Given 60 Minutes' report on video game violence focussing specifically on Grand Theft Auto, [ more info ] and all the other "game induced violence" ignorance floating around out there right now, I figured you guys wouldn't mind me painting a slightly different face on the situation.

I'll tell you honestly, and I expect a good number of you might disagree, I don't believe that games with violent content cause anyone to commit violent acts. Ultimately it comes down to that persons own choices, their mental state, their morality, and their own weak will. If violent video games exerted such a powerful influence over us, there would be a lot more of us out there emulating the games we play.

The vast majority of us see video games, movies, etc as nothing more than entertainment. So nothing within the movie can drive us to act beyond what our intelligence and our sense of right and wrong tells us an "okay course of action".

Blaming video games for violent acts is, again in my opinion, nothing more than a ridiculous excuse. Unless the person is mentally unstable, they know damn well whether their action is acceptable or not. And, if they act on an inclination that they understand to be unacceptable, then it can't possibly be the fault of a video game. The fault lies in making the decision to act on a violent whim despite realizing that it's wrong.

Honestly, the absolute most you could accuse a video game of is stirring curiosity. Self control should be plenty to temper that unless, of course, the parent has done a piss-poor job of teaching the difference between right and wrong.

Which brings me to one key aspect of the whole argument that has, as of yet, been largely ignored. That aspect is that concern over being "Rated M" should not end at the time of purchase. If the game is rated for mature players, then it's the parents' responsibility to actually supervise game play AFTER the game comes home. Buying the game, ignorant of its content, and then not paying attention to the child while they actually play the game... should be just as much a crime as the store selling it to someone that's not old enough in the first place.

In my opinion the only time video games can rightly be accused of causing a violent act is when it's an accident. That is to say, if a person does not understand the consequences, that certain actions can result in pain, injury, and even death. Again, in those instances, I feel the parent is largely to blame for not properly supervising gameplay.

So yeah, the comic is an effort to shine a light on the silliness of the whole argument. So, I'll let you guys run with that.

Remember, neither side of the discussion is wrong. Be adult in your posts. Don't address anyone elses comments. And, let your arguments stand on their own feet. In other words, try to keep this one quote free.

Why people portray video-games (or action flicks for that matter) as being violence inducing quite simply beats me.
To me, the logical consequence of playing violent games would be the exact opposite: People can use video-games as an outlet for the action-thirsting gene that humans apparently posses.

ofcourse I don't believe we have an "angry-gene", but our culture is definitely not the only one who made use of violence as entertainment. Many have come before, and not all of them fit the label 'barbaric cultures' easily: The Romans, for instance, are famous for their gladiator arenas. Medieval europe had their jousting tournaments and public executions (which, unfortunately, has been carried through to some states of modern day America - although it can't really be classified as entertainment anymore...)

And thus, one has to acknowledge the fact that video-games is a rather peaceful solution to an age-old urge.

Video-games, movies and books all fit into the common denominator "stories". The focus is - in most cases - not on violence for the sake of violence, but on the good story. And most often, stories need exciting things to happen in order to be entertaining!

To sum up:
My view is, that these sorts of entertainment does not provoke some "primal instinct" or "Catcher In The Rye" syndrome which turns people into raving mad killers...We just turn into raving mad geeks instead (though that is an equally uncomforting thought to some people... see PS below)

PS: An equally one-sided view is displayed on the following sites, although this time Roleplaying games are the sinners:
http://www.chick.com/articles/dnd.asp
http://www.chick.com/articles/frpg.asp

In my opinion adults should be able to purchase, view, play, experience, etc whatever the hell they want to. The current move towards censoring things that might be considered offensive is rather frightening. I love the senator that was trying to justify the argument that I should have the cable TV that I pay to have piped into my house monitored and editted by the FCC. WTF? By the same token, arguments to ban games like GTA, in my opinion are equally ridiculous.

I'm 29, my parents are the most tech savvy people in the world and they did need some help with choosing things my little brother should be playing. He turned 17 in December, at this point I believe he's mature enough to decide what he wants to see/play, but prior to this point GTA in specific was one of the things he wasn't allowed to have. On the other hand, something like Halo, while having a much higher body count was fine given that the protagonist was the faceless master chief and the enemies were alien monsters. One game is easily distinguished from reality, while the other comes a little too close to it.

I believe there need to be more stringent controls for sales of mature themed video games. Just as you shouldn't be selling rated R movies to minors, you shouldn't be selling them the video game equivalent. However, personal responsibility is still personal responsibility. You did what you decided to do and it's now your problem. It may have been the result of bad parenting, you deciding to go drink, whatever, it's still something you did.

--Leaf

What about Mario, magic mushrooms, dangerous driving and assult by a deadly spanner. :shock:

I am being serious...

I got 100 hours community service for that.... :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Ok maybe not... :roll:

In my opinion the "Twinkie Defense" to include the rock music/Rap/Video game made me do it, is just telling me that this is what gave me the idea and that yes I did it. The only part of that idea that I care about is the, yes I did it, part.

To commit a crime like this there is something very wrong in the first place.

Very good stuff, Woody.

I can't say I'm sure what it is.. but I like something about the way you drew the cops.

I missedthe report so i read the write up. (thanks Woody) This is a very touchy subject. I think it is right to say that GTA may have helped train, so to speak, the guy. That's what games like that can do, although most of us, including me, believe they are just for fun and would never do that sort of thing. Example, The Marines Corps is in the process of making First to Fight. It's based on Afganistan and Iraq tactics the Marines used. It does indlude some of the bad ones but this is mainly used to train Marines to make the right decisions as a Squad Leader to accomplish the mission with out lossing Marines and Civilians.

I do not agree on blaming Rockstar for these incidents. You cannot blame the company for the actions of a select few. The fact that GTA is played by millions of people in the US alone says to me that there was something already wrong in his head that caused him to make those poor decisions.

The game has an M rating and selling it to a minor, people under 17, is just as bad as letting a minor into a rated R movie. What I don't understand is if it is illeagal to sell an R rated movie ticket to someone under 17 then why isn't it also illeagal to sell that M rated video game to someone under 17. If you want to place blame somewhere in reference to games, place it on the stores that sold the game. They are mostly the reason children get these games because they don't card. If they did card then it would be the parrents fault for purchasing the game for their child without looking into the game.

I was in Eletronics Boutique (EB) a few weeks ago and actually watched the clerk behind the counter deny a child, couldn't been more then 12, the purchase of Resitent Evil 4 and GTA. When the parent came in to complain, the clerk explained those were M rated games and told the woman why the were M rated. Then she told the kid he wasn't getting them and they left.

That right there is what we need more of. people that actually card when selling M rated games and aren't afraid to tell these children no. If store CEO's would enforce carding for the M rated games in stead of looking at the monetary numbers selling it gets them, we would be in a better America.

Minors are a different thing altogether which I did not cover in my previous post.

I agree with Leafweir in the asessment that it is the PARENTS who has the responsibility for what their kids watch/play/hear.

It seems wrong to just censor content, and IMO it would help if the parents calling for censorship would instead take some time to talk to their kids about and explain to them that fiction is not real.

Why should the government or private companies be the judges of how I raise my kids? It seems like we are not allowed the freedom of independent thought afterall...

Ok a bit off topic there hehe. Sorry.

In my opinion (which is in no way humble) it all boils down to free will and responsibility. Without launching into philosophical gargabe, all human beings effectively have free will to make their own decisions, and as such, are responsible for them.

Thus, if I introduce a factor into my lifestyle that would eventually cause me to, say, rob a bank, it is my job to remove said factor, to take responsibility for my own future. If I actually do rob a bank, it isn't fault of the factor for influancing me, it's my fault for allowing myself to be influanced.

Now, children don't have quite the logical thinking skills as adults. Precisely when they reach adulthood in terms of their ability to comprehend right and wrong, and reality vs. fiction is a debate for psychologists, physicians, and apparently, the Supreme Court of the United States of America. But, for this argument, all of that is quite pointless. Until a child is capible of joining the rest of society as a free and independant adult, the parent takes responsibility for the child's actions. If a 12-year-old smashed a window, his/her parents have to pay for it. The idea is simple...society intrusts a parent with the child under the assumption that the parent will raise the child in such a way as to avoid these problems. If that means taking an active parenting role, and not letting a young child play GTA, so be it. Sometimes you have to be the bad-cop.

And in turn, when the child becomes an adult -- in the United States we tend to draw that line at the 18th year -- they, then, take full responsibility for all of their future actions.

No, it is not Rockstar Game's Fault. No, it is not Marylin Manson's fault. No, it is not the NRA's fault. No, it isn't the hot-coffee's fault. No, it isn't the media's fault. No it isn't teen-magizeens fault.

It's your fault.

What gets me is the litigousness of American Society. Since the baby boom personal accountability has been on the downslide. Look, from fitness to differant acts of stupidity it is never the offenders fault.

Whatever the reason, no one is holding a gun to someone's head forcing them to play video games. Think about it a lot of people of my gerneration (mid 30's) grew up with Bugs Bunny, Tom and Jerry, H.R. Puffenstuff, and similar fare. Did we in mass go out and do things that those cartoons did?

No.

I feel that the lack of personal accountability in America is viewed as a joke around the world. A little off topic but I will bring it around: Look to the middle east. How often do you hear of massive bombs going off? Every couple days at least. America has suffered what like 6 in the last 10 years, 4 in one day and we have a memorial for each one. think about it. Other countries don't even have time to bury their dead from one bombing before another happens, let alone build a memorial.

When the vast majority is more concerned about the Donald than world affairs personal character is going to decline. When character declines people start acting like Bart Simpson when he gets busted, it is never his fault although he did it of his own volition and with malice aforethought.

I can only hope that the pendelum has swung all the way away from personal character it is going to go and will start it's swing back to personal accountability.