Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Hans Ludwig

Supreme Court Strikes Rule Banning Violent Video Game Sale to Kids

Recommended Posts

I think kids of that age group should be outside playing coop with a tennis ball, riding their bikes and stealing apples and all that great stuff kids do... Guess I'm getting old, or maybe slightly hypocritical as I wasted lots of 20s on spacies :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My Opinion:

Games are art! They should be protected from censorship! Still its not OK to sell them to anyone, because people are not alike. They are different.

Example: Once I was in my local Hardware and Games shop, called Saturn. I bought something, paid for it and became witness of the following conversation between a mentally handicapped male (20-25 Years old) and the cashier while I packed my Stuff in my Bag.

He approaches the cashier with Doom 3 in his Hands, this title must not be sold to people younger then 18 in germany.

He: This is a shooter right?

She: Yes

He: Is ther much blood in it?

She: (Looks at the rating) Yeah, I think so..

He: I like it if there is much blood, I like to shoot and kill stuff, I like blood

(awkward look on the cashiers and on my face)

He bought the game and I really wish to never meet that person again. First time in my life that I thought positive of the strict gun laws in germany.

That was cleary a person such games shouldn´t be sold to.

My original Point is that games don´t make people run amok (@Vilas, read carefully)

People usually run amok because they can´t stand their own life anymore, people that would also run amok without ever playing a violent game (You know, ther was murder before video games were popular). They have mental Problems.

I played some very violent games when I was young. One of my first games was "Return to castle Wolfenstein" (damn those Zombies were scary!) I played it at the age of 14. I played alot of other violent games, but still I didn´t run amok. I´m a very peacefull person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but also read what i told before (and few times more on this forum)

so i will just write it again to avoid loosing it in block of sentences:

- law is always made because of 1-5% of not responsible people who can destroy life of rest (95-99%) if have given such power (allowance)

you don't make law restriction for 90%, you do it for 1-5%

if you will not do it, this 1-5% will spoil and damage life of rest (guns, drugs, alcohol driving etc.)

i am responsible, you are, 90% are and so what if sumbachinegun will get to hand of addicted gamer at age of 12 who sit whole day playing SoF3 instead gluing models of jets ?

you do prevention in law not for majority, for small minority ( i know cause i also work in law, we also do things which are restrictions against fraud, you would not fraud, 90% here would not fraud, but we must do things to avoid 5% of society against possibility to fraud 95% of society using some kind of equipment)

do 90% of normal, responsible, sane suffer from restrictions ? yes

but without restrictions they would suffer more because of 1-5% of morons , cycos, retards, thieves , frauds, liars... etc.

when you do law - you cannot think about "normal person" , you must "prevent" against worst person

for normal people there is no need for bans, police, courts, jails

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are right about that, I was just angry because of your "all amok runs happen because of violent games attitude".

And should those 90% of the population really have to suffer because of those 10%?

I made my point clear, I don´t want some games beeing sold to anyone, but still I think that every person deserves the right to judge by himself if those games are good for him or not.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
And should those 90% of the population really have to suffer because of those 10%?

or even 95 because of 5 % or maybe 99% because of 1 %

yes, there is no other way

how can you prevent them ?

you don't have right to make abortion of living kid who acts the way showing he will be psyhopatic in life

you must do all to prevent him geting any anger-violence-power tool in hand

there is no other way in law, you cannot rely on people's responsibilty

law must be ready for worst case

law must have joker in pocket to show it when needed

western "freedom" do not allow to get rid of "psychopats" or "sociopaths" so you must construct bans such way - to avoid their growth and going deeper into mental problems

but still I think that every person deserves the right to judge by himself if those games are good for him or not

ask those from school violence act "would you like to have M249 instead of single shot black powder pistol and knife" ? all would say "yeaaa, awsum, daamn, blood, kill , more kills"

10, 12 y.o. kid cannot decide , he is too young, his parents , psychologists, doctors, people who work in police should decide , not kid

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn´t matter if he gets an

anger-violence-power tool
in hand, If he is mentaly unstable (provided that every one that runs amok is mentaly ill), he doesn´t need Video games to make him kill somebody.

You can´t kill anybody with a Video Game. Gun laws? OK, they are really needed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
you give one example, i can list example of kids who commit school shootings and were addicted gammers, i can list some more acts commited by game addicted kids, i know teenagers who sit all time by shooting games and become very agressive to anyone around trying to force their will

How do you explain pre-game killings/shootings? IMO games do not cause it, those kids that are like that anyway are drawn to it in the same way they're drawn to the guns they'll eventually use. It's a symptom, not a cause, and most kids play games just fine without any nutcase-like effects :)

Anyway, this is getting to be one of those OT things where no-one agrees or changes their opinions :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it is one of important factors, not main cause (the cause is made from several factors which meet together in one person)

if you take away factor, you might prevent act from being commited (like in chemical mixture, which will not work , if one element is missing)

majority of angry addicted kids would be technical nerds if you would give them CAD or ProEngineer instead of Doom3

addictive person will be addicted anyway, just replace alcohol, games, guns by science, you will have genious hard working engineer or best modellers or whatever kind of nerd (including guy who builds amplifiers and loudspeakers instead of drinking and being violent )

just replace one element in equation to have other result

How do you explain pre-game killings/shootings?

how about if i say it was 3-5 times less before ? how about 1984 and 2004 criminal stats in countries from this side of steel curtain ?

2 teenagers who run with knife to stab policeman before 1989 ? joke ? but now ? not joke

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Tonci87

Thanks, already thought I'm the only one seeing it like that :D

@Katipo66

Agreed, it's a shame really. I remember when I used to sneak up on my neighbours cherry tree and grab some cherries, and he would sneak up on me (@ 70 years), and go "WhatAreYouDoingUpThere!GrabbingCherriesAreWe!!!" in a low pitch voice (and he spoke fast while doing that, so the lack of spaces).

Then he started laughing seeing my face up in the tree, completely buff :D

Well, it ended with him giving me a bucket, and me harvesting some cherries for me, and another bucket for him :D

Ahh nice times, and nice people.

@vilas

I wasn't as lucky to have "clubs" that teach you something around. We learned from our elders, from neighbours etc. but pretty much, yeah, we did repair our mountain-bikes, learned our share of house-building, metal works etc. it were nice times.

Also, yeah, like I said, and like you said, kids these days are rude, and have no respect of anything whatsoever. And while I agree that violent games don't help such kids, I cannot and will not agree that it's the games causing the problems in the first place.

Also, don't know how you folks in Poland train martial arts, but let me tell you how it worked for us. If your trainer found out we were in a fight, no matter who started it, we got a fight with him..which is to say...not nice. If he found out that we started a fight...well...never happened to me, but as his words were "it will not be a good day for you"

I don't think I need to point out, that martial arts are for training the body, and the mind, and not about violent fighting.

As I see it, in the ages between 0-8 parents and family are very important, and a kid has no idea what fiction is and what reality is. So, no violent games for them, from there till 12, I don't think kids should be treated quite as foam-coated (e.g. shielded) from the world, let them see what it is, how it looks etc. but keep a close eye on 'em.

Now from there it really depends. I did a whole lot of non-Virtual activities, from martial arts training to mountain biking, by the age of 14 I was allowed to drive a bulldozer, learned lock-picking from a police officer, and from there it just went on. So yeah, a lot of thing to do. But then there are those long winter days, and nights, when my parents wanted me to "learn for school", which of course I didn't do, rather I played IL-2 over the internet, being part of a team, a group, a clan, playing a game with so many people, most of them mature, and just having a blast got me through those months. And I learned a lot of stuff there, respect for elders (well I had that before...but still), working in a group, working towards the greater good (mission), leading a squad even.

So, for me this was a good point and it's why I advocate games, as with the right people, even seemingly violent games turn into something more, something which isn't just about violence, but about much more then that.

Let's take for example ArmA (didn't see that coming, now did you? :P ). It's a game about warfare, about violence, and it's shown pretty blunt. But I think you all will agree, that when we look past what is on the screen, and into the part which we see when playing, it's about much more. You have a role to play, and your team counts on that, you have a squad to lead, and loosing them feels sad, and wrong. AND not to forget, once you are online, you're part of a mature community, working within it, and often you have to suck-it-up for the community, and just not say something what you think, because it would make the community look bad, for example, when explaining what arma is all about to non-players, you have to take care not to call someone a SOB or something like that.

One of the points I want to stress here, is just that I don't think that it's the violence per-se that is a problem, since being with the right people even in "violent" games or "acts" (Martial Arts training/tournaments) will make it a whole different thing.

Just to make sure I delivered my point right: It's not the violence per-se which is a problem, it's our look on it, and this look on it is being influenced heavily with the world we surround us with (e.g. the folks around us.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@nethawk - refresh page, you missed my post about "factors" and combination of them in person

factor is not equal "the cause"

factor is "element which can avoid or can make something happen"

taking away "one element" you minimize probablity of act (and than you can say "we couldn't do more")

if you can lower victims number from 50 to 40 by banning something for 10000 people, well, ask families of those 10 people "would you like your relative to live today" < for me it is worthy, even if 10000 will be limited in something

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The U.S. Supreme Court (judicial) is not the state of California (state legislator). Therefore, there is no contradiction.

Ah sorry, should probably have been more clear, in the PDF of the Court's ruling, there are numerous references to California's attempt at regulation being well intended and also that rating systems are there for a reason (eg. 18 rated games are for 18 years olds and up) but there shouldn't be regulation to limit or ban minors from such games.

So, out of interest, what limits are there for a say, 13 year old buying a game with a higher age rating in the US? Most countries in Europe at least, just want some ID to prove they are the same age as the rating on the case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@vilas

took me some time to write it :P

Anyway, I've read through what I missed, and while you have a bit of a point you're neglecting quite a few others. For instance, the idea of interchanging one addiction with another isn't new, nor bad, it actually works, BUT what you fail to mention there, is the point of surroundings. Now you can get a person of a certain addiction fairly easy, with substitution, but the re-lapse effect is almost 90% when they have friends/family which are taking/addicted to the primary addiction. I am saying this, because I've seen it happen, a lot of times, and I've tried to help, even learned about the psychology of addiction etc.

Now where does this come into play? Well, suppose you can get one or two of those teens to work with science. Ok, but all their friends will be out on the street smoking pot. Guess what? They will relapse, and go back out there, and if you try to force them, it's gonna end even worse.

What you really want to do is get the whole group into another addiction. This is especially problematic after the point, when the addicted has decided to break contact with non-addicted folks. First you have to understand, that he now has a new family, which pressures him into the addiction, then you have to think about approach, you can't just walk up to someone like that, as the group will protect their members, and you know what that means.

So...no, it doesn't work like chemistry. People are complex beings, which can't be changed just like that.

This is why I am stressing so much, that it's the parents responsibility, AND fault if neglected, to teach and educate a child, to show him what's right and whats wrong, EVEN BEFORE the bloodlust, aggression, or other addiction comes into play.

I think this is the only reasonable way to "get rid of the problem". And for me, blaming video games, is just an excuse for personal failure at the parenting level. I'm sorry to say that, and I'm sure many of the people whose kids are like that are fine folks and all, but I still think they made mistakes, a lot of them.

Now, onto school shootings and suicides etc.

Yes this is a "combination" of factors, but I think you give games a too big influence here. And the criminal rate from 1994 - 2005, oh c'mon. The population got bigger, we had more then 2 big wars inbetween, and economic crysis, a gang-war (westSide vs. eastSide), and many many more things.

I am not saying that violent games can't be a factor, and I'm definetely against giving them to anyone <16. BUT making laws to prohibit that, FORCING people to obey such logical laws is in my opinion stupidity.

It doesn't help shielding the kids from this stuff, it never has, and it never will, the only thing that can help is teaching them responsibility, and showing them why violence is bad.

Again, it all falls on us, the society, the parents and the teachers, and not to some abstract laws (no offense there). If we don't do anything to show these kids anything better, they will learn from movies and games. But if we take it upon ourselves to teach them, then we can make a change.

I have teached some people martial arts, and I have teached some on programming, web-design, and many other things. Most of these people, are good folks, with smaller (and sometimes larger) mental problems. I am talking from chronic depression to plain old low-self esteem. And I have teached kids to work with computers, shown 'em the beauty of code, and this is how we made a difference.

So I worked in a cyber-caffee, and this kids came in as CoD gamers, smoking weed, being gangsters and all that. After a while they started hanging out with me more and more, looking at what I was doing. So I've shown 'em programming, and some were interested others not. So we decided to make lessons on cyber stuff, from photoshop, video editing, programming etc., but we kept it on the interesting side, not the theoretical.

Now, a year later two have gone back to school, another one has found a job as small-time graphics designer, and the others, well...they got away from the gangsta BS and started a life.

This might sound like a story, and I probably can't do squat to change that, but it's true. Sadly we had to close shop, because of some BS laws, and other organizations wanting our space. But we know we did "some" good in the meantime, and I'm sure we did much more with letting them play CoD on our PC's and then slowly showing them the other stuff, and not just stamp them away as "angry gangsta teenagers".

Again a long post, I know. But it's hard conveying my ideas clearly without pointing stuff out explicitly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) even if it won't work for 90% , it will work for 10% , so 10% lower violence is worthy , cause 10% is maybe your chance of your kid to not be stabbed in school

if you say it won't work for 95% than ask yourself would you like to be in 5% (parent of kid who suffer OR NOT in school because of someone from this 5%, would you say "worthy" for 5% or not than?)

2) parents role - you forget that those days parents "are working all the time to have money for flat, food, car, rent, credits" and kid sits whole day home, in socialism i sit down in home watching programs that now are called Discovery, todays kids sit all day watching criminal movies and playing Doom3

3) about criminal rate among kids - i took example of Poland, country which before 1989 was with other system and now in others system + US culture mainstream and very strong role of games, gamers (again back to my friends from work, their kids "only play games on and on and on and on" and do not go to street "rain, lazy, too hot, too cold, got sweat" "lazy" )

4) once again, i never said about forbid to adult, i said about "KIDS" (8, 10, 12, 14 y.o. )

we have age barier - let it be, cause it will also avoid kids in gaming (kids can spoil your gameplay fun totaly, baaa kids can even spoil your fun of modding when they will come, flame, bash and go to next game next week or month, cause kids are kids )

look at multiplayer clans - they avoid kids in gaming too ! halfbrain kids will spoil fun for others and might gone mad (this low percent we talk about)

5) society role... majority is low educated, low IQ watching "look how they dance" , so "inetectual elite" must take some actions from time to time unless we do not want to live in jungle (some people love competition, rats race, i like having nice time without stress or being afraid of something)

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Maybe we should agree to disagree?

Honestly said, while I see where you're headed, and I can agree on "some" points, the general idea of what you're saying is for me complete BS.

you forget that those days parents "are working all the time to have money for flat, food, car, rent, credits" and kid sits whole day home,

parents spend anywhere from 8 to 12 hours on the job, with a free day in the week (normal populus). Now, we usually sleep anywhere between 6-8 hours, so, you get 40hours of freee time per week at minimum (excludin sleep).

40 hours to do whatever you want. You could play with your kids, you could take 'em for a walk, there are hundreds of possibilities. The reality is, parents come home, and sit on the couch watching TV those 40 hours. They don't want to play with their kids, they don't want to have a good time with them, they want to watch TV, in silence and peace. Now you can advocate this as much as you want, but these parents should just STFU when their kid does become another "angry teenager", as they did not do squat to change that.

But yeah, sure let's just drop all responsibility to laws, and let's just say "we did all we could".

Like I said, it might be best to agree on disagreeing, as we have different standpoints about parenting and the impact of social life on our lives, which has nothing to do with video games, and yet affects them all the way.

Agreed? :P

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

in this free time parents watch "how do they dance" or "NYPD" serie too

and thats why they rely "on law, police, whatever" and "law , police, whatever" must take part of responsibility (like we had before 1989 when modeling club, drawing club was present in many town districts, like i was having drawing lessons, like i was glueing jet planes etc.)

and this "law, police, whatever" try to "do as much as possible, even if effect will be 10%" by bans , forbiding, punishment etc.

to drive forklifter you must have license

to work with 10 000 volts you must have too

for kids - none

and thats why law, police, psychologist - seek for bans to prevent some act before happening

if society not think, you must think for society - that was our philosophy before 1989 which i prefere more than "lets give idiots all, let they make jungle and hell, strong will survive"< i hate this new way cause if idiots are strong and peacefull are weak, you will be beaten

so i want law to rely on, let law prevent some things before they could touch me and hurt me

some bans make our life little safer , even if little

but little is better than zero

cause you cannot rely on people only, half of them should not have kids, but there is no license like for forklifter or 1000 volts, no HCCP certification

you pay fee - tax

for this fee state MUST do you some favour - like safe streets, so state look for the way to make it 1%, 5% , 10% more safe (inventing bans after some researches)

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heh, I almost feel like you actually agree on the 40hours stuff with me.

And yeah I can see the logic behind the "law, police, whatever" having to take care of it, still, it's wrong.

And about the fork-lift: I have driven a scooter (50cc) at 12, driven a yamaha 1300 @ 14, had my own scooter @ 15, drove a bulldozer @12-14 (can't rememmber exact), did fly a plane @ 16, 17,18,19 (each year once or twice), did drive a boat @ 16, and drove a car for the first time @ 16.

Hadn't had a single crash. The only difference is, I had people willing to show me how it's done. To go out there, take that one hour of their life, and teach someone.

Another thing, I had my fair share (still have) of problems with the police, and laws in general. Especially when it comes down to, me and a couple friends, quietly drinking a beer at the beach @ 17, and two police officers walking up to us, demanding we leave or they'll beat us up. Y'know, if they'd have asked nicely we'd leave in peace, but not like that.

Again, if the adults are acting like children, then don't expect the kids to be any better.

If police officers threaten me, don't expect me to respect them, or for that matter to listen to 'em.

I have been taught to greet older people, even if I don't know them, and I stopped doing it, cause they all looked at me, scared, like "why is he talking to me.." when all I said was "good day" or "good evening".

Then there is the giving off your seat at the buss, you wouldn't believe how many weird looks I got for doing that.

So, if that is what society and police/law are teaching the kids this days, then guess what, it's them who are making it a "jungle".

I have a nephew now, he's almost 2, and I'm taking the time of my schedule to play with him whenever I got the time, cause I know, he won't learn squat in school, and I know he won't learn responsibility in society and school, so it's on us to teach him.

And tell you what, I have already bought his first knife, and he'll get it at age 6, to learn that it's a dangerous thing (like we all had to), and to learn to wield it, use it, and respect it. Teaching him to respect life, and living beings is our responsibility. Now the law will be against my nephew having a knife in a drawer in my house/apartment, but I know I will keep it secure, and can teach him something.

So saying that for 10% we have to make rules for the rest, I'm okay with that, just as long as I can decide how I will raise my kids.

I don't have a problem with games being banned for <18 year old people, on the contrary, I wouldn't allow 'em until 16 atleast!

But this rules are forbidding for me to decide which games this are, and WHEN my kid is ready to play them. So I'm really left with either bowing down to a dumbed down society, and letting my child being educated by laws, or being an outlaw. Does this seem right?

I strongly believe that it's the knowledge and respect for EVERYTHING that makes it secure, and not security messures and laws. Dumbing down people with giving them laws will just result in more laws needed, and you as a law-person should know that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

strange, no liccences to drive ? in my country this all is controlled by allowance licences

if someone would sit kid by bulldozer i would notified police immidiately

why policemen was not nice ? simply - in eye of criminal being nice and polite you are "noone, sucker, weak",

so you must be not nice to people to show "power" cause other way you will be threaten "he is weak, he is shit , he is noone, sucker" etc.

thats why policeman cannot be nice, just give order and threaten - to force respect

would you respect someone weaker ? yes or maybe

would usual lad, football hool will do it ? NEVER , this is also base psychology (i must not be nice too, cause if i am too nice, people want "put envelope with money thinking i am nice cause i can make something faster, avoiding queue"

i was nice at begin of my work, till some people started to over use it , simply every law-worker at work must wear "rude suit", otherwise you are seen as weak and not respected

look how lads, hools respect body builded agressive guys, they put hat off, are very nice and ask "sir, can i ask you for the road to ... ",

look at their attitude to man who looks weak physically "yo, man, who made you by condom with hole, haha"

government and law also must think a little about way of "someone rise his child" for several reason:

- criminals teaching children to be criminals too

- some religious fanatics who would like teach that there was no evolution + condoms are evil

- a lot of very not educated at all people who learn kid to smoke and drink bear instead of writing (in Poland we have order to go to school until 15 y.o., law forces education )

among it there are age bans for games

cause 70% of parents do not look what their kid do and 1% of those kids can become dangerous cycos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
strange, no liccences to drive ? in my country this all is controlled by allowance licences

if someone would sit kid by bulldozer i would notified police immidiately

Ahm, no licence for bulldozer, and no licence at that points for anything, I did make my licences later on, but still I drove this stuff. And y'know, it's the kind of stuff that is a lot of fun. like I said, in todays society this is seen as wrong, but for me it was something beautiful and I WILL break the law to make this possible for my kids.

why policemen was not nice ? simply - in eye of criminal being nice and polite you are "noone, sucker, weak",

I am 180cm tall and ~110kg. Training martial arts my whole life. Now tell me something, how intelligent does it seem to you, to threaten me?

I don't want to fight, I don't like violence, but believe me one thing, I don't care if he has a uniform or not, noone threatens me.

Now, like I said, everyone has a different view on this, so yeah everyone as he pleases.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I am 180cm tall and ~110kg. Training martial arts my whole life. Now tell me something, how intelligent does it seem to you, to threaten me?

so for policeman you could look like "another mafia soldier" cause "lads and hools have only one hobby, body building" and when i see such guy in sportwear think "what does he steal" and "give me gun to shoot him"

:]

and policeman thinks "another bad guy", now lets wait when he will start, my P99 is ready for you, make my day (if he can)

law is law, noone can discuss it, citizen must obey or pay the price :]

usually body builder + tatoos + sport wear (adidas, nike, reebok, lacoste) for us looks like "another f** moth*** gangster hool piece of s***" etc. :) cause it is dres code of gangsters (plus some elements like Cordon Athletic leather jacket, bold, no beard, no mustash )

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So, out of interest, what limits are there for a say, 13 year old buying a game with a higher age rating in the US? Most countries in Europe at least, just want some ID to prove they are the same age as the rating on the case.

The only thing that limits a kid from buying an "M"-rated (17+) game is a voluntarily-enforced restriction by the retailer. Movies work the same way in the United States: There is no law that says that someone under the age of 17 can't see an "R"-rated (17+ or accompanied by an adult) film, but just about every movie theater agrees to voluntarily enforce this standard. The fact that neither movies nor books are restricted to age groups by law was actually one of the major arguments against the California law: It would be inconsistent to limit videogames with the law while leaving film and book restrictions up to voluntarily-enforced programs. The only material that has its sale to children restricted by law in the United States is pornography, which is a cultural exception more than anything (it's arguably logically inconsistent, but we can't seem to break away from our Puritan roots).

@vilas:

There have been no studies done that conclusively link violent videogame exposure to violent behavior in kids. Most studies done on the subject have conclusively demonstrated that there is no causal link at all. Your idea that kids getting access to Call of Duty will somehow lead to mass murder is hysterical at best.

Edited by ST_Dux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@ST_Dux - than why all those school shooting teenagers were addicted gamers ? they were no-lifes which were living only games and living in gaming world instead of real one

i said about "replacing" their "drug" by other

if there is a ban than it is easier to force them to take another drug (lets say models, electronic, I.T.) something which will make them "think" more wide than corridor "awaiting kill"

how about studies of cancer and smoking ? ;) loooong time stopped ? "the Insider" movie etc.

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not every school shooting involves assailants who were addicted to video games, and school shootings occurred before there was any such thing a video game. The question about violent video games leading to real-world violence has been brought up many times, but an actual scientific link has not been established.

From personal experience, I can tell you that I played plenty of violent video games as a kid and never once believed that such violence was meant for the real world.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seriously?

law is law...

really, really?

Law's are there to protect the majority of people, NOT to hinder the education and growing up of people. Now as a law-person, you'll be familiar with this: "when >80% of the people are guilty of breaking a law, there is something wrong with the law, not the people".

This is an ancient (roman I think) statement, it's one of the bases for "law change".

Now, I don't care what I look like to a police officer. He has sworn to protect and serve the people AND the law. And since he doesn't know me, he has to show "some" respect. And so should you. For me this is just a sign of imaturity, stamping someone with a cliche, based just on his looks.

Another thing, a police, or for that matter, any law enforcement, is entitled to only use EQUAL force, meaning they cannot use their P99 or any other gun for that matter on un-armed subjects.

Wanna talk law? By law, a police officer has to report in, wait for response and THEN he can tell us to move. At the same time, he is not entitled to threaten ANYONE at all. Police officers, by law are not allowed, to threaten, insult or needlessly harm ANYONE.

So, who's breaking the law now?

I've had my fair share of problems with the police, but mostly cause they were ignorant and arrogant. Why is it that "beach security" personel comes up to us going: "hey guys, sorry to tell you, but you'll have to pack up shop, we can't allow you to have a party here.", while a police officer first threatens us?

To bring this back on topic, this is another thing that makes kids go the way they go. Not even the police are being roll-models anymore.

Elder people act like a**h***s, not even greeting back when you greet them, and parents are rather watching TV then to educate their kids.

But you know what, it's alright, because we rely on people with not kids, no experience and no ethics to make laws which will protect us. And our protectors are aggressive, arrogant and ignorant, but it's perfectly fine, cause "we did all we could", and if the situation still sucks, we are going to blame it on TV! Yeah TV! those actors smoking in movies, and blurting one-liners like Duke Nukem, they are the problem....oh wait, there are games too! Yeah this is definetely the problem! it's those FPS games! let's ban them.

vilas, don't take what comes next as an offense, but it's people that think like you do that made this mess.

It's this train of thought that if someone can't think for themselves, we must think for them, what got us into this and many other problems.

Instead of teaching society (e.g. our youth) and looking into making it easier for the next generation, all that is being done is to oppress people, filter there thoughts and control their lives, take responsibility away from them is the first step, and it's not alright.

Living in a golden cage, is still life in a cage. Now if you're O.K. with it, sure do it, but the second you start building this cage around my life, I'm going to get angry. I don't care if you allow your kid to play a game. And I certainly don't care about those 10%, especially, not if you don't have better reasons.

Parents that are radical in any way, will give this upon their kids, no matter the games. You don't need to ban FPS games to get rid of religious fanatics, and you surely don't need games to have bullies.

Now you want to live in a Social State? You got Russia, China, Cuba and a couple others. Why don't you go and live there if life is better like that?

it's too hard? not really and you know it. Stop being a Hypocrat, and think about it.

Capitalism, Democracy and Freedom of Speech are the pillars of a responsible society. Sadly it's not as easy, since a responsible society means educated and mature society, but if we are to have any chance at all to reach that state, we must NOT allow law's to take responsibility away from us, we must rather embrace responsibility and teach it to others.

I really don't want to argue this points anymore, so peace out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

than you look at other side of law idea

state is also organization which in real (not in idea) is made to ... have ruling class live well and rule more (since ancient time citizen had one rule - pay tax and die for king, cause king wants to have golden palace but not work for it , it is unfair and wrong, but this way it works, thats why people make revolutions in history of mankind, cause all states are the same - for elite to have palaces and rest must work on them, Matrix movie, Matrix is our reality ),

and police is not to only protect, but also to force regulation (which people may not like)

regulation is regulation and there are means to force it and thats it

about golden cage - a lot of people here in eastern europe say we want back to situation before 1989 in many areas (economical safety, safety on streets, stable job when you can work less and spend more time on fun) , i have family in Belarus, they not complain at all , but simply i live in Poland and "where i was born i want to live cause there i was born"

regarding capitalism - i was always against some things which are along with it like lack of free education, free medical care, free flats for poor people , rats race, karoshi and stress in work (but you are not long on this forum, i am little right-side when it comes to penal law, family but economicaly socialist, not communist)

i also don't want argue :) have a nice day :)

Edited by vilas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To bring this back on topic, this is another thing that makes kids go the way they go. Not even the police are being roll-models anymore.

Elder people act like a**h***s, not even greeting back when you greet them, and parents are rather watching TV then to educate their kids.

^This

Some people really behave like they own the world (especially some elder People)

Let me tell you a story. Once I was driving home from school in a bus. You know the first seat in the Bus, next to the driver? The seat was occupied by a woman, a pregnant women, I think 7th or 8th month. Suddenly an old granny came into the bus, and demanded that seat for herself. Not in a polite way! It was more something like this. "You, get away from there, I have a seniors passanger card" The poor women didn´t know what to say and stood up. Everyone in the bus was like WTF? Someone then offered the pregnant women a seat.

Another time I was driving home by bus and I was reading a book. Suddenly I got stabbed in my side with an umbrella. Ther was some old man who demanded me to stand up for him. He could have asked nicely, but no instead of that he hits me with his umbrella. Needless to say that I didn´t stand up for him.

So if the youth of today has to se stuff like that, how could they become any different?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×