California Lawmaker Wants Gaming Ban For Kids
from the evidence?-what-evidence? dept
A California lawmaker has decided that because there's violence in some video games kids should be banned from buying them. The article at Broadband Reports does a good job explaining why this is overreacting as usual. When there's violence among kids, people are always looking for someone to blame, but the blame never seems to fall on the kids themselves who almost definitely know the difference between virtual and real - and between right and wrong. Instead, people blame the video game and assume that somehow kids will suddenly stop being violent.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Virginia citizen
Virginia citizen calls for ban on stupidity in legislators.
I know this is less likely to happen, even though more people want it. Isn't it a shame that most of the people drawn towards politics are the worst kind to be in politics?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Virginia citizen
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I claim myself as an anti-poster child....
Then again, since I am Californian, I'll vote just about anyone into office... (Although, I like the Governator, he isn't nearly as bad as Davis was, at the moment.)
Second, I am really glad to find out that my pacifist nature wasn't instilled in me by my mother and father (both members of the military,) at an early age, but the fact that I apparently didn't play enough first-person-shooters. Though truth be told, I had a legal copy of Castle Wolfenstein (the first one...) when it first came out, and have had and played copies of every first-person-shooter that has come out since (Doom, Hexen, Heretic, Tribes, etc.,) and still regularly play first-person-shooter games (as well as other games, such as Neverwinter Nights, Warcraft, Starcraft, etc.)
Yet I have very personal and very deep opinions against the last two wars (tell me again why we are fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq?,) and I while I'd give my life to protect the rights we are given by the Constitution if I had to, I am not a member of the military and have no desire to fight in a war (though I do appreciate the fact that others are willing to do so to protect my freedom from foreign invaders.) I do not own a gun, and could not see myself wanting to own one for the purposes of taking another person's life.
Yet I don't see Video games ever having an impact on this, either for or against. To me, a game is an escape, a way to allow my mind to think about things which I am not normally faced with, the same way that movies, music, or a good book do. If I read a really violent book (such as _Night Chills_ by Dean Koonz,) does that mean I am equally likely to be violent? What is the difference, one is in the form of words while the other is in the form of lights on a computer screen?
I agree with Mike, if someone commits a violent act, it isn't because they had a problem determining fantasy from reality (except in the most extreme cases of schizophrenia, and in this case the danger is to the person with schizophrenia who usually takes their own life,) but because of something else, a genetic defect (unlikely,) or bad upbringing (much more common.)
We are so quick to find a scapegoat and so slow to realize the problem instead of the symptoms...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I claim myself as an anti-poster child....
Hitting submit before reviewing...
Geesh, that sounds sarcastic (it isn't supposed to be...) My parents were both in the military during the Vietnam War. They both saw what war does to people, and set out to raise their children to abhor war and seek peaceful solutions unless it is impossible to do so. And even though I occasionally got into fights in Elementry School and Junior High, I never started the fight, but usually did enough to defend myself against an aggressor (my father did teach us how to fight,) and every other option had been tried. Of course, I was playing video games at the time (as I have since my first Atari Game System at 5 years old.)
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I claim myself as an anti-poster child....
That's the pedestrian view of people who think they have a firm grasp of reality. However, psychology does offer an abundance of evidence that so-called normal people do live in realities colored by their thoughts, their biases.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I claim myself as an anti-poster child....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I claim myself as an anti-poster child....
It could be that techies are more brainwashed than they realize -- they are brainwashed to believe they should like music, travelling, and star trek. Perhaps they are just passive products of their environment.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: I claim myself as an anti-poster child....
Oh, I am sorry Dorpus. I guess it is my reality colored by my thoughts and biases that causes me to not understand a single word you are trying to express here...Maybe you can help me out a little?
I think what you are trying to say is that we (or at least what baggage we carry with us, such as biases or memories,) make up our own reality. If this is what you are trying to say, I could agree a little with you, we do make up our own perception of reality based on senses, memory, and biases. It is those "rose-colored glasses" my psychology professor once talked about (ok, so I took a few classes in psychology too....)
But if you mean that we can actually live in realities colored by our thoughts, why can't I stop the movement of time or modify the actions of others? If I am truely living in a reality of my creation, then I should be able to do these things, but cannot.
An individual's perception on reality is what makes them unique, and what makes their opinions different from others. It certainly doesn't make their perceptions right or wrong, nor does it prevent them from changing their perceptions. However, what any of this has to do with kids playing first-person-shooters is beyond me, because games don't alter a perception of reality, they create a new "reality" which we can escape to for a while, and what nobody has even covered as to why banning video games is wrong is the fact that people may learn good things from playing bad video-games, just like people may learn good things from everything else someone might find to be evil, whether it be music, Dungeons & Dragons, Steven King books, banned movies, or whatever someone might try to ban.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Knee-jerk posturing
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
outlaw video games
[ link to this | view in chronology ]