Viewing Thread:
"Does any one here believe that videogames cause violence?"

Someone on the radio said some time ago about how a bloke went out & raped someone because he was excited after watching an acted rape on the television.

It got me thinking about how all things are blamed for violence/criminal activities without good proof. Including videogames.

Do any of you think that playing Quake or Goldeneye would force you (or anybody for that matter) to go down to your local school with a sawn off?
Does watching Tom & Jerry cause kids to shove milk bottles down each others throats?
Would watching a violent sex act on the television give anyone enough reason to do the same to the next stranger they saw?


I believe the answer to all these questions is no. None of the above cause violence/crime. A simple answer could be made from stealing a line from The Simpsons :

"There was violence before cartoons"

As well as that, there was violence before videogames & Tv's.

While that statement doesn't exactly blow the arguement out of the water, I still think that if someone has committed a crime after playing a game, they were probably going to do it anyway. If all that was required was a trigger to set them off, it could have been anything. The TV news reports violent crime at least once a week. Newspapers do the same. Whats to say that the same person was or wasn't going to have his criminal feelings aroused by these???

I dont think outside influence is to blame for violence. I think its down to the actual person themselves. And if they are capable of doing these things, they deserve to be locked up anyway...

Lemme hear your views...

PseudoSavant wrote:

>You've another on the way,
> eh? Congratulations. =)

Cheers, yeah due next month!

meka_dragon wrote:
> Sorry, I didn't make my point very well. Surely as you grow older you learn that there is a relationship between hitting people and causing pain, so you stop hitting people (unless you want to cause pain) especially if the child is brought up in a well balanced atmosphere, and is not subjected to violence. <

True...'if'...

> However if the child is brought up in a violent atmosphere, this might just be from watching violence on TV
and games, then surely they will find it harder to distinguish between real violence and fake, therefore they may commit violent acts unaware of the consequences. <

Possibly.

> Then there are the situations in which you do know what you are doing, but want to do it anyway eg you know that stabbing someone might kill them, but you go ahead and do it. This comes down to a number of factors, half of which I don't have much understanding of. But surely being brought up in a decent environment will make you less likely to lash out, and be able to control your temper? <

Agreed. I've no trouble with what you're saying. All I've said is that so many kids are nowadays being raised in less than 'decent' environments, so what they see on TV, in films, and on videogames does likely influence their actions in a number of ways.

> I don't think it can be under-estimated how important it is that parents teach their children right from wrong, and not hope that it will get taught in schools. Unfortunately this isn't the case. Too few parents are willing to take responsibility for their children, and try to help them grow up to be decent human beings. <

I don't think it can be either. Barring some sort of chemical imbalance, children from such backgrounds tend to be pretty decent people. Of course, this doesn't mean it's impossible for children raised without such things to be good people; it's just less likely.

> I don't mind if Malibu and child 2.0 grow up and don't
achieve fame and extraordinary wealth, just as long as they're well balanced individuals that have an understanding of the consequences of their actions. <

You've another on the way, eh? Congratulations. =)

meka_dragon wrote:
>Regarding whether young children know
> what they're doing, that depends. My daughter is 18 months old,
> sometimes she might hit you with one of her toys in play. She
> doesn't know that she is going to hurt you, but she certainly looks
> sorry after we yell out in pain! I guess if you are inable to learn
> over time the results of your actions then you surely must be a few
> sandwiches short of a picnic anyway....<

PseudoSavant wrote:
>Not necessarily. In
> the example of how your daughter behaves, you state that she feels
> bad for what she's done *after* you react in pain. Now, instead of a
> toy in her hand and likely plastic, imagine if she did the same
> thing with a knife (given she might get access to one) and hit you
> with that. [This is purely hypothetical, please understand.]
>

>Sure, you may react in pain and she may realize that she's
> harmed you, but often the death of a child can come down to just
> *one* moment of not understanding what they should or should not do.
> The fact that they may feel bad about it doesn't restore life to the
> person who might be shot or mend their injuries.

Sorry, I didn't make my point very well. Surely as you grow older you learn that there is a relationship between hitting people and causing pain, so you stop hitting people (unless you want to cause pain) especially if the child is brought up in a well balanced atmosphere, and is not subjected to violence.

However if the child is brought up in a violent atmosphere, this might just be from watching violence on TV and games, then surely they will find it harder to distinguish between real violence and fake, therefore they may commit violent acts unaware of the consequences.

Then there are the situations in which you do know what you are doing, but want to do it anyway eg you know that stabbing someone might kill them, but you go ahead and do it. This comes down to a number of factors, half of which I don't have much understanding of. But surely being brought up in a decent environment will make you less likely to lash out, and be able to control your temper?

I don't think it can be under-estimated how important it is that parents teach their children right from wrong, and not hope that it will get taught in schools. Unfortunately this isn't the case. Too few parents are willing to take responsibility for their children, and try to help them grow up to be decent human beings.

I don't mind if Malibu and child 2.0 grow up and don't achieve fame and extraordinary wealth, just as long as they're well balanced individuals that have an understanding of the consequences of their actions.

egg (the best) wrote:
>Has anyone considered the fact that video games could be an outlet for violence and not a cause of it? I would say that most normal people in a bad mood would more likely kick some @SS on a video game than take up a weapon and head to the nearest crowded area.<

It's possible, I will admit. Though with the physical exertion in sports, you'd think athletes would be less violent outside of their competitions. But this isn't the case. I think it just depends on the person to be honest.

>I do however also beleive that video games can teach you to kill quite effectively as you'll find most american shooter upers of schools are found to play violet shoot em ups. Oh yeah and the american army used to use a version of doom to train cadets.<

That's true. I mentioned it once before, though I don't recall anyone referring back to it. DARPA used 'Doom' (and a couple of other FPSs) for training purposes. The reasoning was to initiate a higher level of reflex actions, to promote teamplay, and to associate killing with something that isn't particularly meaningful, like blowing someone away on a screen.

meka_dragon wrote:
>Going back to the original question, "Do video games cause
violence?" I'd say it wasn't the cause, but it could be the
inspiration behind a violent act.<

I agree.

>Regarding whether young children know what they're doing, that depends. My daughter is 18 months old, sometimes she might hit you with one of her toys in play. She doesn't know that she is going to hurt you, but she certainly looks sorry after we yell out in pain! I guess if you are inable to learn over time the results of your actions then you surely must be a few sandwiches short of a picnic anyway....<

Not necessarily. In the example of how your daughter behaves, you state that she feels bad for what she's done *after* you react in pain. Now, instead of a toy in her hand and likely plastic, imagine if she did the same thing with a knife (given she might get access to one) and hit you with that. [This is purely hypothetical, please understand.]

Sure, you may react in pain and she may realize that she's harmed you, but often the death of a child can come down to just *one* moment of not understanding what they should or should not do. The fact that they may feel bad about it doesn't restore life to the person who might be shot or mend their injuries.

Has anyone considered the fact that video games could be an outlet for violence and not a cause of it? I would say that most normal people in a bad mood would more likely kick some @SS on a video game than take up a weapon and head to the nearest crowded area. I do however also beleive that video games can teach you to kill quite effectively as you'll find most american shooter upers of schools are found to play violet shoot em ups. Oh yeah and the american army used to use a version of doom to train cadets.

Please help. Its shower time.

Lewinsky did....

KINGPIN IS ******* great, what a ******* great mother ******* game, i mean like the **** i learnt and repeated to family members!!

and who said it should be banned?

Lewinsky wrote:
> I disagree with the starter of this topic.

>I personally think I should be banned from this forum.

If it wasn't
> for my warped mind I wouldn't be stuck in jail for three blissfull years after performing unprintable acts with a >hoover. I didn't know it was illegal!

I'm in Strangeways now and
> some big fellow keeps looking at me. I quite like him.

(Oh and ban Kingpin thats one crazy game)