As soon as we begin taking personal responsibility –among each of the following appropriate social sectors- for our children, for the games as they’re being produced, for the violence in movies and on television, for appropriately teaching about gun control and the fact that crime and violence are improper means of resolving issues, and that taking drugs to resolve our anxiety’s actually worsens those anxiety’s and other appropriate issues, perhaps we can begin straightening things out.

Originally posted by ShakyMo
No lok
I'm looking at per capita
The UK has one of the lowest murder rates in the world at 1.2 per 100,000 on a par with places like Germany, Australia and Japan.

I don't know why you are saying 'no lok' as I never said that was false. You said

"Talking out your arse there.

UK is 4th most violent country in the world and usa 23rd - BULLSHIT"

So I linked to the data that shows the stats for violent crimes. The UK is most certainly 2-4 times worse than the US by any measure.

Originally posted by Muppetier

What a pointless thread. Neither side is going to change their views. There is no consensus possible.

Just a massive waste of valuable internet ink.

Open minds are not plentify around here on any topic.  Sometimes a discussion is more about catharsis than consensus.

video games play the smallest of roles in a person becoming a homicidal maniac. honestly you are typically born with the disorder that leads to you harm others its not really something you can pick up playing a game, sure the game may very wall help in "developing" that mental issue... i just dont see playing wolfenstine 3d as a kid or insurmountable number of violate games going to be the leading cause of my going on a rampage with a knife or gun or floppy head dildo.. (sorry playing way too much saints row 3 right now lol) 

while i dont dismiss the possibly of a violent game helping lead a person to go on a rampage, but given that most/all of the mass murders that are well known had very limited to no access to games of any sort i dont really see it being the cause. 

thats like blaming car accidents on racing games like need for speed. neither are even remotely connectable apart from being cars and driving. 

this just by the by screams bandaid/bandwagon against games to push someones voters or agenda.  like the old sopa bill, this is just someone who hates X game type pushing to get that  game type banned to forward their personal choice/ideals. 

will banning all video games from the planet stop mass murder/rape/robbery/ect..... not bleeding likely... will people still push it and think it will... yup because society is majority run by sheep and idiots.

Originally posted by vandal5627
You can't really blame the games entirely but you can't really deny that they do play a small roll in which it effects the minds of the persons that play them.

The typical response to that is usually babble about how the responder has been playing video games for years and never felt the urge to kill anyone.

It's not that repeated scenes of violence make the subject violent, but that it desensitizes the subject to the gravity or impact of violence and violent acts. In the worst cases, it makes one more accepting of violence, but for the msot part it simply makes one less bothered by it, more apathetic toward it.

When dealing with a disturbed or maladjusted minor, one that does not really understand the consequence of actions and has other factors in their life making them a ticking timebomb, desensitizion to violence makes that door easier to open.

Vandal's statement wasn't that video games make people violent. His statement was factually correct.

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by ShakyMo
No lok
I'm looking at per capita
The UK has one of the lowest murder rates in the world at 1.2 per 100,000 on a par with places like Germany, Australia and Japan.

I don't know why you are saying 'no lok' as I never said that was false. You said

"Talking out your arse there.

UK is 4th most violent country in the world and usa 23rd - BULLSHIT"

So I linked to the data that shows the stats for violent crimes. The UK is most certainly 2-4 times worse than the US by any measure.

 

But US is far worse than UK here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

And here? http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri-crime-total-crimes

Originally posted by FromHell

Originally posted by Terranah

Hitler, Stalin and Mao never played video games as children, yet they collectively killed over a hundred million people. 

And the first thing they did was collecting all the guns before they commited democide on the population.

Yeah I see a game ban coming soon. Better stocking up some FPS games before the prohibition comes... :D

Exactly.  Look at the real history of the world for an example of what tyrants do in those situations.  In all three you mentioned (and countless more) disarmament was followed by attempts at genocide.  The first step is registration. That eventually is followed by confiscation.  Or in the US an attempt at it.

Video games are just a useful target right now.  When you have a lot of hysterics running around screaming "Someone has to do SOMETHING!!"  Someone with an agenda steps forward and says "This is something!"  Then the hysterics start to demand that this "something" be done. No matter if it is rational, reasonable or effective. At least "something" was done...

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by vandal5627
You can't really blame the games entirely but you can't really deny that they do play a small roll in which it effects the minds of the persons that play them.

The typical response to that is usually babble about how the responder has been playing video games for years and never felt the urge to kill anyone.

It's not that repeated scenes of violence make the subject violent, but that it desensitizes the subject to the gravity or impact of violence and violent acts. In the worst cases, it makes one more accepting of violence, but for the msot part it simply makes one less bothered by it, more apathetic toward it.

When dealing with a disturbed or maladjusted minor, one that does not really understand the consequence of actions and has other factors in their life making them a ticking timebomb, desensitizion to violence makes that door easier to open.

Vandal's statement wasn't that video games make people violent. His statement was factually correct.

 

 Thanks lok, very well said. /applaud

Originally posted by Axxar

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by ShakyMo
No lok
I'm looking at per capita
The UK has one of the lowest murder rates in the world at 1.2 per 100,000 on a par with places like Germany, Australia and Japan.

I don't know why you are saying 'no lok' as I never said that was false. You said

"Talking out your arse there.

UK is 4th most violent country in the world and usa 23rd - BULLSHIT"

So I linked to the data that shows the stats for violent crimes. The UK is most certainly 2-4 times worse than the US by any measure.

 

But US is far worse than UK here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

And here? http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri-crime-total-crimes

On the first link: You are replying to a post where I agree with ShakyMo on the homocide rate. Like him, you're reading what you want to and not what's there.

On the second link: That was English, now let's try math. 11 million crimes in the US. 6 million crimes in the UK. 350million people in the US. 63million people in the UK. Using the data that you just linked, the crime per capita is about 3 times higher in the UK.

I don't think  the U.S.A needs draconian gun controls,though I personally do not see why anyone needs a personal arsenal of semi automatic weapons,but there does need to be less emphasis on gun ownership as a right and much more on gun ownership as a responsibility and harsher penalties for failing in those responsibilities.

Also whilst these mass shootings are tragic they are still aberrations and should not be the impetus for these discussions.Most gun violence and indeed just violent crime in general are the result of socioeconomic issues and the desperation and disenfranchisment caused by those issues.These are waht we should be discussing and finding solutions for.Then again gang violence and ghettos are also a favorite scapegoat for the government/media to use to distract from such issues.

Originally posted by Wraithone

Originally posted by FromHell

Originally posted by Terranah

Hitler, Stalin and Mao never played video games as children, yet they collectively killed over a hundred million people. 

And the first thing they did was collecting all the guns before they commited democide on the population.

Yeah I see a game ban coming soon. Better stocking up some FPS games before the prohibition comes... :D

Exactly.  Look at the real history of the world for an example of what tyrants do in those situations.  In all three you mentioned (and countless more) disarmament was followed by attempts at genocide.  The first step is registration. That eventually is followed by confiscation.  Or in the US an attempt at it.

Video games are just a useful target right now.  When you have a lot of hysterics running around screaming "Someone has to do SOMETHING!!"  Someone with an agenda steps forward and says "This is something!"  Then the hysterics start to demand that this "something" be done. No matter if it is rational, reasonable or effective. At least "something" was done...

Sometimes I think we haven't really progessed much since the Salem Witch Trials :(

---

Originally posted by Loktofeit

---

Originally posted by ShakyMo Norsegod Talking out your arse there. UK is 4th most violent country in the world and usa 23rd - BULLSHIT America has by far a higher murder rate than the UK. Including per capita. Now if you were talking about assault or something, yeah I could believe UK is higher than usa with that, but not murder. Are you seriously saying their are only 3 countries more violent than the UK? I can think of several right off the top of my head e.g. Afghanistan, Iraq, Egypt, south Africa, Jamaica, usa. Where not even the worst in Europe, Naples has by far a higher murder rate than any British city, up there with places like Detroit & Washington.

---

You're probably looking at raw numbers. When you look at per capita numbers, the UK is a rather violent crowd.... one of the msot violent crowds, actually.

I posted a few links earlier in the thread regarding that.

 

---

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by Axxar

Originally posted by Loktofeit

Originally posted by ShakyMo
No lok
I'm looking at per capita
The UK has one of the lowest murder rates in the world at 1.2 per 100,000 on a par with places like Germany, Australia and Japan.

I don't know why you are saying 'no lok' as I never said that was false. You said

"Talking out your arse there.

UK is 4th most violent country in the world and usa 23rd - BULLSHIT"

So I linked to the data that shows the stats for violent crimes. The UK is most certainly 2-4 times worse than the US by any measure.

 

But US is far worse than UK here? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

And here? http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_tot_cri-crime-total-crimes

On the first link: You are replying to a post where I agree with ShakyMo on the homocide rate. Like him, you're reading what you want to and not what's there.

On the second link: That was English, now let's try math. 11 million crimes in the US. 6 million crimes in the UK. 350million people in the US. 63million people in the UK. Using the data that you just linked, the crime per capita is about 3 times higher in the UK.

Somenoe said it was relative, but looking closer at it it looks like it's total crime. If that's the case and the data is right, then so are you.