• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Senator wants study on video game violence

Page 2 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
VulgarDisplay said:
There is a correlation between violence and video games, but not the one they are thinking. Socially inept crazy people are more likely to play video games because they can't handle real world interactions. Their condition is not caused by video games, but it is a way for them to escape their problems.

Video games do not cause mental health issues in people who are socially capable and not crazy. Again, the issue is crazy people, and not guns or violent media content. The country needs better mental health screening and care for those who need it. Not to take away the rights and priveledges of sane people.

People seem to forget that Timothy McVeigh killed more children with a bomb than probably all of these school shooting combined, and there is no evidence that he played video games.
Click to expand...
^ This!

Leave my games and guns alone!
 
dagamer34 said:
Even if there was a direct link between physical violence and video games, statistically speaking, your average drunk driver is far more likely to kill someone accidentally with a car than a gamer to commit a mass shooting. Should we ban alcohol and cars too?
Click to expand...

Ban beer and I'm gonna come round and punch you in the dick. 😡
 
What idiocy.

Someone with mental issues driving them to violence and anti-social behaviour will always find some medium(s) to feed that side of them. Could be video games, movies, books, anything really. Gets tiring to see political imbeciles with no training or background in mental health, psychology or psychiatry making these idiotic statements.

People also need to understand the differences between a serial killer and a mass murderer, because there are some pretty huge ones. The two are far from one and the same and represent two completely different types of individual.

About the gun thing, there is no reason - imo - for anyone to own or have the right to own an automatic weapon. There is only one purpose for a weapon like that; to kill a lot of people in a very fast amount of time. No one needs to have that right, but that is a topic better for P&N, not PC gaming. Besides, I am fortunate to live in a country where you cannot buy those sorts of weapons.
 
Y'know I was born in 1980 and I grew up on the most violent action movies, Predator, Terminator 1 and 2... Robocop... my parents never restricted what I could watch, I mean I was 11 and watching Silence of the Lambs and such.

I always loved the bloody, violent video games like Doom, Quake, and even made a point to slash up bodies in Soldier of Fortune and got a kick out of blowing limbs off, etc.

Yet, I've never harmed an animal or a person... never even raised my hand to a person. Never owned a gun... or anything. I'm about as non-violent as a person can be.

To end up with a mass shooter a lot of things have to come together. Chemical imbalance and/or other mental problems, bad environment/abuse, and maybe exposure to violent media. Maybe.

It's a very very rare mix to come together, let's be thankful for that and quit trying to scapegoat shit that millions of others are exposed to and never turn out that way due to.
 
Grooveriding said:
What idiocy.

Someone with mental issues driving them to violence and anti-social behaviour will always find some medium(s) to feed that side of them. Could be video games, movies, books, anything really. Gets tiring to see political imbeciles with no training or background in mental health, psychology or psychiatry making these idiotic statements.

People also need to understand the differences between a serial killer and a mass murderer, because there are some pretty huge ones. The two are far from one and the same and represent two completely different types of individual.

About the gun thing, there is no reason - imo - for anyone to own or have the right to own an automatic weapon. There is only one purpose for a weapon like that; to kill a lot of people in a very fast amount of time. No one needs to have that right, but that is a topic better for P&N, not PC gaming. Besides, I am fortunate to live in a country where you cannot buy those sorts of weapons.
Click to expand...

Automatic weapons are extremely rare and hard to obtain. None of the school/public shootings in the news used automatic weapons.
 
We already know that exposure to violence increases one's comfort with it. This common sense notion is supported by plenty of science, studied amply.

I see nothing much from this though. Tool was right we love the violence vicariously, our society loves it even more than sex.
 
BladeVenom said:
With most of the media jumping on the anti-Second Amendment bandwagon, news about anti-video game politicians has mostly been overlooked.
Click to expand...

Overlooked? Hardly. Despite the ranting of idiots on Twitter and Reddit for complete civilian firearm bans, blaming violent video games showed up 24hrs in major news outlets 24hrs after Sandy Hook.
 
Grooveriding said:
What idiocy.

Someone with mental issues driving them to violence and anti-social behaviour will always find some medium(s) to feed that side of them. Could be video games, movies, books, anything really. Gets tiring to see political imbeciles with no training or background in mental health, psychology or psychiatry making these idiotic statements.

People also need to understand the differences between a serial killer and a mass murderer, because there are some pretty huge ones. The two are far from one and the same and represent two completely different types of individual.

About the gun thing, there is no reason - imo - for anyone to own or have the right to own an automatic weapon. There is only one purpose for a weapon like that; to kill a lot of people in a very fast amount of time. No one needs to have that right, but that is a topic better for P&N, not PC gaming. Besides, I am fortunate to live in a country where you cannot buy those sorts of weapons.
Click to expand...

There's no need to be able to buy a car that can go ten times the speed limit or more, do we ban people from buying Corvettes and Ferrari's? No we don't. You don't need to own a dog bigger than a small child. Do we ban all large dog ownership? No we don't.

For the record, the standard AR-15 you can buy is NOT automatic. It's semi-automatic just like a handgun. Full Auto weapons, listed as class 3 firearms are specifically regulated and nearly prohibitively expensive ($10k or more). They have restrictions on storage and such and the BATFE can come knock on the door and ask to check the serial numbers at any time. You also have to pay a hefty amount for a lawyer to do some paper work for you and a pay for a federal tax stamp.

Geosurface said:
I'm calling for a total ban on knee jerk reactions and media sensationalism.
Click to expand...

yes this
 
Sadly, it is always easier to find a 'easy answer' to 'fix' what these brain defective individuals are doing.

That way, it seems like they are doing something, when they aren't really.

Like talking about the 'fiscal cliff' and BO's talk about 'I cut 1.6T!', when in reality, they don't cut a dime, they just slow the proposed growth by .0001%, and then call it a cut.
 
ImpulsE69 said:
Everyone is emotional because it involved small children. The reality is no amount of banning anything is going to prevent things like this. Crazy people will do what crazy people will do. If not with guns, with something else.
Click to expand...

The damage can be mitigated significantly with Bans.
 
A Study like this has value(assuming it is done honestly/scientifically), but if the findings have no influence on subsequent decisions regarding the subject, they are useless. I am quite certain the call for this is simply a delay/deflect tactic, however.
 
Easy. Video games are played in all of the world, but only in the US we see a high amount of school shootings.

So it cannot be video games.
 
It's a whole host of factors about the US.

Diversity, history, culture, guns, media, social trends, personalities which were more likely to be drawn to the new world rather than stay behind... And tons more.

It isn't fixable in any conventional, quick or satisfying way.
 
i heard a song once that told me that it's cool to be hard and bust a cap all up in some white cops ass. Glad that's excluded from the study
 
Ah... I saw this in a thread, I'd like to share it here too...

---
If the right to own video games ("violent" or not) was constitutional, would it be perceived as so much of a potential source of violence in children (or gamers in general) as much as it is right now? In other words, why not also proposing a bill directing the National Academy of Sciences to study the effects of usage of (legally owned) guns on gun users?
---

I thought it was interesting.

But, anyway, personally I think that there are surely some children out there who can unfortunately be negatively "influenced" by violent video games at any extent, and perhaps develop aggressive social behaviors over time. I do believe that exists, but such children's entourage, life-style, parental care (or sometimes lack thereof), friends (or "bad" friends, bad influences), social status at school (is the child being bullied? looked down upon?) or potentially non-diagnosed (or known) mental illnesses of any types can certainly play a role in the end (cumulative or not).

The problem I have with "studies" made on children concerning influence that violent video games may or may not have on them rarely take into consideration the many other variants of their respective life. And if the study does that take into consideration it is rarely publicized afterwards within the research's results, usually only pointing at how the game's violence alone affected (to any degree) the children.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top