HOME | DD

GratefulReflex In reply to SlackEye [2019-08-14 03:16:46 +0000 UTC]

I agree....now to go find some eye bleach.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

aroteer-jughashvili In reply to zoommerfish [2019-09-07 17:36:58 +0000 UTC]

Violent juvenile crime in the United States has been declining as violent video game popularity has increased. The arrest rate for juvenile murders has fallen 71.9% between 1995 and 2008. The arrest rate for all juvenile violent crimes has declined 49.3%. In this same period, video game sales have more than quadrupled.From that exact page.
Even better:
A causal link between violent video games and violent behavior has not been proven. [34 ] Many studies suffer from design flaws and use unreliable measures of violence and aggression such as noise blast tests. Thoughts about aggression have been confused with aggressive behavior, and there is a lack of studies that follow children over long periods of time.And
A 2004 US Secret Service review of previous school-based attacks found that one-eighth of attackers exhibited an interest in violent video games, less than the rate of interest attackers showed in violent movies, books, and violence in their own writings. The report did not find a relationship between playing violent video games and school shootings. [35 ]

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

zoommerfish In reply to aroteer-jughashvili [2019-09-08 20:40:17 +0000 UTC]

You also ignored several other sources that also directly contradict those statements. You do realize why I posted that source specifically right? They have both sides of the argument, with studies.

>"Violent juvenile crime in the United States has been declining as violent video game popularity has increased."
Besides my own skepticism of this in the face of ever increasing shoootings I'll point out that correlation is not the same as causation. I've also noted that this drop of arrests and 'violence' is in the face of the Nixon/Reagan War on Drugs crackdown winding down.
>"A causal link between violent video games and violent behavior has not been proven."
The conclusion of 1 study that claims that others are flawed but is as flawed as they are in making such a conclusion...
>"one-eighth of attackers exhibited an interest in violent video games, less than the rate of interest attackers showed in violent movies, books, and violence in their own writings."
Because Video-games as a medium is far younger than any of those mentioned and in 2008 there was far more violent movies and books than videogames, and in higher definition.

Conclusion, you have not really disputed my point, ignored at least 15 different excerpts specifically citing video-games being linked to violence over several years and in separate studies, and have brought nothing new to an month-old post, as the soviet anecdote goes "Are you going to the store?" "NO! I'm going to the store!"

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

romuald244 In reply to zoommerfish [2019-09-19 20:56:26 +0000 UTC]

In a video game, you are the one who does the violence, instead of movie and books where you watch people doing it. Of course violent people will be more attracted to that. They dont want to watch violence, they want to do it themselves, these is their exhutory . This prooves absolutely nothing on the effect to the average player, who plays because it's fun
It's like saying people who go to the church are more likely to be crazy fanatics nutjob than people that dont, or that people who own gun are more likely to kill people than the people that dont. This is true in data, but it's reverse logic to assume church make fanatics, and guns make killer because of that.
People who wants to kill buy guns, they dont buy a gun, and then feel the urgent need to go outisde and kill people.
Crazy fanatics go to the places where their crazyness will be encouraged.
Sorry for my potato english, have a nice day

👍: 0 ⏩: 0