NationStates Jolt Archive

I was reading the Daily Bulletin yesterday and i came upon a weird statement by some game-hating Republican talking about a link between that kid that killed 8 people in the Minn school:

'Local leaders rallied in support of Rep. Joe Baca's new legislation targeting the $11 billion video-game industry and its rating system, using the Minnesota school shooting and baseball's steroid scandal to drive home their point.

"This material must stop infiltrating the minds of our children," the Rialto Democrat told roughly 100 people gathered Tuesday in the quad at Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. Middle School. "How can parents make the right decision if they're not being given the right information?"'

so, i guess the question is, how the hell do they make the link between video games and violence? and why are the parents complaining when it is really their fault?!

whats the quote i read sometime...

"videogames dont create psychos, they just make psychos more creative"

'twas something like that anyway

Video games introduced at an early age, is bad. The children do not comprehend what is happening and naturally develop the inclination for violence. It has a link.

Bad parents will complain anything and anyone in order for them to believe that they arent bad parents.

I've always, since very small, seen violent movies and played violent games. But you know, i always had a mother that would sit beside me and tell me "That is not for real, in reality, people get hurt, alot". And so, i understood from an early age that war is fun, if its a computer game, seeing other being blown away is fun, in a movie. But never, ever in reality.

So i grew to be a law abiding, not very violent (I do tend to kick the shit of my friends, but hey.. its men stuff! :p) individual.

So any asshole that says something like the one you refer in the test, is a complete dimwit, and a failure as a father. Period.


Video games introduced at an early age, is bad. The children do not comprehend what is happening and naturally develop the inclination for violence. It has a link.

See? People dont take the time to teach to their childreen that what happens in a computer game or in a movie isnt real, and shouldnt be replicated.

If your parents didn't do their job, and you're an idiot, then video games and the insides of candy wrappers will melt your brain and make you go postal.

Bad parents will complain anything and anyone in order for them to believe that they arent bad parents.

Exactly. To imply that video games create or suppliment teen violence is pathetic. Sadly, that's the culture we live in...and this is a Republican talking...

Video games introduced at an early age, is bad. The children do not comprehend what is happening and naturally develop the inclination for violence. It has a link.
You have nothing to prove that. I have a billion cases to prove that there is no likn or if there is one it is superficial because the kids were already fucked up

That reminds me, this stupid guy that owns a video game store won't sell me M-Rated games because I'm 17...

If your parents didn't do their job, and you're an idiot, then video games and the insides of candy wrappers will melt your brain and make you go postal.
thats just the thing, though...
the government thinks that all kids under 18 are stupid and unable to control their emotions and feelings... which is exactly the opposite

I believe so, well perhaps not the actually encouraging violence bit, odds are the reason that kid went postal is because the other kids in the school and his area in total where a bunch of bastards to him. It simple logic really but ive never heard any one utter it.

One thing games do, do especially from about 3 years ago, if heavily teach 'killing' theory, think about it the most realistic games to date, mainly war based ones, like call of duty, operation flashpoint or America’s army, actually teach you military theory. i.e small unit tactics, firing positions, bar getting you to do fitness training and field exercises, they effectively train you to be a solider, aka killer.

Don't get me wrong i love these games especially when my future career choice is partisan, but honestly from an objective stance, make you kill, no. It pretty obvious the difference between a life an a character on a game, show you how to yes, the more and more realistic they get the more actual theory they will show people.

Any who its just the American 'liberal' media finding a scapegoat, in reality it was societies fault, but point the figure at the viewer doesn’t get good ratings.

That reminds me, this stupid guy that owns a video game store won't sell me M-Rated games because I'm 17...
whats an M-Rated game?

That reminds me, this stupid guy that owns a video game store won't sell me M-Rated games because I'm 17...

Report him to the better business bureau. 17 is the legal age to buy R-rated movies and M-rated games.

You have nothing to prove that. I have a billion cases to prove that there is no likn or if there is one it is superficial because the kids were already fucked up
My neighbor's brother is very scary. He is 8 and has been playing video games since he was 5. He constantly runs around in the front yard, making gunshot noises, and saying "Your dead, hah", "Your dead, hah".

I make of it as a video game link. I'm sorry if I'm wrong.

Violence is created by anger.
I do not believe that video games are responsible for that.
My 15 year old loves video games, but he is one of the nicest people you would ever meet.
He still hugs me, he loves his brother, he helps people and cares for others.
I don't believe video games create violent teenagers.
I believe that bad life, violent home life, unloving parents, constant teasing and "torture" from peers, things like that, create violent teenagers.

Wait.

What do steroids have to do with all this?

whats an M-Rated game?

One that is considered "Mature"

kinda like an R-rated movie

whats an M-Rated game?
M for mature.

My neighbor's brother is very scary. He is 8 and has been playing video games since he was 5. He constantly runs around in the front yard, making gunshot noises, and saying "Your dead, hah", "Your dead, hah".

I make of it as a video game link. I'm sorry if I'm wrong.

Sorry. I think most boys (american at least) go through their love of guns phase around that age. I'm pretty sure I played with guns all the time (still do to be exact), as well as video games, and I'm no worse off.

I'm 13, and I watch R rated movies and play M games. I started watching/playing those movies/games last year. They do not have an effect on me, as they have been introduced to me at a late age. Te younger, the worst.

Sorry. I think most boys (american at least) go through their love of guns phase around that age. I'm pretty sure I played with guns all the time (still do to be exact), as well as video games, and I'm no worse off.
I never did.

He plays games like "DragonBall Z", "Prince of Persia:warrior Within", etc...

I believ there is a link.

That reminds me, this stupid guy that owns a video game store won't sell me M-Rated games because I'm 17...
its his own life he might be saving!

after all people are delicate (like a flower) up to the moment they pass their 18th birthday

at which point they can be inundated with violence and sexual perversions and go unscathed.

I've played video games for over 20 years now. In that time, I've shot, blown up, incinerated, beaten, electrocuted, preforated, stabbed, strangled, bludgeoned, whipped, melted, and otherwise caused serious and irreparable harm to many things, inanimate, human, and otherwise in an electronic scenario.

I have no criminal record. I can count the number of fights I've been in during my lifetime on my fingers. I think that violence, while sometimes necessary, should remain a last resort in almost any situation. I've never abused animals, beaten a significant other, or knocked any children around. No thoughts of suicide, or murder-suicide have ever crept into my brain. Sure, I've thought "I'd really like to kill that bastard" about people, but I've never actually taken the initiative.

Well, I think that just about debunks the whole "video games cause violence" theory, doesn't it? Maybe they should concentrate more on what was going on, or what wasn't going on, in that boy's life before jumping on an already overloaded bandwagon for a quick answer to something that was probably very compex.

whats an M-Rated game?
whats a g-rated game?
i havent seen one of those... ever...
and the ratings come from that jackass Lieberman after some other kid went postal "because of games."

TO ALL LAZY PARENTS:

You mother f*****s mess up our games every day by not paying attention to your kids! honestly, do you think that GTA:III is going to teach them good life skills? picking up prostitutes and shooting someone isnt an "admirable thing" to do!!! so watch your freakin kids and dont bitch when your innatentiveness and bitching f****s up the system!! Teach your kids right from wrong!! ITS NOT OUR FAULT THAT LITTLE JOHNNY WENT AND BLEW HIMSELF APART!!!

thats just the thing, though...
the government thinks that all kids under 18 are stupid and unable to control their emotions and feelings... which is exactly the opposite

Blame the games, the guns, the black clothes, the goth stuff, the nazis - but never blame the kid who decided to be a fucktard. Never blame the parents (or grandparents) who didn't raise him right. Never blame the asshats in the school who made his life a living hell.

Better to blame some inanimate object, because it's not going to argue.

That's what the government thinks. Stupid, eh?

whats an M-Rated game?
M for Mature. The rating system for games is done usually by ESRB.

Politicians have a tendency of not wanting to blame potential voters. Videogames tend to make a nice scapegoat since most parents aren't into gaming all that much and most children aren't old enough to vote. But the tides will soon be turning as the original gaming generations get older. Mwahahahahahahaha

Sephyr, that is pretty on the money. I mean we've got the first Nintendo generation in adulthood and they're accustomed to games as a form of entertainment. It isn't a "kids' media" anymore. The kids who grew up on Mario are in the market for more growed-up pastimes. So we get Cold Fear and GTA and a bunch of other shit that ain't kid-appropriate. The burden ought to be on the parents, as it is with other media.

And this Baca is just some douche trying to make political hay while the blood's wet (or however the cliche goes). Why on earth would he bring steroids into this, except to touch as many hot button issues as possible in one speech?

Link between violence and video games? - No, i don't think so. If you look at the number of sold copies (i say legal copies, the number of people who played the games can be assumed to be ten times higher :D ) of first-person shooters and look at the number of school massacres, a connection seems highly unlikely, IMHO.

My neighbor's brother is very scary. He is 8 and has been playing video games since he was 5. He constantly runs around in the front yard, making gunshot noises, and saying "Your dead, hah", "Your dead, hah".

I make of it as a video game link. I'm sorry if I'm wrong.
Kids have been doing that since before video games existed.

Kids have been doing that since before video games existed.

Yes, I remember running around with sticks with other boys, pointing them at each other and saying, "bang, you're dead".

Yes, I remember running around with sticks with other boys, pointing them at each other and saying, "bang, you're dead".
I never did thta. I must be weird.

Kids have been doing that since before video games existed.
Since videogames came around I've been seeing a lot less of this behavior though. :(

Now if you'll excuse me
*runs outside making gunshot noises*
:mp5:

TO ALL LAZY PARENTS:

You mother f*****s mess up our games every day by not paying attention to your kids! honestly, do you think that GTA:III is going to teach them good life skills? picking up prostitutes and shooting someone isnt an "admirable thing" to do!!! so watch your freakin kids and dont bitch when your innatentiveness and bitching f****s up the system!! Teach your kids right from wrong!! ITS NOT OUR FAULT THAT LITTLE JOHNNY WENT AND BLEW HIMSELF APART!!!

Woooaaah! Don't be dissing GTA. I got GTA: III, Vice City, and I'm waiting my ass off for San Andreas.

It is not the players of FPS games you have to worry about. They are only led to go shoot a few people. It is the players of strategy games like civ that are the problem. They are used to and inured to killing off millions of people at a time with nukes or biowarfare etc. :eek:
Edit:
I never did thta. I must be weird.
Yep.

Woooaaah! Don't be dissing GTA. I got GTA: III, Vice City, and I'm waiting my ass off for San Andreas.
GTA is a great game. It's coming for XBOX soon. that's when I get it.

I'm a Republican and a gamer, but I doubt that violent games lead to violence, to me, the games like GTA or the wrestling or shooter games are an outlet for testosterone or stress but, I will say this, if the person is in a violent enviroment, with or without the games, they will likely end up violent anyways, so it likely depends upon the psyche of the person whether they will be provoked into violence from video games.

It is not the players of FPS games you have to worry about. They are only led to go shoot a few people. It is the players of strategy games like civ that are the problem. They are used to and inured to killing off millions of people at a time with nukes or biowarfare etc. :eek:
I like using nukes in Empire earth on people who are still in the Stone Age. :)

Woooaaah! Don't be dissing GTA. I got GTA: III, Vice City, and I'm waiting my ass off for San Andreas.

He's not dissing GTA. He's just pointing out that just becomes it comes on a CD and fits in an XBox, it ain't kid-appropriate. I think it's a great game, but at the same time, I know Tommy Vercetti is not a role model. Six year olds might not make this distinction w/o a little parental intervention.

Since videogames came around I've been seeing a lot less of this behavior though. :(

Now if you'll excuse me
*runs outside making gunshot noises*
:mp5:
Yeah, throw away that game and buy your sun a cap gun

Btw, i think the school massacre 'epedemic' in the US rather comes from the way-too-soft laws on firearms in the US. Similar events happened in other countries, but to a much lesser degree due to stricter laws on firearms.

However, stricter firearm laws in the US seem to be unlikely, thanks to a certain lobby who claims that they have 'the right to possess a weapon'. :rolleyes:

has anyone seen "Bowling for Columbine'?

See my reply to the Gun=Evil thread and you will see where I stand on this. As a review I think this is chicken shit. This is just another attempt to shift the blame off of those who should be blamed and put on a "evil" influence. So much for people being responcible for thier actions.

Btw, i think the school massacre 'epedemic' in the US rather comes from the way-too-soft laws on firearms in the US. Similar events happened in other countries, but to a much lesser degree due to stricter laws on firearms.

However, stricter firearm laws in the US seem to be unlikely, thanks to a certain lobby who claims that they have 'the right to possess a weapon'. :rolleyes:
Umm, let me find a quote. It's from a fairly centrist document. Its called: The Constitution. I'll even bold it.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Well, would you look at that? It says I do have a right. Funny.

Yeah, throw away that game and buy your sun a cap gun

My daughter has her own Remington 700 (in 270 Winchester), and a CZ 452 rimfire rifle.

My oldest son has a CZ 452 trainer (a shorter, smaller version of the same rifle my daughter has).

The youngest son is still too small to shoot.

I don't have toy guns in my house. I teach my children that video games are games, and guns in real life are always real. I teach them that there are appropriate uses for real guns - and that's the way they should be used.

Teach your children. Know what's going on in their lives - bullying and teasing is everywhere. If your children don't trust you, and you haven't been involved in their lives, then you'll be to blame when something goes wrong.

I've played Video Games since I was two. First game I ever played was Maniac Mansion, hell, that's actually how I learned to read. I memorized the text by having my mom/dad/whatever read it to me, and I played it a lot..

I am now 15, I am -deathly- afraid of actual guns...
Blood doesn't really effect me, though.

But... if there is anything relating to internal organs (brain, heart, liver, ect), I get faint. Even if it's text... I hear something about a surgery on the heart, and I get woozy XP

Not to mention that I have an extreme dislike of violent people, and am easily frightened by thus. My dad was a violent person as I was growing up, but nothing horrible... Hell, I've been known to break up fights in my school... *chuckles a bit*. I hate fighting, I hate violence...

But I love these games to death -- But, I'm also not just a fan of games with big explosions and huge gore... I know there are games that are -just- that, with boring gameplay.

And.. I never went through that "Bang, you're dead" phase, but my Little cousin (Currently 5, I think) is in that phase. He says he wants to be an army man when he grows up, and I had asked him why. He said something like "because I want to shoot the bad guys, before they shoot us" o.O

If anything, I'd be worried over brainwashing via videogames. Such as the "America's Army" game (which I've been playing a lot recently, mind you XD). This game actually has you study and take written tests to be able to be a medic, special forces, ect. You have to get a certain score in shooting before you can actually play, as well. Oh yes, and this game is made by the American Military.

Well, My view is pretty simple. Video games are not a direct cause of voilence ever. They make a nice skamgoat for the religious right wing people who run the U.S.. That said, the rating system could use some work. The ratings are voluntary, and many people don't even know what they mean. Not to mention that in many places, a 5 year old kid can walk into a store and buy GTA 3 legaly. I figgure they should make the system more like what we have for movies, and make it maniditory.

Umm, let me find a quote. It's from a fairly centrist document. Its called: The Constitution. I'll even bold it.
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Well, would you look at that? It says I do have a right. Funny.

Just a couple of questions: What is a well regulated militia? and Were the teenagers who shot people in the schools part of this well regulated militia?

Ooops. I bolded a different bit.

Just a couple of questions: What is a well regulated militia? and Were the teenagers who shot people in the schools part of this well regulated militia?

Ooops. I bolded a different bit.
Did you actually see the part where it said " The Right of the people to keep and bear arms? Or did you leave that out?
I'm not saying that teenagers should have guns. And definatly not at school. But maybe there were other factors, besides the fact that they somehow got hold of a gun.

Did you actually see the part where it said " The Right of the people to keep and bear arms? Or did you leave that out?
I'm not saying that teenagers should have guns. And definatly not at school. But maybe there were other factors, besides the fact that they somehow got hold of a gun.

I saw it, I copied it, I posted it. I was asking a different question. What is a well regulated militia?

The old chestnut of rights has gone backwards and forwards so many times that it loks like a shuttle on a loom. I was curious as to the other part of trhe constitution statememt. The one that everyone seems to ignore.

Just a couple of questions: What is a well regulated militia? and Were the teenagers who shot people in the schools part of this well regulated militia?

Ooops. I bolded a different bit.

We really should leave the 2nd Amendment out of this.

1. His grandfather (his legal guardian) was a tribal policeman.
2. There were several police guns in his grandfather's possession, along with ammunition. Police guns. For a policeman.
3. The kid killed his grandfather with one of the guns, killed the grandmother, picked up the other guns, and took the police car to school.
4. Opened fire on the unarmed school security guard at the metal detectors.

You'll notice that no law that restricts guns to police only would have stopped this.
The metal detectors didn't stop this.
The security guard didn't stop this.

Heck, even more police wouldn't have stopped this. In a society with one policeman for every potential offender (his grandfather was a policeman living with him), and a security guard to stop him at the door, one wonders how many police would fix anything.

It is not the players of FPS games you have to worry about. They are only led to go shoot a few people. It is the players of strategy games like civ that are the problem. They are used to and inured to killing off millions of people at a time with nukes or biowarfare etc.


In an FPS, you look down the berral of a gun, at something representing another person, and shoot them to death. In a TBS ( turn based stratdgy), you give an order for one bit-map to fight another one. If you use a nuke, you remove NUMBERS from the screen, not body parts. Although I beleave neither causes violence on it's own, ever, I'd have to say that if Ihad to choose which was more likly to do so, it wouldn't be one that removed a number.

Did you actually see the part where it said " The Right of the people to keep and bear arms? Or did you leave that out?
I'm not saying that teenagers should have guns. And definatly not at school. But maybe there were other factors, besides the fact that they somehow got hold of a gun.

And besides that, do you think that people who do the most harm to us would actually try to get a firearm legally? Come on, yeah, we should have strict laws and regualtion, but completely outlawing firearms would create a black market of weapons that we, the law-abidinig citizenry, wouldn't be able to get to, and if you think the police forces are inadequate now, take one of the best ways to protect ourselves from the citizens, and see how much crime is commtited then.

I saw it, I copied it, I posted it. I was asking a different question. What is a well regulated militia?

The old chestnut of rights has gone backwards and forwards so many times that it loks like a shuttle on a loom. I was curious as to the other part of trhe constitution statememt. The one that everyone seems to ignore.
My last saying on this.
The well regulated militia is the National Guard. I'd dig up a thread talking specifically about that, but I'm feeling a litte lazy now.

Psycos just blame thier violence on video games so crazy people will think it isn't their fault and find something new to blame things on.
I'm not saying that I like games where you go around mindlessly killing everything in sight leaving behind oceans of blood, as matter of fact I really don't think it's nessecary for games like that to exist. It's just that shooting someone in the virtual world isn't going to make you unable to differentiate between the real world and video games. That is unless you were criminally insane to begin with in which case you would kill people anyways.

My last saying on this.
The well regulated militia is the National Guard. I'd dig up a thread talking specifically about that, but I'm feeling a litte lazy now.

National Guard is one thing. Crazy 'shotgun-militias' are another. And America is much better off without the latter one. :p

My last saying on this.
The well regulated militia is the National Guard. I'd dig up a thread talking specifically about that, but I'm feeling a litte lazy now.

Thank you, that is all I wanted to know.

I agree with Whispering Legs. This is not a 2nd ammendment discussion.

Thank you, that is all I wanted to know.

I agree with Whispering Legs. This is not a 2nd ammendment discussion.
yes, it is...
the 2nd amendment guarantees the right of the citizens to own and upkeep firearms. the kid that did all of this got his gun from a law-abiding (and enforcing) citizen and killed a whole bunch of students.
the first part of the amendment guarantees the citizens ownership... the second part gives the reason why
...
though guns are a necessity in society. the pacifist approach of "no guns-no death" is bullshit. we ban the sale of pot, yet pot is one of the most abused illegal substances in america. this also happened with the prohibition in the 20s. the ban of something inevitably leads to MORE of that sort of substance/item used.

He's not dissing GTA. He's just pointing out that just becomes it comes on a CD and fits in an XBox, it ain't kid-appropriate. I think it's a great game, but at the same time, I know Tommy Vercetti is not a role model. Six year olds might not make this distinction w/o a little parental intervention.
yeah, well, the game wasnt intended for the use of anyone 17 or under...
not even a six year old...
remember how those two kids shot at the freeway with rifles and killed motorists cuz "they saw it on GTA?" well, guess what?

THIS INCIDENT MAY VERY WELL SET THE PRECEDENT FOR THE BANNING OF ALL M-RATED GAMES IN AMERICA!!!

the only other country (off-hand) that has ever done this is Australia.

I found an article a little while back about Film Violence which basically summed up how I feel. I'll look for the link but I'll copy and paste for now:

Three teenagers who acted out a scene from the Quentin Tarantino film Reservoir Dogs, trying to cut off the ear of a 15-year-old friend before beating, stamping and stabbing him to death, were ordered to be detained at Her Majesty's pleasure. Mr Justice Penry-Davey, lifted an order which had prevented the three from being named. Allan Bentley and Mark McKeefrey, both 15 at the time, and Graham Neary, 16, denied murdering Michael Moss.
The court was told that they lured Michael to playing fields in Litherland, Merseyside, one night in November 1999 where they stripped him and subjected him to torture for more than two hours. Michael was repeatedly slashed with a broken vodka bottle and one boy jumped on his head from a playground climbing frame. The attacks were such that Michael suffered a separation of two vertebrae in his neck. Bentley had sung a song from the film - Stuck in the Middle With You, by Stealer's Wheel - as he poured cider on the dying boy's wounds.

The killing is the second violent case linked to Reservoir Dogs - twice shown on Channel 4. In May, Steven Craig, was jailed for life after setting girlfriend Jacqueline Kirk on fire. A Bristol jury heard he watched the same infamous scene, telling her: "That's you being tortured and I'm the guy singing and dancing." The question we are now asking ourselves is did the film Reservoir Dogs cause these people to commit these acts of violence or were they violent to start with and simply used the film as a source of ideas.If they did use the film as a source, is that enough to get it banned?

To say that violent films lead to a violent society is taking a narrow view and not looking at the wider picture. Are we all so easily lead that we can be coerced into committing a crime of unspeakable violence by simply watching a movie? Or are these people violent to start with and the film acts as a trigger to the violence that is already inside of them? If this is the case then what about acts of violence that took place before we had such horrible films. Is murder a modern phenomenon? Was Genghis Khan a great Quentin Tarantino fan? The bottom line is we have always had murderers and rapists, even before we had the movies or the Internet.

Back in the good old days of 1974 Anthony Barbaro, a 17-year-old honour student in Olean, New York, broke into his high school and set a few fires. He then holed up in a room on the third floor with his rifle to shoot people as they were drawn near by all the excitement. He managed to kill three people and injure 11 before surrendering. In January 1979 a more famous adolescent, 16-year-old Brenda Spencer, took her new rifle, a Christmas gift, and opened fire on the elementary school across the street from her San Diego home. She managed to kill the school principle and the janitor, nine children and a policeman were also injured. "I just did it for the fun of it. I just don't like Mondays."

But the savagery of our children does not stop with guns. Joseph Ruben's film Money Train was implicated in the New York trend of squirting lighter fluid over subway ticket sellers and setting them alight. But this is far from a new idea. In Rochester, New York, in 1930 three boys, all under 11, came across a drunk unconscious in the woods. After tying his feet to a tree they dowsed him in petrol and set him alight. After they were arrested they explained that they had done it "just for fun."

No matter how much you shelter them from the influences of violent media, nothing compares to the imagination of a child. If those three boys hadn't watched Reservoir Dogs what's to say that they wouldn't have seen a large stone lying nearby and used that to hit their victim over the head, or seen a river and held him under the water. If we take the easy route and blame Hollywood for every murder that takes place involving a young murderer then are we not ignoring one very important fact; parental education. Are the parents completely blameless? Is it not the duty of every parent to instil in their child the difference between right and wrong? Are we not passing the buck somewhat when we say that little Johnny would never have committed such an atrocity if he hadn't watched Childsplay?

Children do have an imagination and they don't need Hollywood to give them ideas. Children derive more influence from their parents than they do from electronic media so it is the job of the parent to raise their child to understand what is right and what is wrong, and what is acceptable behaviour and what is anti-social. Of all the millions who have seen Reservoir Dogs how many have gone out and committed a crime? A percentage so minute that it becomes almost impossible to calculate.

EDIT: I realise this is about films and not games but it's in the same area and the arguments are still relevant.

I found an article a little while back about Film Violence which basically summed up how I feel. I'll look for the link but I'll copy and paste for now:

Three teenagers who acted out a scene from the Quentin Tarantino film Reservoir Dogs, trying to cut off the ear of a 15-year-old friend before beating, stamping and stabbing him to death, were ordered to be detained at Her Majesty's pleasure. Mr Justice Penry-Davey, lifted an order which had prevented the three from being named. Allan Bentley and Mark McKeefrey, both 15 at the time, and Graham Neary, 16, denied murdering Michael Moss.
The court was told that they lured Michael to playing fields in Litherland, Merseyside, one night in November 1999 where they stripped him and subjected him to torture for more than two hours. Michael was repeatedly slashed with a broken vodka bottle and one boy jumped on his head from a playground climbing frame. The attacks were such that Michael suffered a separation of two vertebrae in his neck. Bentley had sung a song from the film - Stuck in the Middle With You, by Stealer's Wheel - as he poured cider on the dying boy's wounds.

The killing is the second violent case linked to Reservoir Dogs - twice shown on Channel 4. In May, Steven Craig, was jailed for life after setting girlfriend Jacqueline Kirk on fire. A Bristol jury heard he watched the same infamous scene, telling her: "That's you being tortured and I'm the guy singing and dancing." The question we are now asking ourselves is did the film Reservoir Dogs cause these people to commit these acts of violence or were they violent to start with and simply used the film as a source of ideas.If they did use the film as a source, is that enough to get it banned?

To say that violent films lead to a violent society is taking a narrow view and not looking at the wider picture. Are we all so easily lead that we can be coerced into committing a crime of unspeakable violence by simply watching a movie? Or are these people violent to start with and the film acts as a trigger to the violence that is already inside of them? If this is the case then what about acts of violence that took place before we had such horrible films. Is murder a modern phenomenon? Was Genghis Khan a great Quentin Tarantino fan? The bottom line is we have always had murderers and rapists, even before we had the movies or the Internet.

Back in the good old days of 1974 Anthony Barbaro, a 17-year-old honour student in Olean, New York, broke into his high school and set a few fires. He then holed up in a room on the third floor with his rifle to shoot people as they were drawn near by all the excitement. He managed to kill three people and injure 11 before surrendering. In January 1979 a more famous adolescent, 16-year-old Brenda Spencer, took her new rifle, a Christmas gift, and opened fire on the elementary school across the street from her San Diego home. She managed to kill the school principle and the janitor, nine children and a policeman were also injured. "I just did it for the fun of it. I just don't like Mondays."

But the savagery of our children does not stop with guns. Joseph Ruben's film Money Train was implicated in the New York trend of squirting lighter fluid over subway ticket sellers and setting them alight. But this is far from a new idea. In Rochester, New York, in 1930 three boys, all under 11, came across a drunk unconscious in the woods. After tying his feet to a tree they dowsed him in petrol and set him alight. After they were arrested they explained that they had done it "just for fun."

No matter how much you shelter them from the influences of violent media, nothing compares to the imagination of a child. If those three boys hadn't watched Reservoir Dogs what's to say that they wouldn't have seen a large stone lying nearby and used that to hit their victim over the head, or seen a river and held him under the water. If we take the easy route and blame Hollywood for every murder that takes place involving a young murderer then are we not ignoring one very important fact; parental education. Are the parents completely blameless? Is it not the duty of every parent to instil in their child the difference between right and wrong? Are we not passing the buck somewhat when we say that little Johnny would never have committed such an atrocity if he hadn't watched Childsplay?

Children do have an imagination and they don't need Hollywood to give them ideas. Children derive more influence from their parents than they do from electronic media so it is the job of the parent to raise their child to understand what is right and what is wrong, and what is acceptable behaviour and what is anti-social. Of all the millions who have seen Reservoir Dogs how many have gone out and committed a crime? A percentage so minute that it becomes almost impossible to calculate.

EDIT: I realise this is about films and not games but it's in the same area and the arguments are still relevant.
its too sad that this is true....
parents are hardly blamed for anything that a kid does

"I just did it for the fun of it. I just don't like Mondays."Clearly fun and Mondays are to blame and they must be banned, now.

I agree with everyone else who's said it, the parents are the problem, not the games.

As I'm feeling lazy at the moment, I'll simply offer up a good argument that Roger Ebert wrote. This is excerpted from his review of the movie "Elephant." Granted, this also talks about movies rather than video games, but I think the logic is the same in either case.

Van Sant seems to believe there are no reasons for Columbine and no remedies to prevent senseless violence from happening again. Many viewers will leave this film as unsatisfied and angry as Variety's Todd McCarthy, who wrote after it won the Golden Palm at Cannes 2003 that it was "pointless at best and irresponsible at worst." I think its responsibility comes precisely in its refusal to provide a point.

Let me tell you a story. The day after Columbine, I was interviewed for the Tom Brokaw news program. The reporter had been assigned a theory and was seeking sound bites to support it. "Wouldn't you say," she asked, "that killings like this are influenced by violent movies?" No, I said, I wouldn't say that. "But what about 'Basketball Diaries'?" she asked. "Doesn't that have a scene of a boy walking into a school with a machine gun?" The obscure 1995 Leonardo Di Caprio movie did indeed have a brief fantasy scene of that nature, I said, but the movie failed at the box office (it grossed only $2.5 million), and it's unlikely the Columbine killers saw it.

The reporter looked disappointed, so I offered her my theory. "Events like this," I said, "if they are influenced by anything, are influenced by news programs like your own. When an unbalanced kid walks into a school and starts shooting, it becomes a major media event. Cable news drops ordinary programming and goes around the clock with it. The story is assigned a logo and a theme song; these two kids were packaged as the Trench Coat Mafia. The message is clear to other disturbed kids around the country: If I shoot up my school, I can be famous. The TV will talk about nothing else but me. Experts will try to figure out what I was thinking. The kids and teachers at school will see they shouldn't have messed with me. I'll go out in a blaze of glory."

In short, I said, events like Columbine are influenced far less by violent movies than by CNN, the NBC Nightly News and all the other news media, who glorify the killers in the guise of "explaining" them. I commended the policy at the Sun-Times, where our editor said the paper would no longer feature school killings on Page 1. The reporter thanked me and turned off the camera. Of course the interview was never used. They found plenty of talking heads to condemn violent movies, and everybody was happy.

My neighbor's brother is very scary. He is 8 and has been playing video games since he was 5. He constantly runs around in the front yard, making gunshot noises, and saying "Your dead, hah", "Your dead, hah".

I make of it as a video game link. I'm sorry if I'm wrong.


HAH HAH HAHHAH and also HAH I am 17 years old and have played video games on every system from atari onward and I have heard this argument since I was 10 and it's still about as specious as the argument for gun control.

It is kinda funny how republicans refuse to give up guns, yet they don't like video games with guns in them. Shouldn't they be happy that they are teaching kids the right mindset to be in while shooting somebody? :p I'm confused :confused:

Getting rid of video games or guns wouldn't solve anything if ya ask me.

Nobody ever said politicians were smart.

Originally Posted by Heiligkeit
Video games introduced at an early age, is bad. The children do not comprehend what is happening and naturally develop the inclination for violence. It has a link

I've been playing video games since I was like two. But I'm not a confrontational person. I could tell you an effective military strategy. Or the proper formation of a military battalion. And I can fire a gun, and I've gotten a few bullseyes using unsighted handguns. But I learn strategy and battalion formation from reading and history. And I learn how to shoot a gun by proper training. And I love violent games, especially games like Red Faction, Call of Duty, Ghost Recon, and Rainbow Six. But I know that they are just games. I think the reason kids snap and shoot is due to constant torture by peers, destructive minds, and lack of educational structure.

And also, the kid from the Minneosota shooting was visiting Neo-Nazi websites. And was an Anti-Semite. And his peers also noted of his destructive behavior.

I enjoy video games, but time after time credible studies have shown that violent videogames and television cause or increase violent behavior. This does not mean that it causes society to become more violent. Violence has occured long before television and even electricity was even thought of. I do not belive that violence on TV causes a substantial increase in violence (paticularly shootings) in society. You can however elicit short term violent behavior by priming people.

i love how many of the people who feel that there is a link are the ones who believe that taking your kid out hunting if a fatherly thing to do.


just a thought