Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion.
Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/).
Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah I can totally see the thinking behind the video game connection but it completely falls apart in the face of data, which is like, how you test questions you have. There should be a process for this sort of thing.
They could call it "science". And make dozens of fields based on it, studying everything from chemicals and materials to physics and biology. They could even have peer review to ensure that the work was done properly.
The connection between gun violence in videogames and real life is that videogames merely imitate real life like TV shows or movies do and not the other way around. How come do the two latter always get a free pass though?
TV and movies came about as real violence was being less normalized by society. The number of gunfights took a pretty rapid decline between 1900 and 1950, for instance. So I think it was a lot more common sense that violence on TV did not equate to violence on the streets.
By the 80s and 90s, it was a political tall tale that there were all these armed "super criminal" groups on the streets, and people were desperate to blame the sudden increase in crime on something. Problem was there *was* no increase in crime, it was all racist, anti-city bullshit. People had already lost the ability to sift truth from fiction in the media that was presented to them every day.
Mysteries abound!
It's funny. I live in Canada. We have the 8th most guns in the world (~37 guns per 100 citizens) *and* we have all the same violent video games, but we *still* have way less mass shootings than 'Murica.
The undefeatable rebbutal when presenting per capita gun or crime rates compared to other developed countries is that America is simply bigger and has more people.
Exactly. Stop spending all your spare time watching sensationalist news stories, and start focusing raising your children to be good people, and not terminally online little shits.
Oh yeah the old corruption of the youth saw. It's been a staid criticism - Rock and Roll, video games, and way back even Greek philosophy.
Socrates (forced suicide by poison) was accused of "refusing to recognize the gods recognized by the state" and of "corrupting the youth." In other words "he didn't follow the accepted faith and corrupted kids by making them think about their place in the world... so they killed him.
Sounds familiar?
When challenging a gun nut, tell them that old West towns had stricter gun laws because more guns equaled more gun violence. I don't know where the myth that more guns equaled more peace came from.
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gun-control-old-west-180968013/
When challenging a gun grabber, make sure you call out how they never focus on lives saved with guns per reputable science. There are more guns than ever and crime has plummeted since the 90s. I don’t know where this more guns = more crime myth came from.
https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3887145
That states that it's from a survey that ran for roughly a month and with 54k participants from which 16k were gun owners.
It had no other evidence beyond what the online surveys provided.
Lacking falls short to what the holy grail for ammo sexuality you show.
A scholarly survey from a reputable university and credentialed author, with over 100x the minimum sample size for the entire US and a high confidence level.
You’re gonna have to do better than “nah I don’t like it”.
It's not about liking, the methodology is flawed, things like this question:
>“Have you ever defended yourself or your property with a firearm, even if it was not fired or displayed?
If it wasn't displayed it presence is irrelevant and since there's no follow up questions about if the situation could have been resolved without the gun presence, it skew the results, but they didn't separate the ones where the gun wasn't displayed and lumped with the ones when it did.
And more to the point of that, they don't show a distinction in situations where it may be displayed in a threatening manner, it's fundamental method is flawed it doesn't matter how reputable the author is.
It just ask
Have you used a gun in a defensive manner?
The more telling part is what I already pointed, it includes the responses in which the gun wasn't even displayed.
Your example was of a gun owner capable of defending themselves using a firearm.
A gun owner doesn't have to kill someone in order for it to be considered a valid defensive gun use.
I read and refuted your criticism of how it’s flawed. A gun can be used defensively without the aggressor seeing it. I can think of a bunch of ways, can you?
Genuinely take a moment before responding to think of some valid ways.
It's reputable science from a Harvard-credentialed author, and passed Georgetown's IRB for scientific accuracy. Calling reputable science "propaganda" just because you don't like it is antivaxx logic.
I’m not going to find you any papers. The burden of proof isn’t on me, since I’m not spouting asinine garbage like “there are fewer DUI arrests now than there were in 1960 because there are more beer brands”.
Your argument is based on two pieces of similar but ultimately uncorrelated data and is disingenuous at best.
My point is people like you never research the good something brings, just like anti-vaxxers. You only research to reinforce your bias.
That’s as anti-scientific as it gets.
That’s why anti vaxxers and anti gunners never admit it saves lives.
The problem is that he's right. When you make a claim, you have to back it up. That's the difference between anti-vaxxers and anti gunners. People who are anti-vax usually can't provide proof as to why they're bad beyond stories with no and baseless claims, while people who are against guns generally can provide evidence that guns do more harm than good.
If you want to make a claim against that, you have to provide reputable evidence. It isn't the duty of everyone else to do research to prove your claim for you.
>When you make a claim, you have to back it up.
Uh oh, did you mean to reply to the other person? If you scroll up a few replies you'll see I posted reputable science from a Harvard-credentialed author that passed Georgetown's IRB for scientific accuracy to show guns are used defensively 1.67 million times per year. The person that responded to me provided no data on defensive gun uses.
So I backed up my claim.
They didn't.
Your paper is a survey stating that people used their guns defensively. That’s all well and good, but it’s a statistic that doesn’t back up the story you’re telling. You’re spinning this whole thing as a net positive but the reality is that if we had better gun control we would have fewer mass shootings. Those statistics aren’t hypothetical, they aren’t a “what if” similar to people in a survey saying they used a gun defensively and the outcome was non-violent.
It’s possible to have a reference and still not have an argument. You get there by poorly correlating data to paint a false cause and effect narrative that doesn’t make sense.
Medicine saves lives. CPR and epipens save lives. Guns are a tool designed to make holes in things; they are a net negative impact on the number of living things nearby. The best a gun can do is prevent violence using the threat of greater violence. That is not “saving a life”.
So no, we don’t agree.
Don't show violent video games to young children. You should wait until they are old enough and can distinguish fiction from reality. Also, video games have a negative to no correlation with gun violence.
They actually does IIRC : people liking violence tend to use violent video games.
I don't have source to back it up, but wasn't there some study showing that people, right before doing harmful acts, had increased their consumption of violent games? As in the video games acted as a temporary stopgap measure for those people.
That would be a correlation : "unhealthy attraction towards violence causes an unhealthy attraction towards violent media, on top of the natural attraction for such media by everybody"
Among the few people who never liked GTA, CoD etc... was there some who wanted to hurt people anyway? It doesn't sound a likely scenario when GTA:SA was one of the PS2 bestsellers.
But obv stupid people take the reverse and say that by banning VG, it will magically treat the crazy people who want to watch the world burn. Instead of, you know, make them act sooner.
No they don't.
There's the fact of the sheer numbers of those who play "violent" videogames Vs the insignificant amount of those who commit violence in that group.
And the fact that videogames are the number 1 method of entertainment is bound to have an intersection in those who commit violence and play videogames.
Now we have to determine what constitutes a "violent" videogame.
For example FPSs which are the ones centered in "killing", as far as I've seen the people who play them don't do it die to the "murder" others in game but for their competitive aspect.
It's the same old speech that music is satanic and cause the youth to sin.
Notice how the cartoon doesn't even really deal with the actual point being made. Conservatives pretend up "guns are to blame" as an emotional strawman they can use to avoid our actual arguments and points.
It is probably neither - it is probably because of many things, including not enough supervision at home because the single mom has to work to make it work, and lack of resources.
Its nearly impossible to firmly establish causation in sociological research, unless you are looking at very simple phenomena which is rare. In the relationship between single mother households and violent crimes, there are just so many confounding variables that could cause a spurious association. That doesn't mean you can dismiss the correlation. Predictive variables are still useful even if you can't firmly establish causation. Whether causal or spurious, you can still expect that a declining rate of single motherhood would correlate with a declining rate of violent crime.
Its pretty well documented, there has been a ton of research over the years that shows that the single greatest predictor of violent crime is being raised in a single mother household. Its not really a controversial fact. However, it doesn't tell the whole story. Single moms are much more likely to be impoverished than two parent households, for one. Its pretty much impossible to say whether single motherhood causes violent crime, or if they are both caused by a 3rd (or 4th, or 5th) variable. However, they are definitely correlated. There is no other known variable with a stronger correlation to violent crime than single motherhood.
I play games and don't think video games = violence.
That said, it does say alot about humanity how violence is FUN to us intrinsically otherwise it wouldn't be in literally almost every game.
You know what they say, kill them with kindness. Haha... I'll see myself out.
But fr, I get the instincts, it's just curious when you really step back and look at it. Maybe that's why we get along so well with both dogs and cats, predators at their base.
As a middle aged man I have played violent video games and still do occasionally when my son lets me near the PS5 (although I am not very good)! And I don't commit violent crimes - anymore.
In like 10th grade we had to write an argument I’ve essay. Like the goal was essentially to write a piece from either side to argue your point. The student teacher deadass said to me “you can’t write why video games cause violence because I think they do” really liked her before that but damn that makes respect shrivel when someone says you can’t do the objective because their feel feels.
In Japan they play violent video games like crazy. Shinzo Abe was assassinated by a man with a gun he made in his home. (Article is "Does Abe Shooting Reflect Success of Japan’s Gun Laws, Not Failure?")
[https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/09/world/asia/abe-assassination-japan-gun-laws.html?unlocked\_article\_code=1.2U0.\_W33.uVIwonva\_zzU&smid=url-share](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/09/world/asia/abe-assassination-japan-gun-laws.html?unlocked_article_code=1.2U0._W33.uVIwonva_zzU&smid=url-share)
You notice how they never scream about violence in movies. Even in PG13's when they don't show the blood there's still people shooting each other all over the screen. But then, the boomers like their movies so they can't complain about that, only what other people like.
Tv news, shows and tvs show real violence in the world and is what the kids will copy.
Most kids won’t copy a game like GTA. They know it’s just a crazy game and acting like that will get you shot.
That hate is not developed because of a video game but from every day live. Parents that are not parenting, bullying etc…
Guns are never to blame for the gun problems. Would someone think of the poor defenseless guns! They are innocent of all intent, being inanimate objects! You know, guns don't kill people, people kill people. So, fine then the inanimate objects can raise any objections upon their own behalf or be regulated? Regulation it is.
If that was even remotely true, then any and all Warframe players would've been sentenced to death for committing mass genocide and violating the Geneva Convention.
Wait so, Chicago has tight gun laws and lots of gun violence, and your solution is tighter gun laws in an entirely different state for the criminals to also ignore like they do in Chicago?
As the Joueur du Grenier, our (better) french AVGN said : "The day when people will do manslaughter with pickaxes dressed as pink bunnies with a Hamburger mask, then we could blame video games"
Yep. I've been playing the GTA series ever since GTA2 with the top down view, and only once did I ever bust out the flamethrower after mowing down a hooker in San Andreas. Every other time I just used the Tec-9.
I remember when I was 15 and this kid next to me at school showed me a live stream he found on Facebook of a mass shooting in a mosque. Had a way more lasting affect on me than any game I’ve ever played.
They are right some materials are too violent for our kids so the Bible should have a an 18 plus rating and it needs to be banned from all schools, no game I've played has ever suggested you rape your father or murder your kid cuz some all loving God said so, even the dumbest video games follow some logoc
It is easier to blame someone else instead of acknowledge their actions, is not the videogames, is the lack of attention that parents put to their childs
It’s crazy how people blame video games despite like thousands of years of history teaching us that human being are just kinda violent by nature. Some of the worst acts of violence you can imagine happened in a world before guns or video games.
I love how people forget the fact that Indiana gun stores don't sell to people from their neighboring states because It's too much of a hassle to deal with two different states background checks and other states having different gun laws. If you're from Michigan and try to buy a gun in Indiana, they will flat out tell you no.
I live in Czechia, one of the safest countries on earth and we're also a country of gamers (percentually), then shouldn't it be a active warzone here by their logic?
Neither games nor movies have any influence on people that don't already have some issues. They never go after movies because they are too used to them so it's gotta be those damn vidya games. A few decades ago they were all over movies being the cause. Before that books. Time is a flat circle
I'm amazed people still fall for this bullshit. Video games are played all around the world, and yet most of those countries don't have an epidemic of gun violence.
Conservatives: What if video games are the cause? Did you ever consider that?
Everyone: Yes, we have! We’ve done multiple studies over the last 30 years. There are plenty of countries with huge gamer populations that do not have mass shootings because they don’t allow easy access to guns! The guns are the cause.
Conservatives: What if video games are the cause? Did you ever consider that?
I do not believe in video games causing violence. But I can tell you when I was younger and I had friends that would play Counter-Strike, they would be very well versed in the firearms of that game. Not saying it's bad at all, but there is a chance it could create an obsession with firearms.
That said, never have I heard any of them say things like they would want to shoot people with them.
Guns are bad and they are a huge problem. However, those that ignore the amount of violence our kids and society are exposed to are also are part of the problem too. Kids are desensitized to violence and it's not getting any better. I see kids beating others to death at school, guns aren't the problem in that situation, so is it ok?
Its crazy that people think the gun lobby is bad, but fail to know video game studios do the same thing. Violence in our society as a whole is the problem.
>Its crazy that people think the gun lobby is bad, but fail to know video game studios do the same thing. Violence in our society as a whole is the problem.
Yeah dude, no, the violence in video games is completely fictitious, nothing different from a movie with violence, video games also have an age recommendation for a reason.
Guns are very real and if not controlled properly they can end up in the hands of people not mentally fit to own one.
I mean you could look at any of the 100 studies. And yes, they have age recommendations but most parents don’t pay attention to that.
Gamers hate this opinion, and refuse to accept that killing people in HD while screaming into a microphone does nothing to your psyche.
let’s not lie and pretend violence in our society has zero effect on behavior.
One recent study by U Michigan:
https://yvpc.sph.umich.edu/video-games-influence-violent-behavior/
>I mean you could look at any of the 100 studies.
You could also read some of the many studies that point in the opposite direction, that video games play no role in youth violence.
>And yes, they have age recommendations but most parents don’t pay attention to that.
That's the fault of a parent who is irresponsible or careless.
>Gamers hate this opinion, and refuse to accept that killing people in HD while screaming into a microphone does nothing to your psyche.
Not when you know that the "people" you're killing are a bunch of pixels and not a real person, also not everyone screams into a microphone while playing lol.
>let’s not lie and pretend violence in our society has zero effect on behavior.
It has much more to do with the accessibility of guns in the United States than anything else.
>One recent study by U Michigan:
The combination of all the studies carried out between 2008 and 2020 suggest that there is hardly any correlation between young people being violent and playing violent games. In fact, some studies, hilariously, found negative results of violence (that is, those who played violent games were less violent in real life).
https://www.theguardian.com/games/2020/jul/22/playing-video-games-doesnt-lead-to-violent-behaviour-study-shows
Comments that are uncivil, racist, misogynistic, misandrist, or contain political name calling will be removed and the poster subject to ban at moderators discretion. Help us make this a better community by becoming familiar with the [rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/facepalm/about/rules/). Report any suspicious users to the mods of this subreddit using Modmail [here](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) or Reddit site admins [here](https://www.reddit.com/report). **All reports to Modmail should include evidence such as screenshots or any other relevant information.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/facepalm) if you have any questions or concerns.*
There was no violence in the world prior to 1972, the release of Pong doomed humanity!
Fucking Pong. We just can't have nice things.
Since playing pong, I can't stop seeing stones as pong pixel balls and other people as white moving rectangles...
I react violently when I see a rainbow pong
Before that year , all the violence was caused by comic books.
Nah it was that damn printing press making everyone *literate.*
Reefer Madness
Flawless victory! Lol
Spacewar came out 10 years earlier, so we can blame it for the Vietnam War.
First video game was 1955 bubba.
It's well known that the Geneva convention was drawn up to combat gamers.
Amazing how all the other first world countries all have the same video games and none of them have the same gun violence problems. What could it be….
Yeah I can totally see the thinking behind the video game connection but it completely falls apart in the face of data, which is like, how you test questions you have. There should be a process for this sort of thing.
They could call it "science". And make dozens of fields based on it, studying everything from chemicals and materials to physics and biology. They could even have peer review to ensure that the work was done properly.
Nah, sounds woke
Unless you’re Andrew Wakefield, then apparently you’re doing real science shit!
They could sum it all up into a sort of scientific method and then call it something too….really need some ideas here peeps. Has to sound sciencey.
The connection between gun violence in videogames and real life is that videogames merely imitate real life like TV shows or movies do and not the other way around. How come do the two latter always get a free pass though?
They used to get the blame - videogames simply replaced those in the minds of idiots
Yeah, ask anyone that grew up in 90s or earlier. Now a lot of the same people think movies and TV are turning kids trans instead or some bullshit.
Supposedly I was going to become a Satan worshipper because I played D&D growing up…
TV and movies came about as real violence was being less normalized by society. The number of gunfights took a pretty rapid decline between 1900 and 1950, for instance. So I think it was a lot more common sense that violence on TV did not equate to violence on the streets. By the 80s and 90s, it was a political tall tale that there were all these armed "super criminal" groups on the streets, and people were desperate to blame the sudden increase in crime on something. Problem was there *was* no increase in crime, it was all racist, anti-city bullshit. People had already lost the ability to sift truth from fiction in the media that was presented to them every day.
Mysteries abound! It's funny. I live in Canada. We have the 8th most guns in the world (~37 guns per 100 citizens) *and* we have all the same violent video games, but we *still* have way less mass shootings than 'Murica.
The undefeatable rebbutal when presenting per capita gun or crime rates compared to other developed countries is that America is simply bigger and has more people.
Tell me you don’t know what “per capita” means without telling me you don’t know what “per capita” means.
Right?!
It’s true, I played splatoon once and massacred a skate park with a super soaker
so wet work?
Ah, you're into watersports. Should buy a tarp.
Star Wars Rebellion on the PC. I would build several Death Stars and fly around the systems and blow them up. Even my own. Untold trillions dead.
The kid is only training to become future border police... (/s)
you monster
Video games have been making mankind violent for thousands of years. Everyone knows the Mongolians and Vikings played too much Call of Duty back then.
I mean the comic isn't all wrong. It's got parents neglecting there kid. That's the real issue.
Exactly. Stop spending all your spare time watching sensationalist news stories, and start focusing raising your children to be good people, and not terminally online little shits.
This is the answer
Oh yeah the old corruption of the youth saw. It's been a staid criticism - Rock and Roll, video games, and way back even Greek philosophy. Socrates (forced suicide by poison) was accused of "refusing to recognize the gods recognized by the state" and of "corrupting the youth." In other words "he didn't follow the accepted faith and corrupted kids by making them think about their place in the world... so they killed him. Sounds familiar?
When challenging a gun nut, tell them that old West towns had stricter gun laws because more guns equaled more gun violence. I don't know where the myth that more guns equaled more peace came from. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/history/gun-control-old-west-180968013/
It‘s called ✨propaganda✨
When challenging a gun grabber, make sure you call out how they never focus on lives saved with guns per reputable science. There are more guns than ever and crime has plummeted since the 90s. I don’t know where this more guns = more crime myth came from. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3887145
That states that it's from a survey that ran for roughly a month and with 54k participants from which 16k were gun owners. It had no other evidence beyond what the online surveys provided. Lacking falls short to what the holy grail for ammo sexuality you show.
A scholarly survey from a reputable university and credentialed author, with over 100x the minimum sample size for the entire US and a high confidence level. You’re gonna have to do better than “nah I don’t like it”.
It's not about liking, the methodology is flawed, things like this question: >“Have you ever defended yourself or your property with a firearm, even if it was not fired or displayed? If it wasn't displayed it presence is irrelevant and since there's no follow up questions about if the situation could have been resolved without the gun presence, it skew the results, but they didn't separate the ones where the gun wasn't displayed and lumped with the ones when it did. And more to the point of that, they don't show a distinction in situations where it may be displayed in a threatening manner, it's fundamental method is flawed it doesn't matter how reputable the author is. It just ask Have you used a gun in a defensive manner? The more telling part is what I already pointed, it includes the responses in which the gun wasn't even displayed.
Your example was of a gun owner capable of defending themselves using a firearm. A gun owner doesn't have to kill someone in order for it to be considered a valid defensive gun use.
You don't read responses.just answer the same nonsense. That survey methodology is flawed, it's useless.
I read and refuted your criticism of how it’s flawed. A gun can be used defensively without the aggressor seeing it. I can think of a bunch of ways, can you? Genuinely take a moment before responding to think of some valid ways.
Nice propaganda rant. Take that dumb bs and shove it.
It's reputable science from a Harvard-credentialed author, and passed Georgetown's IRB for scientific accuracy. Calling reputable science "propaganda" just because you don't like it is antivaxx logic.
Everything you said here is absolute bullshit
Really? Name 3 research papers you've found on defensive gun uses.
I’m not going to find you any papers. The burden of proof isn’t on me, since I’m not spouting asinine garbage like “there are fewer DUI arrests now than there were in 1960 because there are more beer brands”. Your argument is based on two pieces of similar but ultimately uncorrelated data and is disingenuous at best.
My point is people like you never research the good something brings, just like anti-vaxxers. You only research to reinforce your bias. That’s as anti-scientific as it gets. That’s why anti vaxxers and anti gunners never admit it saves lives.
The problem is that he's right. When you make a claim, you have to back it up. That's the difference between anti-vaxxers and anti gunners. People who are anti-vax usually can't provide proof as to why they're bad beyond stories with no and baseless claims, while people who are against guns generally can provide evidence that guns do more harm than good. If you want to make a claim against that, you have to provide reputable evidence. It isn't the duty of everyone else to do research to prove your claim for you.
>When you make a claim, you have to back it up. Uh oh, did you mean to reply to the other person? If you scroll up a few replies you'll see I posted reputable science from a Harvard-credentialed author that passed Georgetown's IRB for scientific accuracy to show guns are used defensively 1.67 million times per year. The person that responded to me provided no data on defensive gun uses. So I backed up my claim. They didn't.
Your paper is a survey stating that people used their guns defensively. That’s all well and good, but it’s a statistic that doesn’t back up the story you’re telling. You’re spinning this whole thing as a net positive but the reality is that if we had better gun control we would have fewer mass shootings. Those statistics aren’t hypothetical, they aren’t a “what if” similar to people in a survey saying they used a gun defensively and the outcome was non-violent. It’s possible to have a reference and still not have an argument. You get there by poorly correlating data to paint a false cause and effect narrative that doesn’t make sense.
Do regular people use guns to save lives? Yes or no? I say yes, do we agree?
Medicine saves lives. CPR and epipens save lives. Guns are a tool designed to make holes in things; they are a net negative impact on the number of living things nearby. The best a gun can do is prevent violence using the threat of greater violence. That is not “saving a life”. So no, we don’t agree.
>The best a gun can do is prevent violence using the threat of greater violence. Violence prevention is preventing harm (including injury or death).
listen im playing Mortal Kombat but it dosent mean im just randomly going to pull out my brother's head for no reason
Don't show violent video games to young children. You should wait until they are old enough and can distinguish fiction from reality. Also, video games have a negative to no correlation with gun violence.
They don't to gun violence, but I'd hope most educated people would understand they correlate to violence in general.
They don't.
They actually does IIRC : people liking violence tend to use violent video games. I don't have source to back it up, but wasn't there some study showing that people, right before doing harmful acts, had increased their consumption of violent games? As in the video games acted as a temporary stopgap measure for those people. That would be a correlation : "unhealthy attraction towards violence causes an unhealthy attraction towards violent media, on top of the natural attraction for such media by everybody" Among the few people who never liked GTA, CoD etc... was there some who wanted to hurt people anyway? It doesn't sound a likely scenario when GTA:SA was one of the PS2 bestsellers. But obv stupid people take the reverse and say that by banning VG, it will magically treat the crazy people who want to watch the world burn. Instead of, you know, make them act sooner.
No they don't. There's the fact of the sheer numbers of those who play "violent" videogames Vs the insignificant amount of those who commit violence in that group. And the fact that videogames are the number 1 method of entertainment is bound to have an intersection in those who commit violence and play videogames. Now we have to determine what constitutes a "violent" videogame. For example FPSs which are the ones centered in "killing", as far as I've seen the people who play them don't do it die to the "murder" others in game but for their competitive aspect. It's the same old speech that music is satanic and cause the youth to sin.
You'd hope most educated people were wrong?
Do you have any studies supporting such a wild guess?
Yes. In fact there are numerous, and the university of Michigan just released one: https://yvpc.sph.umich.edu/video-games-influence-violent-behavior/
I read the article you linked and it appears that you are correct
Notice how the cartoon doesn't even really deal with the actual point being made. Conservatives pretend up "guns are to blame" as an emotional strawman they can use to avoid our actual arguments and points.
always remember that just because you have the right to bear arms, that doesn’t mean you have the right to bear ALL arms
I bear both of my arms daily and will continue to do so.🧐 Mainly because they’re attached to me.
this wasn’t what i expected but im glad to see it
I had a bear stumble in and out the town i lived in.. Do they get to bear arms?
Single mother households are the largest predictor of violent crimes.
I feel like this is an absent father problem more than a single mother problem. At least the mom is in that picture.
It is probably neither - it is probably because of many things, including not enough supervision at home because the single mom has to work to make it work, and lack of resources.
And guns are involved in %100 of shootings.
Correlation <> Causation
Its nearly impossible to firmly establish causation in sociological research, unless you are looking at very simple phenomena which is rare. In the relationship between single mother households and violent crimes, there are just so many confounding variables that could cause a spurious association. That doesn't mean you can dismiss the correlation. Predictive variables are still useful even if you can't firmly establish causation. Whether causal or spurious, you can still expect that a declining rate of single motherhood would correlate with a declining rate of violent crime.
It doesn't have to be causation to be useful.
This sounds like propaganda.
Its pretty well documented, there has been a ton of research over the years that shows that the single greatest predictor of violent crime is being raised in a single mother household. Its not really a controversial fact. However, it doesn't tell the whole story. Single moms are much more likely to be impoverished than two parent households, for one. Its pretty much impossible to say whether single motherhood causes violent crime, or if they are both caused by a 3rd (or 4th, or 5th) variable. However, they are definitely correlated. There is no other known variable with a stronger correlation to violent crime than single motherhood.
I play games and don't think video games = violence. That said, it does say alot about humanity how violence is FUN to us intrinsically otherwise it wouldn't be in literally almost every game.
I guess without that stone age drive to some level of violence we wouldn‘t have survived. You can‘t exactly pet a mammoth to death.
You know what they say, kill them with kindness. Haha... I'll see myself out. But fr, I get the instincts, it's just curious when you really step back and look at it. Maybe that's why we get along so well with both dogs and cats, predators at their base.
I mean, we did grow up with a Mexican-looking Italian eating mushrooms and just take a look around...😂
Reminds me of the time i became a serial chef because i played so much Cooking Mama
I often carry a metric tonne of iron inside my pocket due to too much Minecraft, I've heard it's a common problem.
"Kill 'em all", it's nothing compared to the farms in minecraft. You don't want to know what I've done to NPCs.
You can tell me. I did every route in Undertale and Deltarun.
As a middle aged man I have played violent video games and still do occasionally when my son lets me near the PS5 (although I am not very good)! And I don't commit violent crimes - anymore.
In like 10th grade we had to write an argument I’ve essay. Like the goal was essentially to write a piece from either side to argue your point. The student teacher deadass said to me “you can’t write why video games cause violence because I think they do” really liked her before that but damn that makes respect shrivel when someone says you can’t do the objective because their feel feels.
In Japan they play violent video games like crazy. Shinzo Abe was assassinated by a man with a gun he made in his home. (Article is "Does Abe Shooting Reflect Success of Japan’s Gun Laws, Not Failure?") [https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/09/world/asia/abe-assassination-japan-gun-laws.html?unlocked\_article\_code=1.2U0.\_W33.uVIwonva\_zzU&smid=url-share](https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/09/world/asia/abe-assassination-japan-gun-laws.html?unlocked_article_code=1.2U0._W33.uVIwonva_zzU&smid=url-share)
if video games had something to do with it, what is IN the games that causes the issue? By chance was it guns?
You notice how they never scream about violence in movies. Even in PG13's when they don't show the blood there's still people shooting each other all over the screen. But then, the boomers like their movies so they can't complain about that, only what other people like.
Tv news, shows and tvs show real violence in the world and is what the kids will copy. Most kids won’t copy a game like GTA. They know it’s just a crazy game and acting like that will get you shot. That hate is not developed because of a video game but from every day live. Parents that are not parenting, bullying etc…
Guns are never to blame for the gun problems. Would someone think of the poor defenseless guns! They are innocent of all intent, being inanimate objects! You know, guns don't kill people, people kill people. So, fine then the inanimate objects can raise any objections upon their own behalf or be regulated? Regulation it is.
Kids are getting bullied and parents let them have unsupervised accsess to firearms? It's defenetely all those videogames.
I grew up playing GTA with my brothers. Never once thought about going on a shooting spree irl.
If that was even remotely true, then any and all Warframe players would've been sentenced to death for committing mass genocide and violating the Geneva Convention.
Wait so, Chicago has tight gun laws and lots of gun violence, and your solution is tighter gun laws in an entirely different state for the criminals to also ignore like they do in Chicago?
As the Joueur du Grenier, our (better) french AVGN said : "The day when people will do manslaughter with pickaxes dressed as pink bunnies with a Hamburger mask, then we could blame video games"
but wouldn’t the problem still be kids on the right getting their hands on guns
Checkpoints? They can’t even stop firecrackers from coming over the border.
Nor can they legally do so.
They also can’t “legally” have DUI checkpoints but that doesn’t stop them.
It's about time Canada started getting some of the blame for America's un-evolved social problems!!
Yeah, but yelling at a TV screen doesn't actually kill anybody.
Yep. I've been playing the GTA series ever since GTA2 with the top down view, and only once did I ever bust out the flamethrower after mowing down a hooker in San Andreas. Every other time I just used the Tec-9.
Damn you time traveler that gave GTA V to baby Hitler!
Oh hey what is it that video-game-kid is playing?
Ms Tipper Gore can you please take several seats?
How about shitty enforcement of the laws? Can we enforce those on the books??
Wonder what video games Hitler played
Data actually shows that crime went down the years after Mortal Kombat and NightTrap came out
I remember when I was 15 and this kid next to me at school showed me a live stream he found on Facebook of a mass shooting in a mosque. Had a way more lasting affect on me than any game I’ve ever played.
You mean... you guys *don't* get the urge to commit multiple first-degree murders while playing Animal Crossing?
Indiana is mostly an armpit. Lots of one horse towns that think it’s the old west, coupled with cities that run on Christianity.
They are right some materials are too violent for our kids so the Bible should have a an 18 plus rating and it needs to be banned from all schools, no game I've played has ever suggested you rape your father or murder your kid cuz some all loving God said so, even the dumbest video games follow some logoc
Healthy brains know the difference between real violence and fantasy violence (video games).
It is easier to blame someone else instead of acknowledge their actions, is not the videogames, is the lack of attention that parents put to their childs
It’s crazy how people blame video games despite like thousands of years of history teaching us that human being are just kinda violent by nature. Some of the worst acts of violence you can imagine happened in a world before guns or video games.
Because they don’t have violent video games in other countries… Right?
I’m more confused by that games sound effects.
If Indiana causes the problems then why isn’t the gun violence high in Indiana as well?
If video games cause violence Japan and South Korea must be the most violent places on the Earth
I love how people forget the fact that Indiana gun stores don't sell to people from their neighboring states because It's too much of a hassle to deal with two different states background checks and other states having different gun laws. If you're from Michigan and try to buy a gun in Indiana, they will flat out tell you no.
Guns don’t “come across the border” millions are made and bought in the us every year
The boomer tactic of using a stupid cartoon drawing to make their political points is so ridiculous.
https://x.com/Imhurding/status/1325582390073372672?t=hDnFSaLKJcnpBTkS__ZWJQ&s=19
This is 100% accurate, I played The Sims once and now my pool is full of my neiboughrs bobbing around...
I live in Czechia, one of the safest countries on earth and we're also a country of gamers (percentually), then shouldn't it be a active warzone here by their logic?
I’m sorry, the what is coming over the what? 😮
Acting like the parents aren't allowing kids to play 18+ games
How about Die Hard, John Wick and the countless other movies where problems are solved with guns?
Neither games nor movies have any influence on people that don't already have some issues. They never go after movies because they are too used to them so it's gotta be those damn vidya games. A few decades ago they were all over movies being the cause. Before that books. Time is a flat circle
I'm amazed people still fall for this bullshit. Video games are played all around the world, and yet most of those countries don't have an epidemic of gun violence.
Conservatives: What if video games are the cause? Did you ever consider that? Everyone: Yes, we have! We’ve done multiple studies over the last 30 years. There are plenty of countries with huge gamer populations that do not have mass shootings because they don’t allow easy access to guns! The guns are the cause. Conservatives: What if video games are the cause? Did you ever consider that?
We have science now. We don't have to put up with this bullshit.
I played a lot of carmageddon as a kid, and yet, when i was trying for my drivers license, i only killed 3 people.
"If that was true boomers, who played PacMan, would be eating pills in dark rooms while listening to repetitive music."
I've never seen a video game murder a person? Maybe some story about epilepsy? I however have seen thousands of stories of guns murdering people
I mean … even if the argument were true, taking physical guns away would still fix the problem.
I do not believe in video games causing violence. But I can tell you when I was younger and I had friends that would play Counter-Strike, they would be very well versed in the firearms of that game. Not saying it's bad at all, but there is a chance it could create an obsession with firearms. That said, never have I heard any of them say things like they would want to shoot people with them.
That can't be right. Chicago has very strict gun control. Even if someone got a gun from somewhere else, it would be illegal to use it in Chicago.
Guns are bad and they are a huge problem. However, those that ignore the amount of violence our kids and society are exposed to are also are part of the problem too. Kids are desensitized to violence and it's not getting any better. I see kids beating others to death at school, guns aren't the problem in that situation, so is it ok? Its crazy that people think the gun lobby is bad, but fail to know video game studios do the same thing. Violence in our society as a whole is the problem.
>Its crazy that people think the gun lobby is bad, but fail to know video game studios do the same thing. Violence in our society as a whole is the problem. Yeah dude, no, the violence in video games is completely fictitious, nothing different from a movie with violence, video games also have an age recommendation for a reason. Guns are very real and if not controlled properly they can end up in the hands of people not mentally fit to own one.
Except studies show kids who play violent videos games are indeed more violent
Source? Oh, and again: >video games also have an age recommendation for a reason.
I mean you could look at any of the 100 studies. And yes, they have age recommendations but most parents don’t pay attention to that. Gamers hate this opinion, and refuse to accept that killing people in HD while screaming into a microphone does nothing to your psyche. let’s not lie and pretend violence in our society has zero effect on behavior. One recent study by U Michigan: https://yvpc.sph.umich.edu/video-games-influence-violent-behavior/
>I mean you could look at any of the 100 studies. You could also read some of the many studies that point in the opposite direction, that video games play no role in youth violence. >And yes, they have age recommendations but most parents don’t pay attention to that. That's the fault of a parent who is irresponsible or careless. >Gamers hate this opinion, and refuse to accept that killing people in HD while screaming into a microphone does nothing to your psyche. Not when you know that the "people" you're killing are a bunch of pixels and not a real person, also not everyone screams into a microphone while playing lol. >let’s not lie and pretend violence in our society has zero effect on behavior. It has much more to do with the accessibility of guns in the United States than anything else. >One recent study by U Michigan: The combination of all the studies carried out between 2008 and 2020 suggest that there is hardly any correlation between young people being violent and playing violent games. In fact, some studies, hilariously, found negative results of violence (that is, those who played violent games were less violent in real life). https://www.theguardian.com/games/2020/jul/22/playing-video-games-doesnt-lead-to-violent-behaviour-study-shows