Are Video Games Really Evil

Our "pub" where you can post about things completely Off Topic or about non-silent PC issues.

Moderators: NeilBlanchard, Ralf Hutter, sthayashi, Lawrence Lee

Post Reply
andyb
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Are Video Games Really Evil

Post by andyb » Thu Nov 30, 2006 3:54 am

Jack Thompson thinks so. But then again, I think that he is a lunatic.

It all seems very good and noble until you look under the skin.

Jack Thompson is on a crusade to outlaw and all violence and sex from video games, more recently he has been turning his head towards the real problem.

The real problem is of course that huge amounts of people are breaking the law, whether its kids playing 18 rated games, or adults selling the games to kids, or even their parents letting their kids playing 18 rated games.

You will find 5,120, 000 hits if you search for "Jack Thompson", fortunatley there are other "Jack Thompsons" out there, but he is stealing the limelight from the more deserving crowd.

Below are a couple of interesting links for the "Jack" that is trying to ban gomputer games.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thomp ... ttorney%29
http://www.jackthompson.org/

I honestly understand Jacks motives, however I think that he is going about his actions the wrong way. Jack has managed to sell more copies of "Bully" AKA "Canis Canem Edit" than anyone else on the planet.
http://www.play.com/Games/PlayStation2/ ... oduct.html
This is more proof that Jack is going about things the wrong way, he has stolen the limelight 18 months before the game was released, tried to have it banned in the US, and what did he do, sell millions of copies..... oops.

On top of the fact that Jack is quite mad, what exactly is he trying to achieve.??? To be honest I dont actually know, but by trying to ban every violent game out there he is getting an awful lot of flak, and achieving very little (except sales).

I personally like to club baby seals to death, rip peoples heads of, snap bones, kick testicles and of course use explosives and guns to kill as many people as possible.

That is fun............... in real life things are very different (fortunatley), games do NOT make people sadistic brutal murderers. Books, Movies, and TV shows have all been blamed in the past by Jacks of the past and they were all proven NOT to have a serious effect on "Normal Adults".

"Normal Adults" dont go around hitting and killing other people, abnormal people do, I dont think that anyone who is deranged really needs an excuse like "I was playing GTA" so I shot a load of people for fun, but Jack helps them by putting the words into peoples mouths. Likewise anyone who blames a "film" or "book" should also be listened to shortly before being ignored.

Comments are welcome alongside criticism, although and vulgarity might end up with you being sued by Jack "Mad" Thompson.


Andy

qviri
Posts: 2465
Joined: Tue May 24, 2005 8:22 pm
Location: Berlin
Contact:

Post by qviri » Thu Nov 30, 2006 4:54 am

Yes.

andyb
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Post by andyb » Thu Nov 30, 2006 5:05 am

Just "YES".

I am guessing that the "yes" refers to Jack being totally MAD :P


Andy

AZBrandon
Friend of SPCR
Posts: 867
Joined: Sun Mar 21, 2004 5:47 pm
Location: Phoenix, AZ

Re: Are Video Games Really Evil

Post by AZBrandon » Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:24 am

andyb wrote:I personally like to club baby seals to death, rip peoples heads of, snap bones, kick testicles and of course use explosives and guns to kill as many people as possible.
I thought guns didn't exist in the UK anymore? Didn't they make them illegal, thus causing all guns to vanish from within the borders of the UK?

floffe
Posts: 497
Joined: Mon May 08, 2006 4:36 am
Location: Linköping, Sweden

Post by floffe » Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:32 am

It's happened before, the most recent moral panic being the video movies of the 80's (Texas Chainsaw Massacre, anyone?). Similar opinions were widespread over the radio in the 30's, TV in the 60's and 70's, not to mention the devastating effect music can have on young, impressionable minds (Elvis).

There are a lot of other examples of "current" sentiments dating back a long time: "The horrible youth abusing the language" is first documented in ancient Greece :lol:

jaganath
Posts: 5085
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 6:55 am
Location: UK

Post by jaganath » Thu Nov 30, 2006 8:33 am

I thought guns didn't exist in the UK anymore? Didn't they make them illegal, thus causing all guns to vanish from within the borders of the UK?
You're being ironic, right?

Ralf Hutter
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 8636
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 6:33 am
Location: Sunny SoCal

Post by Ralf Hutter » Fri Dec 01, 2006 9:10 am

jaganath wrote:
I thought guns didn't exist in the UK anymore? Didn't they make them illegal, thus causing all guns to vanish from within the borders of the UK?
You're being ironic, right?
I suspect that he's pointing out that banning guns in the UK has not caused the criminals to give up their guns, and that gun related crime has actually been increasing in the UK.

jaganath
Posts: 5085
Joined: Tue Sep 20, 2005 6:55 am
Location: UK

Post by jaganath » Fri Dec 01, 2006 9:30 am

Ralf Hutter wrote:
jaganath wrote:
I thought guns didn't exist in the UK anymore? Didn't they make them illegal, thus causing all guns to vanish from within the borders of the UK?
You're being ironic, right?
I suspect that he's pointing out that banning guns in the UK has not caused the criminals to give up their guns, and that gun related crime has actually been increasing in the UK.
Guns have never been "banned" in the UK, in the sense that they have never been allowed (except for pheasant shooting etc). Unlike the US there is no constitutional right to bear arms (or even a constitution) so by definition anyone in possession of a firearm is a criminal (except some police officers, for example at Heathrow airport). In general I am suspicious of the argument "look at the UK, guns are illegal yet there is still gun-related crime"; I'm not sure what this is supposed to prove, except that weapons are generally required for the comission of a serious crime?

Ralf Hutter
SPCR Reviewer
Posts: 8636
Joined: Sat Nov 23, 2002 6:33 am
Location: Sunny SoCal

Post by Ralf Hutter » Fri Dec 01, 2006 9:43 am

jaganath wrote:
Ralf Hutter wrote:
jaganath wrote: You're being ironic, right?
I suspect that he's pointing out that banning guns in the UK has not caused the criminals to give up their guns, and that gun related crime has actually been increasing in the UK.
Guns have never been "banned" in the UK, in the sense that they have never been allowed (except for pheasant shooting etc).
Of course they've been allowed. They've just been tightening up on them over the past 80+ years, primarily starting with the famous "Firearms Act of 1920".

History of British Gun Laws

andyb
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Post by andyb » Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:07 am

Whether gun crime has risen or fallen in various parts of the world is largely irrelevent to my point.

Few poeple dissagree with Mad Jack when he says that "young people are impressionable". However the fact remains that those young people should not be allowed to play those games because they are often 18 rated.

So why does Jack try to sue Take2 entertainment for making the GTA series of games, when he isnt trying to sue:

The relatives that let the kids play the games illegally.
The relatives that dont lock their guns up.
The gun makers, hell the bullet makers as well.
The car makers for not making their cars more difficult to steal.

The answer is simple, and comes in 2 parts.

Money..... Take2 are rich, very rich.
Scapegoats, Take2 are a very easy target from Jacks point of view, and lots of guillible people will back him up, including the murderers themselves who feel a little less guilty having passed some of the blame on.

The whole idea is retarded, yet he has many followers.


Andy

Mar.
Posts: 561
Joined: Thu Jan 20, 2005 8:58 pm

Post by Mar. » Fri Dec 01, 2006 10:33 am

Luckily, we Americans don't have such laws. Kids can buy whatever video game they choose - so long as the storekeeper will sell it to them, and depending on the game, that can be a hard storekeeper to find.

croddie
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:52 pm

Post by croddie » Fri Dec 01, 2006 11:25 am

The issue is not as simple as "sex and violence in games and media makes people obscene and violent", but also more complex than "censorship has no effect on sexual and violent behaviour and attitudes".

andyb
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Post by andyb » Fri Dec 01, 2006 4:25 pm

Well put Croddie, I agree with you, and at the end of the day the solution that works for one individual wont work for another, which is where the parents come into it, the parent have to try to raise that child not to be a sadistic arsehole. Its a job, and if they arent up to it then they shouldnt allowed to have the job of raising kids.

Millions and millions of kids play 18 rated games, watch 18 rated movies, and look at whatever they want on the net, but very few people turn out really bad, which proves the point that watching sex and violence dont automatically make you bad.

To a certain extent too much censorship is bad, all of those kids who have been isolated form real life tend to have a bit of a shock when real life catches up with them. Likewise kids who are allowed to do whatever they want whenever they want are far more likely to turn out bad because their life is ruleless and uncontrolled, but this doesnt mean that they are guarunteed to become a bad person.

Lots of people believe in fate, and to a certain extent there is some truth there, but its only to do with genetics in this discussion. Genetics have been proven to affect an individuals behavour as much as their appearance.

As I said its the individual thats really important, and to a degree if someones genetics suggest that they are going to turn out to be a sadistic arsehole, chances are they would become sadistic whatever their upbringing. I dont know how much affect a perfect upbringing might have had on some of the really sick people out there if any.


Andy
Last edited by andyb on Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

nick705
Posts: 1162
Joined: Tue Mar 23, 2004 3:26 pm
Location: UK

Post by nick705 » Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:12 pm

andyb wrote:...which is where the parents come into it, the parent have to to raise that child not to be a sadistic arsehole. Its a job, and if they arent up to it then they shouldnt allowed to have the job of raising kids.
andyb wrote: As I said its the individual thats really important, if someone is going to turn out to be a sadistic arsehole, chances are they would become sadistic whatever their upbringing.
And all within one post... :shock:

andyb
Patron of SPCR
Posts: 3307
Joined: Wed Dec 15, 2004 12:00 pm
Location: Essex, England

Post by andyb » Fri Dec 01, 2006 5:42 pm

Well spotted, that was actually a test :lol:

I think I will re-phrase that.


Andy

croddie
Posts: 541
Joined: Wed Mar 03, 2004 8:52 pm

Post by croddie » Fri Dec 01, 2006 6:46 pm

andyb wrote:Well put Croddie, I agree with you, and at the end of the day the solution that works for one individual wont work for another, which is where the parents come into it, the parent have to to raise that child not to be a sadistic arsehole. Its a job, and if they arent up to it then they shouldnt allowed to have the job of raising kids.
Yes parenting is very important but:
-There are other factors too and if the culture is bad (e.g. media for middle classes, deprived neighbourhoods, even gangs lower down) children may not turn out well even with good parenting.
-Taking children away from parents is not a very nice solution and you have to have a way of bringing them up well away from their parents.
-Even if parenting is bad, other factors are still important and being able to blame parents shouldn't stop us from making use of them to make children grow up better.
Millions and millions of kids play 18 rated games, watch 18 rated movies, and look at whatever they want on the net, but very few people turn out really bad, which proves the point that watching sex and violence dont automatically make you bad.
Oh I think many people do turn out really bad. Whole cultures can turn bad. Perhaps you have been inured to this by sex and violence in movies!

(But if you mean becoming hardened criminals then yes you are right.)
To a certain extent too much censorship is bad, all of those kids who have been isolated form real life tend to have a bit of a shock when real life catches up with them.
And being is shocked is bad is it?
Is it never an appropriate reaction to be shocked?
Also:
Are criminals likely to be easily shocked?
Likewise kids who are allowed to do whatever they want whenever they want are far more likely to turn out bad because their life is ruleless and uncontrolled, but this doesnt mean that they are guarunteed to become a bad person.
Oh yes you can never find a cause that is 100% effective. We can only look at likelihoods when asking what causes criminal behaviour just like almost anything else one can think of.
As I said its the individual thats really important, if someone is going to turn out to be a sadistic arsehole, chances are they would become sadistic whatever their upbringing.
Oh but that is not true. What about for example... the importance of parenting? That takes us full circle doesn't it?

I think all of this is more interesting that talking about popular political causes which are bound to be simplistic and even stupid.

Post Reply