Deontology/Consequences/Virtue

Solomon WAS known for his wisdom but your story was incorrect and, as recorded in the bible, doesn't make your point.

When two women claimed that the same baby was theirs, Solomon proposed that the baby be cut in half and half given to each. He had no intention of doing it but it forced the "real" mother to give up her claim so that her baby might live. Solomon then gave her the baby and punished the other.

What he specifically didn't do was "force the parties to come to a solution of their own". Quite the opposite. Solomon would have cut off the hands of any programmers responsible for programs that he didn't like. You can do that sort of thing if you're an absolute monarch.

:D

Since when does the constitution protect your right to be offended? I remember the freedom of speech part, but offend? That part I do not recall. You probably watched Bugs Bunny, Daffy Duck, and Popeye as a child. Were they not violent? Of course they were, but you turned out OK didn't you? Currently, what exudes more violence now then the War in Irag? Please, for once will you parents take some responsibility for what you and your children watch by adding parental controls and blocks to computer systems and televisions. Discuss these games that offend you with your family and explain your concerns to your children. Computers should be located in a comunal space where you can monitor what web sites your child is accessing anyway. Get a life and stop trying to censor everything.

First, are the makers responsible for the actions of people that use the games? No.

Should people be held accountable for their own actions no matter where they got the ideas from? Yes.

Making this available to minors who are NOT able to make good judgements yet is an issue.

I personally do not allow any games in my house that glorify being a scumbag. This means all the grand theft games in particular. And I have explained this to my boys that I will not tolerate anything in anyway that glorifies this. This also includes the vast majority of rap "music". Not in my house.

You saved me from typing that over again. What point do parents start getting yelled at? I mean seriously little billy whines and you give him the violent game.. Seems to be your inability to raise a mild tempered child is at fault.

Maybe this is in reference to RPG games like Atari's Temple of Elemental Evil? (Not to be confused with the computer language RPG which has such stellar titles as 'Find the missing inventory' and 'Reconcile that Report!')

The game refers to some "made-up" (read as not yet accepted by the main stream media as actual all powerful beings) deities from the Dungeons and Dragons universe. Though they may be refering to Oprah...

I agree. To expand on what I think you were saying: It is my impression that students in school are forced to be "mature" and have to deal with issues and situations which would have been unthinkable several, maybe 20 years ago (thumbsuck value), possibly due to higher moral standards and ethics. This kind of violence would also have been unthinkable then. Maybe this is the cause rather then the magic computer games which somehow remote control people to be evil... :)

I guess that is the answer to everything. More regulation. The government needs to baby sit us because we don't know our own good. I think we are all responsible adults. And as adults we are responsible, not only for our actions, but for our childrens actions as well. I get tired of parents pushing their kids in front of a computer or video game as a babysitter. You better watch what them kids are doing, because you are responsible for them.
What cracks me up is the parents will blame the programmer for creating such a violent game and it cause their child to kill someone. Soo, where were you (parent) when this child was playing this game? If you don't have time to spend with your child, then you should of never reproduced.

Such doing away is not limited to leftists, as anyone in the allegedly leftist education profession could tell you. "No Child Left Behind" is another in a growing string of mandates placing all accountability for student achievement (and personal responsibility for all sorts of behavior) on someone other than the student. If Johnny and his friends don't pass the [dubious] standardized test(s), it's the school's fault, and they are the ones "reconstituted" as a penalty. I agree with a number of posters who have suggested that what's needed is personal accountability, sound parenting, and a recognition that with "rights" come responsibilities.

Saying video games incite violence and immorality is yet another example of how certain individuals in today's society will do anything and blame anybody to avoid putting the responsibility where it actually belongs. It's always something. Rock and Roll, satanic messages secretly embedded into heavy metal albums, Teletubbies...; the list goes on ad nauseum. Where should the self righteous really focus their attention? It's a little thing I like to call RESPONSIBLE PARENTING. There's a rating system on video games that allows parents who actually take the time to pay attention to determine whether or not the subject matter is suitable for the child. Also, the retailers should be held responsible for carding minors. Of course, most children I know don't have jobs. With video games costing an average of $50, I wonder where the kids are getting the cash. Could it be that, once again, responsibility falls to the parents?

I've been playing video games and D&D for, literally, decades. I've never killed anyone, stolen a car, robbed a bank or solicited prostitutes. I don't believe I can turn myself invisible or cast a fireball. That's why they call it fantasy. I work for a living and am a productive member of society. Most of the people I associate with fall into the same category. I don't need some sanctimonious, self-appointed moral compass telling me how to enjoy myself or live my life. As long as I'm not impinging on someone else's personal space, I don't expect anyone to be impinging on mine. If I would rather unwind after a hard day at work cutting down hordes of orcs instead of tying one on at the local tavern, that's my business and I would ask "you" ("them", "they")to stay the hell out of it.

Should have paid more attention on Sunday afternoons as a kid.

It would make the most sense for the video game box makers to allow parents to censor games on there own. A sort of vChip for set top boxes.

If the parent doesn't want mature games being played, the kids could still rent them but they just wouldn't work until they have their parents' permission.

This would take the burden of the video stores and place it on parents, where it should be.

- OK, well a lot! - I think that made-up dieties sounds like a good idea!

Neil :)

As a soon to be parent of 5 myself, we have 4 already, there's just ONE in the oven now, I have to say, TALKING to your kids, and being INVOLVED in their lives does a WHOLE lot more for their social responsibility than does telling them they can't watch an R rated movie, or play a "violent" game.

And even within your own family, you have to gauge each child's "readiness" for certain things. My two oldest children are 14 and 11. The 14 year old was emotionally much more mature at 11 than the 11 year old is now. There are certain things that the 14 year old was allowed to do at various ages that the now 11 year old has still not been allowed to do, like riding his bike by himself the mile to the gas station... he just doesn't have the emotional maturity to handle a "situation" should one arise, and he's not focused enough to avoid CAUSING a situation.

There's not anything "wrong" with either of these children. All children develop in their own time, and as a parent you have to KNOW YOUR CHILDREN well enough to know what EACH INDIVIDUAL is capable of, and not just assume that because one was able to do something at this age, that all the rest will be as well.

With no regulation/laws then I think it's called Chaos. With any group of people you have to have guidelines (read laws) for the whole. And, these guidelines have to be agreed upon by the majority (read democracy).

There are some things that are meant for adults, and not appropriate for children. As a parent it is my responsability to ensure that my children do not get exposed to the things that I feel are inapropriate. I do not think its fair, or proper to expect everyone or anyone else to do that for me.

However, there is also nothing wrong with me, as an adult, getting help. Ratings schemes, with defined criteria are one way to help the me with this. If I see an "M" rated video game, I know there is something in the game that has an adult theme, just the same as if I saw an "R" on a movie. I now have a choice of allowing it, dissallowing it, or previewing it first to determine if it is appropriate or not in my own judgement.

Stores selling these games to my child (or movies letting them in) without my consent is actually DEPRIVING me of the ability to make those choices in regards to my children, since the child can obtain the item (or view the movie) without my knowledge. If I want to allow my child to play the game (or view the movie) then there's nothing wrong with me signing a release, or buying the game for the child; it is, after all, my responsabilty as a parent to remain involved. Am I so lazy that I want these things made freely available so I don't have to lift a finger?

Not allowing a child to obtain possibly objectionable material is not censorship, nor does it infringe on rights of freedom of speach since the materials are not banned, are freely available to adults, and are available to children by parental consent.

There is nothing wrong with the community, manufacturers, movie makers, game programmers, and even the government from HELPING a parent, but lets also not go so far as to make any of the previously mentioned BE the parent, by deciding for us what our children do or do not see.

You were on the right track.

I agree that some people have challenges dealing with making good choices. I would extend that I expose a person to choices to make, but I cannot choice for them. By the way, is your slapshot icon supposed to be "senseless".

Games don't 'incite' violent behavior, they portray & reward it.
That said, responsibility for exposure to the content of these video games lies with the individual or thier parents if under the age of majority, not the producers. Their responsibility ends as it should with accurate content labeling.
Auto & consumer product manufactures are held responsible for flaws in the design and construction processes involved in thier products. They are generally not called to action until an independent agency (usually government funded or controlled) finds that a particular problem is the fault of the manufacturer, and beyond the scope of what the consumer is aware of.
Entertainment is a very different story. All types of entertainment now require content labeling to inform the consumer what it is they're getting. The consumer knows that they are getting a game or film that contains violence, sex & drug use. The producers know how much violence, sex, & drug use is in their product, and very intentionally control the levels according to thier audience.

In my opinion, manufacturers of video games are not responsible for any actions their customers take. When a child goes "Columbine", it is not the video game's fault. It's lack of parenting. I started playing "violent" video games when I was 10 years old. I have never in my life gotten into a fight. I have never felt the urge to go postal on someone. Why, because my parents taught me the difference between right and wrong.

If anyone feels offended by these video games, then they shouldn't buy/use them. It's as simple as that. And yes, this type of censorship would constitute a violation of the first amendment.

... Are that they are based upon fallacical arguments. There is not
one study that has proven to conclusively provide a substantive link
between video games and violent behavior in anyone previously not
a violent person. Someone who is already violent in expressing
their angers and frustrations is just as likely to be motivated to
conduct such behavior by anything in their daily lives.

While your example of the we--adjusted non-violent 13-year-old honor student who plays Grand Theft Auto is interesting, I would view it as a long way from the norm. I work on a regular basis with boys with few of those qualities, and whose parents (or parent) don't have the luxury of constant monitoring of their activities. I'm not talking about the hood here, just typical midwest middle school boys. The reality of the situation is that television becomes more and more violent and adult-themed with each passing year,to the point where I'm not comfortable letting my youngest son watch TV sports events on Fox due to the graphic nature of their commercials. I think the sexual content of MTV videos - not to mention the sexist nature of the lyrics - is way off the charts. In the videogame space, it's clear that violence sells and, like TV, the games depict and endorse a violence-steeped culture that is so far from our normal lives, you can't see there from here. I think first-person shooter games should be rated M, not T. I think every boy who wants to buy one should be required to play it once with his mom in the room.

Similarly, the notion of Free Will as the guiding principle of individual responsibility is only relevant in adult interactions. Kids earn the ability to exercise more personal freedom and responsibility as they grow up, but those privileges need to be given out cautiously and parents need to understand that they, moreso than their children, bear ultimate responsibility for their kids' actions.

There's a vast gap between pretend violence and real violence.

Play is just that: play. Your cops 'n robbers games were products of your imagination, and you knew it. I'm betting that your parents (like mine) taught the difference between fantasy and reality. Being raised on a steady diet of violent comic books, I managed to not only become a reasonably-literate adult, but I've thus far not managed to kill anybody with kryptonite. Neither have I slain any dragons recently, nor felt the urge to try to block bullets with my bracelets.

I'd suggest that the inability to distinguish between fantasy and reality is a component of any number of psychological disorders...In such cases, it's incumbent upon the parents to pay attention long enough to identify the problem, control the child's environment as the case warrants, and seek appropriate treatment.

To the main question: video games don't "incite" violence any more than movies, Television, rap music, etc. One could argue the opposite in fact, that due to the interactive qualities of video games they allow one to "let off steam" in a fantasy setting rather than in real life.

Any Columbine-like incidences are, were and always will be the failure of parenting. Sorry to step on anyone's sensitivities, but it's true.

The Bible and the Quran have incited FAR more killing than video games ever will.

Listen, you've got your ESRB ratings in place, game reviews, and you've got the description on the box. What more do you want? What the hell happened to personal responsibility? Liberal 80's pop-psychology happened that's what!

If you let your kids buy this crap, if you let your kids play their computer in their room where you can't see them, if you let it dominate your kid's psyche, it's YOUR fault as a parent. That doesn't give the government the right to censor the material.

Censorship leads to the Dark Side, and while it may be the Christian thing to do, it is very UN-conservative.

I'm a conservative.
I'm a Deist.
I manage to support school prayer, "In God We Trust", "Under God" and STILL think Jesus, Budda, Mohammed etcetera should be barred from politics.

Don't stick all right-wingers in with Pat Roberson's facist crew.

depicting a hokey player's head exploding after being impacted with a hokey puck has ?incited? me to throw a hokey puck at a co-worker. Sadly, his head did not explode. Instead he yelled ?Fatality!? and attempted to yank my spinal chord from my body. You will be hearing from my lawyer ;)

I don't see anything wrong with restricting the sale to minors.

I DO see something wrong with restricting the sale......

I have kids, and we have plenty of violent games such as Republic Commando, Planetside, World of Warcraft...all the Star Wars games...

I will not allow my kids to play games like GTA or any of the "Hitman" games.

There's a BIG difference between killing robots and monsters or even plain old FPS Multiplayer and games like GTA that advocate lying, cheating, stealing, brutalizing innocents and breaking the law.

But I don't think the manufacturers of that morally repugnant crap should be sued because someone didn't have the moral fortitude to say no to their kids and their kid are stupid enough to act out the game. That's retarded thinking.

Vote with your wallet. You don't like it? Don't buy it/download it/play it. The game manufacturers are in it for the $$$.

I agree with your principle of Free Will. However the choices we make are made based on the input we receive, and marketing agents and advertisers know this. They paint the products they sell as magic.
While some of us have figured out that TV is the devil, most of the world disagrees. Many of the children of my generation grew up with TV as their best friend, me included. Many of today's children contine to grow up with TV as their best friend. With this as the trend, rampant consumerism is inevitible, as is desensitization to dramatic events, and the blurring of the line between reality and fantasy. Advertisments, video programs, video games are all forced to become more sensational to get and hold our attention.
Sure we as individuals are ultimately responsible for our choices, but look a the choices we are encouraged to make. At some point the government had to step in, and make sure that purveyors of harmful products were being responsible in their advertisments.
Until about 20 years ago breweries, distilleries, and tabaccists were allowed to advertise thier products with out regulation. Nowadays the governments of several nations require that these advertisments be limited and include warning of the possible harmful effects of consuming these products.
More recently producers of entertainment products are required to label the content of their productions. This includes video game producers.
Without this regulation the general public would have no way to make a choice based on reality.

Hey, pal. Keep the crap local. We quite like our London Bobby - twisted or untwisted - not being able to blow the sh:t out of us.

By the way, I think, as a country, you have you priorities wrong. You can have any level of violence in games, TV shows and even your sports and yet if Janet Jackson lets a nip slip loose during the Superbowl...

Lets have MORE reality. Lets see the consequences of violence as graphically as possible. Lets have people DIE in the A-Team with their guts hanging out after BA throws them through a plate glass window.

Above all, lets have more SEX.

...of my nephew. Not allowed to play with guns/swords/army men anything violent was prohibited.

Result?
He was fascinated with guns.

My father was cleaning his closet and had all his dresser drawers laid out on his bed. In one of the drawers was a .22 revolver.

My nephew picked up the revolver, pointed it at my face, pulled back the hammer and said "is this thing real?"

My dad had a nasty bruise on his thumb from there the hammer struck it as my nephew pulled the trigger.

One would think that anti-gun liberals would teach their kids about guns, gun safety, identifying guns...along with the "evils of guns". Well, my brother is not noted for his grand intelligence, only his well-meaning...which almost got me killed.

You see, my dad (frothing liberal, btw) knowing that his older son (my frothing liberal brother) was very anti-anythingviolent and therefore assumed (incorrectly) that he had taught my nephew what a gun was and never to touch one...
Nay, he never taught him anything but "guns are bad"...

I was puzzled by this post, until I discovered your 'down under'.

In the U.S., game manufactures have voluntary, which is to say the government gave them the choice of co-operating or have the industry regulated by law, placed ratings on their products. Most of these ratings are based in part on the movie rating system and for the most part it seems to work.

(http://www.esrb.org/esrbratings_guide.asp) for more information on the ratings.

These ratings are generally applied to the ?store bought? video game, where an adult can ?question? if a sale may be inappropriate. In the Co-op industry, where video games are in specialty cabinets and bought directly from the manufacturer, they usually do not have a rating on them.

Lawsuits have been filed when the operators of the game rooms, have allowed inappropriate images or actions to be displayed on the games were underage patrons are on the premises. All arcade games have a ?violence? level that can be set and locked in place. The same is true for store bought games. If a sale was allowed to a minor, the parent could file a lawsuit against the store.

As for games that are sold over the internet, I do not believe there are any regulations. At that point, it would be up to mom and dad to determine what their child is doing on the computer and if it is appropriate.

Regulated or unregulated really makes no difference for my house and many others who have decided to actually learn the proper way to parent. I do not allow any brainwashing mass broadcast media into my house, nor do I allow any game that I don't choose to have MY children and I stress MY, not the "Village's" children to be exposed to. So in my humble opinion, the real question is that of constitutionality and from that stand point I do not believe the government should or has a constitutional right to do anymore than require "disclosure without exposure". In other words, to require that producers of a product or service disclose to potential customers the nature of their product or server, without requiring that one see it first hand. If one chooses to buy a product or service after receiving said disclosure of the potential of negative affects, then TOO FRICKEN BAD. Its called personal responsibility something quickly fading as the Educationally Elite Left (and the Canadians) plot to sell the American soul which is "Freedom of individual choice and responsibility" to the Internalionists who would love to see the United States be absorbed into the European Union.

Absolutley,
The documentation exists in the sections of the Constitutiuon of the United States of America that: created a legislative body appointed by popular election, an executive office held by representative appointment in popular election, and a judicial body appointed by said executive officer, and approved by said legeslative body.
These mechanisms are echoed by each state in the Union. At the local level the members of these governing bodies are appointed by popular election. Hence we are regulated by generally accepted social and religious mores.
The regulations both protect and limit the inalienable rights laid out in the Bill of Rights, which if you really pay attention does not actually guarantee any freedoms, only the rights to them.

My point is that Sauron of the LOTR stories is no less an invention of a human mind than Jehovah of the Bible.

Moses, or at least that was his pen name, invented Jehovah.

The inventor of Allah is known to have been Mohammed.

Anybody who claims to believe in fairies, pixies, nymphs, or other "supernatural" characters can be committed and locked into an asylum for life.

Why do Christians receive unlawful protection against the diagnosis of insanity? Is the key to get "accepted by the main stream media"? Oprah has been...

My post should have read "social and religious guidelines". Without doubt, social and *legal* guidelines are permitted, but not "social and religious guidelines".

The prohibition of government support for an establishment of religion in fact denies the possibility of "religious guidelines" for interpretation of law, as well. Otherwise, every Act passed by Congress IS "respecting an establishment of religion".

Hello:
I agree with you 100% plus..... I strongly believe in controling what games MY kids play so that they have a chance to grow their morals with out outside corruption. We are seeing the problems of years of "letting kids find themselves" and they have, in violence drugs and the jail?.. Letting kids find them selves is just the lazy way out of raising your kids. If a person would really step back and listen too themselves and hear how stupid it is to let a ?KID find themselves ? We train our pets we go to school to learn how run things. We don?t let workers find themselves on the jobs why would we let innocent blank minds find themselves and HOW?????
I play a lot of games and I love the one commercial , ?Play in our world LIVE in yours.
Thanks for the rant
ICON58

Indicators of School Crime and Safety, 2000, the third in a series of annual reports on school crime and safety from the Bureau of Justice Statistics and the National Center for Education Statistics, presents the latest available data on school crime and student safety and contains the following statistics on school violence:

In 1998, students were about two times as likely to be victims of serious violent crime away from school as at school

Between 1995 and 1999, the percentage of students who reported being victims of crime at school decreased from 10 percent to 8 percent
Ninety percent of public schools reported no violent crime incidents in 1996-97.

Forty-three percent of these reported no crimes of any kind

Forty-seven percent of these reported at least
one nonviolent crime, but no violent crimes.

The most prevalent type of youth crime is theft, and the most common types of violence are fist fights, bullying and shoving matches.

Overall, about 1,000 crimes per 100,000 students were reported in public schools, 950 of which were not serious or violent.

The ratio of serious violent crime is lowest in elementary schools, with 13 violent crimes reported per 100,000 students compared with 93 per 100,000 students in middle schools and 103 per 100,000 students in high schools.

Schools that reported serious discipline problems were more likely to have experienced one or more incidents of crime or violence, and were more likely to experience serious violent crime than those with less serious discipline problems.

The rate of serious crimes is fairly small when compared to the number of students-approximately 54 million-in public schools.

As the most outspoken "soap box" type of all TR members I've encountered, I agree with analysis, but as an opponent of the regulation solution I see no need to address specific games. Also, I don't play many, but my experience with Nintendo games is that it was an escapist activity with no application or relevance to reality.

Are today's games really so much more "life-like" that they are confusing today's stupid kids? I know SAT scores are re-inflated annually, but come on, we're still talking about homo sapiens. Aren't we?

"Certain types of games that incite violence and immorality are rife and readily available."

Perhaps the above quote, was used to promote a discussion or provoke a comment, which in my case the latter.

If, as a rational adult, you made a conscious decision to raise a child, then...that became your primary objective.

If at some point, you're not happy with the results of your objective, remember...until that child is capable of cognitive choices, he/she is what you created, and those choices he or she makes before that point and after, will be the result of the "guide" you offered.

Just like the irrational assumption that opened this discussion, is much like telling a child they are 'born with original sin', then telling them, they ought to be good.

Look at the world around us, and tell me "humans..sic" more than generally speaking, are not "jokes!"

JG

but since you brought it up, being offended by the left does not necessarity imply lock-step approval of whatever today's Republicans call the "right" wing.

...but who decides what's mature content and who's a minor? Either you want censorship or not, make up your mind!

he did'nt use a gun, he used a claw hammer, i did'nt say the motive was only robbery the police report said that, the point i was making is that the newspapers immediately grabbed on to the part about video games and said it was the fault of violent games because he committed the crime in a way shown by the game, even though it was the victim that had been the one playing the game, read another report on the story here for a different view on what happened

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/leicestershire/3538066.stm

You've brought many like-minded people to my attention with this discussion of misplaced moral obligation.

BTW, notice SlapShot does not actually advocate a view, only presents one. I suspect he actually prefers violence, and is enjoying all this arguing much as he would enjoy the vicarious violence of a fight during a hockey...match? game?...farce? whatever

I agree with your evaluation of the advertisment industry and I agree with some regulation regarding what is available to children. When a family can't even watch the news because they are showing people shooting one another on the SIX O'CLOCK NEWS, it is time for some responsibility of decency to be placed on the media. Where I do not agree that these games should not be sold to those who are mature enough to handle them, I do think that stricter guidelines should be in place for this sort of media (as well as the media machine as a whole).
Ultimately, it is up to the parents to become the filter to the outside influences that are not healthy for their child. I am a step-mother of an eight-year old and even though I have games like Hitman and Diablo in my repetoire, she is allowed to play PowerPuff Girls and Roller Coaster Tycoon. I know exactly what is on her computer at all times, have set up several filters on her computer to restrict her Internet access to only a handful of sites (nickelodeon and disney...). But even with all of these safeguards in place, I had to stop her from watching a cartoon that had zombie corpse parts falling from the sky! This cartoon was rated Y7 (meaning it was deemed acceptable for children 7 years and older).
Parents cannot depend on the government to make choices about what is acceptable for their children. Being involed with your children and making sure that everything that enters your house for the children is acceptable to you and in accordance with the morals you have taught is essential for raising happy, healthy children. It does take a village to raise a child, however, it takes individuals to make a village.

1st - by whose view of morality would we measure? Dr James Dobson(Spoonge Bob is gay)? Larry Flint(Hustler publisher)?
2nd - not a new idea, but how about the person who takes a particular course of action being responsible for it? It's nice to blame my bad on anything other than me, but how realistic is that?
3rd - why stop there? What about movies, TV, books... all media. Anything with violence, immorality or sex should be banned for the good of society... shouldn't it? Of course we'd have to ban the Bible too... it's full of all of these.
4th - programmers? Uh, does that mean we should sue the printing press operators, key grip, janitor in the TV studio? Wouldn't this ridiculous overbearing cencorship be better aimed at the company publishing the offending software, not the guy who programs 3D shading on the rocks used in the background of Grand Theft Auto?

Ah screw it. Let's just lock up everybody since we've all had bad thoughts and it's only a matter of time until we do something wrong.

How many posts would there have been if SlapShot had just said "It's not my fault".

To paraphrase Tucker Carlson, any claim that cannot be made with a simple declarative sentence is an attempt to evade the necessity of understanding, either the speaker's or the audience's. Both are immoral.

then the most important parenting challenge "is making sure that the information you want decisions based on gets the most air time." If, on the other hand, they are capable of cognition, then hours of video gaming are successfully combated with a succinct analysis of the stupidity of the idea that stealing police cruisers (GTA) is a type of good idea. We are talking about young humans, not young border collies. Give me a break.

Video games inciting violence, I mean.

I did see a tv preacher inciting his followers by saying it would be okay to kill men. "If any man ever looked at me that way I would kill him and tell God he died." The parishoners thought it was real cute, hahah, chuckles all around.

So if a man "looks at" your sister "that way" and she kills the guy, I suppose this tv preacher should take some responsibility.

But I guess that's not the same thing as a video game.

with its "judge not" and "blessed are the merciful" garbage. Seriously, if you took every word of it at face value, you wouldn't last a week!

I am not saying that all kids should be allowed to play violent video games, I am just saying it should be up to the parents to decide. Some kids may have problems with them, but it should be the responsibility of their parents to regulate that, not society.

I still think Free Will applies to children as well as adults. Parents do have the responsibility to raise their children right, but the children still need to be held responsible for their actions.

That's what happens when you put a 32" TV on a TV tray.

that it isn't my fault!

Oh, that isn't what you were asking for. OOPS!

Personal accountablity? I don't see it happening. Partly because if you do stand up and say "I did it" you get nailed hard. Deny deny deny. Too many people are just looking for someone to blame for everything and you make yourself an easy target.

What would happen at work if you stood up and say "yes, I am the one that crashed the server"? You may feel guilt free as you stand in the unemployment office.

And I AM in favor of accountablility, it is just stacked against the moral and honest. Only the weasles advance. Look at your boss.

It's pronounced Randian, right? I may not know about Solomon, but I do know that Rampersandian was a mystic advisor to the last Tsar of Russia. I'm not TOTALLY ignorant.

Play hockey in a fat old man no-check league, like I do, and you'll learn to love and appreciate it.

In some ways I believe that this is being used as just another way for someone to not take responsibility for their own actions. I agree that some of the stuff out there (TV/interweb/music/games/etc) have no real intellectual value, but just because you see it in the realm of "entertainment" does that make it ok to carry it out in the real world and then say "well I played GTA and "learned" it was ok to kick the snot out of random people and steal their money". Everytime I hear someone trying to blame the entertainment industry for their stupid actions I just have to roll my eyes. Step up and take responsibility for yourself.

A TV program, most which are not fit for human consumption, can be turned of or blocked. I have the worst of mine blocked and I will not give anyone my code. A video/computer game has to be bought. So to buy or not to buy that is the question?? TV channels can be blocked or turned off. Most parents buy the games for their children not even knowing what the game is about nor do many even care. The society we live in proves that conclusion.

You may not feel comfortable allowing your kids to play certain games, watch certain shows, listen to certain music...etc, but don't infringe on my right to do so.

that productivity is cause for pride, and entertainment is a euphemism for wasting time. Problem solved.

Having raised 6 kids to adult, none in prison but 2 in the computer gaming industry - I guess I am ready to weight in on this issue.

R&ian is ready for adult games - if he can stomach them.
Slapshot (despite his euridite nature and non violent avitar) is not yet ready to handle posting to bullitem boards.

As to the issue in question - the lawyers always go for everyone peripherally associated with their clients suffering by the thinnest of real or imagined correlation: that is WHY we shoot them first!

Sims, shooters, or strategy...they are all digital nacotics and you should be watching closely what your kids are playing. Failure to do so - now That might actually be a valid cause of action.

Ed,
MCSE, MCDBA, CPA, MBA, YADA, Yada...
Infection in EverCrack (Evernight)
Pandemic in ToD
...

Are you implying that only Christians have any morals?

I didn't put ANYTHING of any religious nature in my post, so would you care to explain just what "There's your bloody Christianity again" has to do with what I posted.

If you mean that non-Christians are all immoral, then I think there are quite a few members here that would contend that notion.

I got yours. It was the guy talking about the advisor to the last tsar of russia.

You will still have the idiot parents. I mean a Mrs. Ayala stick a finger of a co-worker in her Wendy's chili and SUE Wendy's.

My point: People are stupid and letigious. Nip it in the bud now.

and the necessity of them. I was actually saying that Christians, with their belief that mercy is a virtue, are enablers of all they hold to be sinful. I was adding to your closing "But then, we aren't supose to make any kinds of moral judgements anymore are we?", which I hope was sarcasm.

Here in the UK, all recorded media is treated the same, be it video game, DVD or CD.
If it has a BBFC certificate it is illegal to sell it to someone underage. The fine can be up to ?5000 and is given to the person selling the item, not the store.
When I used to work for a computer store the policy was that if they wanted to buy a certificated game, they had to produce ID showing their age. No ID, no game. Some companies also include the ELSPA rating in this requirement.
We got a lot of abuse from kids trying to buy games like GTA. The law is there for a reason, if the kid wants the game the parent would have to buy it and would be informed of the rating and the reason for it.

The joke was calling Rasputin, a real historical character, "Rampersandian", which is unintended pronunciation of the full name of a punctuation character.

Video Games for the Youth
Video games today are one of the youth of America?s greatest forms of entertainment. On the other hand, many adults shun games across the country. Why has this come to be? Games are not a new concept. Board games are a harmless enjoyment that could not possibly be dangerous and have been enjoyed by many for years. Then we had the great games of the Roman Empire, such as the gladiators, which could easily end your life in a cruel manner. We are not talking about any of these though but about the digital images on a computer screen or television. It is these games that the new generation plays, the ?game generation".
The majority of these electronic games are harmless. However, some youth cannot tell the difference between reality and imitation. Only at this point can games start to become hazardous for human kind. Who knows what an infant adult might determine to do? Even though this case is exceptionally rare, it makes you contemplate about the movements of light that run across your television or computer screen. Video games can be a positive or a negative thing depending on each adolescent, but parents must keep an open mind and realize what the game really is to their young person.
Games of the modern era come in many forms of style such as RTS, FPS, MMO and RPG. We will start of with an RTS (Real Time Strategy). With this form you control a civilization or country and collect resources. By the collection of resources you are able to boost your economy and build armies to dominate one?s enemies. Hasty decisions are required when playing an RTS, for if a player does not research technology and keep up with their hostile targets they will merely get squashed by superior high-tech units. If players remain head-to-head you must simply out smart and out maneuver your enemy to create an advantage, which is easer said than done. Many players will build up strong defenses before they go on the aggressive. Usually people will never defeat their opponent on the first siege of his city or stronghold. Many cycles of attacking are taken before your opponent is weakened and then can be terminated. Destroying them the majority of the time consists of taking out all buildings or units left breathing. By the time that objective has been completed a RTS game lasts an average of an hour or more per game depending on the game speed and a few other random factors.
FPS, or First-Person Shooter, is exactly what it sounds like and probably remains the most played style of game in the industry. The main goal is to kill the enemy using an assortment of arms including: assault rifles, sniper rifles, grenades, sub-machine guns, pistols, shotguns, melee weapons, and rocket launchers. For the reader?s information, a melee weapon usually consists of your fist, end of your gun or a knife. That is your arsenal; you have your enemy, good luck. As you guessed you take a firearm and start pulling the trigger towards the opponent. Victory normally requires one to take out the enemy at all possible costs. While gaming online players go head-to-head. The mission being to cap/ kill each other for points or to capture the other teams flag. Online games of today almost must be played with a high-speed Internet connection (DSL or Cable). Otherwise you will develop a lag time in the game. Lag is when your computer cannot keep up with the game causing everyone?s game to run slow. Most gamers get frustrated when this occurs and will start booting gamers out of the game server.
On a server players will do battle with other members of the gaming community in a competition that the gamer will constantly struggle to win. Gaming with one another allows gamers to ?express their violent impulses in ways that are not antisocial? (Costikyan). The game becomes a stress reliever that is more productive than punching a pillow.
The next form is the MMO, Mass Multiplayer Online. Obviously some form of broadband will be required. MMOs are probably one of the ultimate feats in the gaming industry, taking a game and instead, making it a world with other players. Gamers constantly are playing with other gamers all over the world in an attempt to complete thousands of quests and continue to scale up the level of a character. People can even group with one other to go united and trample the despicable inhuman bastards. The legacy of the machine brain versus the complexity of the human mind will unravel. But even with all this intense storyline and fighting you can still play in peace. In Everquest 2, a very popular MMO, you can be a blacksmith or a seamstress, can go fishing and gathering, players can even buy a house and furnish it. MMOs have brought forward a world that will never end, just like life itself. There is always another quest to do, place to explore or person to meet.
Lastly we have the RPG, or Role-Playing Game. RPGs are the games probably most known to people that are not considered ?gamers?. There titles include Mario, the Zelda series, and the Final Fantasy series. In these interactive fantasy stories individuals become the heroes and go swiftly go around defeating the dark forces of evil. While being the hero, the person in control is brought unto a very in-depth story line. From what I have played, some of these storylines are easily television show quality. They are a riddle that does not get solved until the final battles, which constantly keeps your drive going. Progression and finding out the riddles that ay before you clearly becomes your goal and keeps the game zesty. Many levels require additional thinking to move on, and you must do it all by yourself. RPGs are single-player games. The players hunger for the storyline makes you strive for victory and will create a drive that will go on for hours.
RPGs are usually one of the most difficult genres of games to beat. ?Getting past all the puzzles, obstacles, and hidden clues takes critical thinking, deductive reasoning and problem solving?(Kalinske). Kalinske, who was the former CEO of Sega and now works for Educational Technology, knows how games help children as well as others in academic and day-to-day skills. The numerous amount of mind-boggling riddles and puzzles gives you the bases of problem solving, a helpful skill for anyone. Players begin to find solutions by thinking outside of the box. That form of thinking will help everyone get through school, college and everyday life.
Interactive competition is magnificent for everyday life, but games offer even more than that. Games are able to speed up the neural pathways within your brain (Deutsch). Of course this makes absolute sense considering a lot of games have puzzles or complex storylines, which always keeps a person on their toes. Then, unlike movies where all one gets to do is go through and watch the storyline from a third person view, in games people actually get to live it through in-depth interaction. A player is the character, and he must go through figuring out the problem ahead of him/her. With this interactivity gamers also learn problem solving from the numerous questions and problems they have to seek solutions for.
For example, communications is an interactive part of a game. Games help kids develop these communication skills and therefore help them develop socially (Kalinske). Team play in almost every game, except the RPG, is a must if one plays with friends or online. Cooperation requires speech in the form of typing or talking. Yes, believe it or not, there are ways to talk to other gamers through your computer or XBOX. In first-person shooters talking is essential for giving away enemy targets as well as correlating attack plans. MMOs it is inevitable to use communications, for in many cases you must form groups with other players just to defeat the objective. In real-time strategy games allies must form strategies and a lot of the time must undertake unison and organized attacks to defeat your foe. Gamers that reside in clans, which are teams of gamers, become more than just random people online chatting, but become close friends. Teammates like clan mates will have gained social bonds from the rigors of competition just as if the two of you were active in sports together.
Another synonym for a game should be an excellent stress reliever. Kids today have a higher amount of stress then ever. When you play games you get biofeedback. Biofeedback is created when you force a normally involuntary body mechanism to behave in a controlled manner. Doctors to help control stress and tension have used biofeedback for many years (Beyond Online Limited). Pressure in children is constantly being applied, and eventually they may need a way to dispose of that enormous build up. Violent games where people do get to kill digital object on your screen or television might just be the perfect solution. Sometimes even being able to see the blood and watch the bullet casings fly off just makes a guy feel better. Than a stressed human can imagine whatever he/she is shooting at is their stress, and they just get to blow it to absolute smithereens. As a gamer might I say I will never have a need for a punching bag again.
Not only are games a marvelous relief for those who play them, but for patients as well. ?Video games can be used to distract patients form physical pain and reduce levels of stress? (Beyond Online Limited). If pain is an unnecessary negative, why have it? Playing a game and not feeling the pain seems a lot more pleasant. That also reinforces how great and in-depth the story-line for some games really are.
Games may end up requiring a change in schools and teachers as well. The ?game generation? is a whole new kid. This kid in particular can multi-task like crazy, being able to e-mail, instant message, type a paper, listen to music and browse the Internet simultaneously. That is all able to happen since the game generation can process information extremely quicker than the older generations (Hostetter). In result of these teens being able to process all this information so much quicker, students often will get bored in class by their teachers. All these current teachers are not part of the new game generation and are still adapt to the old step-by-step learning process that can dull these kids who play games. Students are changing, when are teachers going to change?
Here comes the big question, why do people think games are so bad? Like many of today?s questions there are several answers. Are the reasons logical though?
Probably the ultimate reason for games being stereotyped as evil is the point that many people bring up about the excessive amounts of violence in their contents. ?Video games like DOOM and MORTAL COMBAT can increase the players aggressive feelings, thoughts and behaviors (Muscari).? Hmm let us be logical for a minute. When it all comes down to it there are numerous amounts of situations that can increase one?s aggression. Receiving a bad test score can increase ones aggressive feelings. Does that mean students go murder their teacher? When a person?s Ford F-150 breaks down do they go and bomb the Ford factory? Usually not right? Do video games force you to walk into your school and start shooting people? Let us be realistic. Why don?t we ban high school football or wrestling? The whole point of these sports are to generally hit the other guy harder than he can hit you. Players can even bleed on the field in real life or fracture a bone. Aggression can become apparent and grudges begin to be held. That being said, why don?t schools ban those sports. Then the logical solution presents itself being that these physical activities already are socially accepted, were as being a gamer and playing constant games still has not walked into that path of social acceptance. Slowly though, games are becoming more and more commonly seen throughout the country.
Directly connected with violence is the ability to tell the difference between real and make believe that resides within this form of entertainment. All responsible studies that have taken place between violence in games in comparison to violence in children have determined that children can differentiate between actual violence and fake violence (Kalinske). Today, games with their realistic 3D graphics take you into a new paradise of evil or magnificence, but you must always remember everything in that new world is an illusion. All the living and moving objects condenses down to an electronic signal interpreted by a digital display. Players never really kill anyone in life, just an animation made by programmers and then brought to live by modern day computer technology. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING IS REAL. Even though most people understand the game is not real, not all children do understand this. When our young generation are playing games such as Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas and do not understand that it is not an actual part of history, they become a hazard to society.
The final reason for people thinking games are so treacherous comes from parents themselves. ?Parents invariably view the new medium as threatening,? which clearly creates the problem (Costikyan). Since children of the future are becoming so game involved parents have been afraid and frightful. The cause of this fear is simply from parents and others have been attaching a bad reputation to games. Games have been one of the newest scapegoats for parents. If a child is getting fat, it is the games fault. When they are not getting A?s in classes, it is because they spend too much time playing games. The exact moment a kid requires glasses the cause comes again from sitting and watching the screen too much. Obviously, parents think games are unhealthy for us. Why do parents blame games? The blame comes from fear it self. A majority of people fear things they cannot comprehend and because they do not understand the game, they fear the game, making it automatically the opposite of a great thing (Muscari).
Parents must open up their minds to this greatness. Today parents seem like they are very isolated. We know that parents fear games because they do not understand them, therefore maybe we can even let some parents try playing a game or two. Being a gamer myself I know some gamers that happen to be 30-40 years of age. When mothers and fathers play maybe they will enjoy the game instead of despise it. After that maybe they will have an epiphany and realize games are a great tool and have an extensive amount of interactivity. Even a parent can learn something from a game I imagine.
Yet the children?s creators must know how their children react towards violent games. All the above information will help children only if they know what is fake and what is real. If they cannot tell the difference between the two have no business playing such a game. The solution to the question of are violent video games dangerous for your children, falls to the responsibility of parents knowing their kids. According to an IDSA (Interactive Digital Software Association) research in 1999 parents were asked who should take responsibility of what their kids play. The majority of parents said it is the parent?s job to control such things (Lowenstein). Now if a child can tell the difference then let him have at. If he can?t, make sure you keep him/her away from it until you are certain he/she can distinguish the difference of the two. Just keep reminding your kid that it is not real.
Video games are played primarily for relaxation, not agitation, that they sharpen rather than dull the mind, and develop rather than retard social skills?(Kalinske). Violent games and the amount they can be played depends on the young person. Can or can?t they handle the violence? Honestly, parents need to start taking responsibility and taking more responsibility for their own child?s actions. Parents just need to start becoming more responsible and learn to tell what their child can handle or in this case tell if the child can understand and clearly recognize the differences between the fake and the real. If the kid cannot tell the two apart do not allow him/her to play the game. Start taking action before you watch the action evolve into a problem. Parents should not blame everything but themselves for not paying attention to your kid. Be honest to yourself parents. In the end maybe it is the parents of today that need to change instead of the gaming industry. Games are not for everyone, and the amount of violence in a game will always depend on each child on an individual bases and parental units must realize this.

Works Cited
Beyond Online Limited. ?Video Games Can Be Used For Therapeutic Purposes.? Fighting For Survival. Sept. 2000. Opposing Viewpoints. Sno-Isle Regional Library, Arlington, WA. 24 Mar. 2005
Costikyan, Greg. ?The Problem of Video Game Violence is Exaggerated.? "Games Don't Kill People--Do They?" 21 Jun. 1999. Opposing Viewpoints. Sno-Isle Regional Library, Arlington, WA. 24 Mar. 2005
Deutsch, David. ?Playing Video Games Benefits Children.? Taking Children Seriously. 1992. Opposing Viewpoints. Sno-Isle Regional Library, Arlington, WA. 15 Mar. 2005
Kalinske, Tom. ?Video Games Do Not Cause Aggressive Behavior in Children.? "Technology and Its Post-positive Impact on Kids." 18 Aug. 1994. Opposing Viewpoints. Sno-Isle Regional Library, Arlington, WA. 24 Mar. 2005
Lowenstein, Douglas. ?The Video Game Industry Regulates Itself Effectively? Excerpted from Douglas Lowenstein's testimony before the Senate Committee on Commerce. 13 Sept. 2000. Opposing Viewpoints. Sno-Isle Regional Library, Arlington, WA. 15 Mar. 2005
Muscari, Mary E. ?Media Violence Causes Aggression in Children.? Not My Kid: 21 Steps to Raising a Nonviolent Child. 2002. Opposing Viewpoints. Sno-Isle Regional Library, Arlington, WA. 24 Mar. 2005

I think we are missing the point of the original post. The original post was talking about stores selling mature games to children. If there is a rating system in place then maybe it would be good to follow it. If the game is rated 13 and up then let a 13 year old buy it and the parents can say wether the games stays or gets returned. If a 12 year old tries to buy it then the store should say no. Its not that the store needs to force morals, they need to follow the rating system. I know that it is not the same as movie ratings, but I think it should be handled the same way. If the parent wants their child to go to a movie that is rated R then that is their choice. If the child wants to go they are stopped at the ticket booth. This isn't a question about "the village" raising our children, nor the programmers getting sued for violent content, its about stores following the rating system that is already in place.

But you don't need spend your hard earned time & money for that.
History has plenty of examples of how well it works.
After all Hitler didn't start out with a nation full of anti-Zionists.
The Protestant Church would never have had anything to protest if Guetenburg hadn't made his press, the Bible would have never been available to the common man so he could form his own opinion of how Christianity works.
Even our modern day democratic elections are influenced by this strategy. It's a foregone conclusion that campaign adverts only give the information that's needed to get the 'right' idea.

She never liked that term, since it implied a 'cult' which reared it's ugly mentality, and she rejected. How about the term she coined for her philosophy, "Objectivist!"

JG

I agree with you. I have a relative whose "friend" engaged in adult materials at a young age. My relative was subsequently sexually assaulted by this "friend." I believe a significant contributing factor to the "friend's" aberant behavior was due to the pornographic nature of his recreational activities. Society suffers from uncenured content in video games.

of irrational people who use the concept of a cult to belittle the only philosophy I know that holds reason as an absolute. The only absolute, in fact.

Hysterical, if you ask me.

Abolish the unenforceable, undefineable rules, they will quit the unproductive behavior when they notice their own boredom. I guarantee it.

Yes. Alot of games are violent and immoral. But the same violence and immoralities can be found in comics and books which are just as accessable to young minds. So where do we draw the line. Is it right to make the developers responsible for the content of their programs? Do we make authors responsible for their writing?
Maybe an easier solution would be to have an independant board that censors and rates these programs. Putting inforcable restrictions on the age limits of the end user.
But face it. A fragile mind, is a fragile mind, regardless of age. The wrong type of person can take a tv show, movie, book or video game and be violently influenced by it, where others just take it as it is meant to be.

I am not an advocate for banning games, my suggestion like others are enforcement of laws. A child should not be able to buy cigarettes if a place sells and gets caught they get find. The same should be done with game retailers and renters. Catch the sellers in the same way you do with cigarettes and soon they will learn not to sell. Of course it will not stop but may deter sellers to think again. I will not speak of parents responsibilities in ensuring they know what their kids are doing simply becuase that's sadly something that will never change.

Speaking for myself, I think many people here miss the point of the discussion. I think you are all falling into moral, legal & social issues.
When I was growing up, the amount of violence around was still a reasonable amount, however what happened was it was not 'flaunted' in your face ie: explicit & focused, with the intent to disturb or impact the viewer. Kids would play cops & robbers (sure... no problem) but did you see kids perhaps whipping out the tomato sauce and spraying it everywhere?? no, of course not - their mum's would get pi**ed off for wasting the sauce. Now, however the violence itself has become a important medium in conveying the plot to the viewer. The difference between perhaps "The Longest Day" and "Saving Private Ryan" is the probably the most profound contrast. As humans do, we will grow up learning combative techniques that have instinctually been bred into us (natural selection, alpha male, etc.) BUT... we do overcome these most of the time through social & cultural indoctrination. Now... hypothesis: What if the social and cultural indoctrination said - It is ok to work 9-5, mon-fri, earn a wage, have a car, buy a house, etc.... and be happy. (BTW: This is the garbage that is shovelled down peoples throat!) Now, any psychiatrist can tell you "US HUMANS CAN'T LIVE LIKE THAT" not really. Perfect world?? yeah right. So throughout the ages - the imperfections of humanity have come through (crusades, ww1, ww2, other horrid events, apartheid, etc.) So, what you ask is how to release controlled agression in people, (ergo: Cops & Robbers, cowboys & indians...etc) That unfortunately was then.
NOW: pose this hypothesis - today's violent movies are more violent from older movies (hollywood loves blood & guts) more sexual & lasvicious content, more intensive gore & horror themes, (ahh, love that skin peeling & brain eating fun....NOT) and finally as the games are the same, you can turn off the tv & find it on the internet and your computer.
(Sorry if this is turning into an essay)
Hm, will cut to the summary: I think ultimately societies social values & acceptance levels have become more compromised over time. (I see movies that came out and were rated R, 5 years later - MA, 3 years after that rated M, and I am sure that one day they will be PG.)
Is this considered good or bad? I believe that the increase in society's crime/violence and people hurting others around them (whether through verbal or physical means...) is on the increase. This is a subconcious dumbing down of social mores that obviously began back at the beginning of the 20th century.

Other's thoughts? (Ultimately - yes I believe that violent games lead to violent children - which leads to COLUMBINE HIGH SCHOOL events.)

:

Apparently one can have an euphemism of an euphemism.

Regardless of the attempt to stay within TechRepublics terms of use agreement, the point here is that there are video games that portray acts of rape, and some that reward it, GTA specifically, and this behavior is something that can be learned as acceptable without proper guidance etc.

While I disagree that pornography is a crime, the argument can be made that combined with masturbation and a lack of certain moral guidelines it could lead a person to commit sexual assult, which is a crime. This in no way excuses the perpetrator from responsibility for thier actions, nor does it place responsibility on the publishers of pornograhy.

The only acceptable variety of censorship is 'self'. It's the only expression we have any control of as individuals.

Reality dictates otherwise. There are too many stupid people floating around...