Violent Video Games Protected Under First AmendmentFollow

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052702304447804576411571732346148.html?mod=WSJ_hp_LEFTTopStories

Huzzah, and such.

The most interesting part of the story is the voting breakdown. In the majority were Scalia, Kagan, Sotomayor, Kennedy, and Ginsburg, with Roberts and Alito concurring. Dissenting were Thomas and Breyer.

I had heard this earlier. I'm a bit confused as I thought video games already received a rating that prohibited sales/rentals to minors. But perhaps that's only based on sexual content??

I don't think violent video games create violent kids anymore than watching the Road Runner makes one go out and buy an ACME anvil and drop it on someone's head.

The content rating is performed by the games industry, but not enforced in any way by any level of government. However, most big electronics retailers have internal policies of restricting sales of mature-rated games to customers under 17.

I love how the people who are always going "Video games are making kids killers" are of the right age to have played cowboys and indians as children, pointing guns and shooting at each other.

Right. Because saying "Bang, bang!" at someone is exactly the same as a realistic depiction of murder in a video game.

I'm not in favor of laws like in the OP but don't hurt your own cause by sounding retarded in its defense.

Not if you make sure that the Indians Indigenous People of the Americas win exactly 50% of the time.


Duh.

What realistic depictions of murder? Like, which game are you thinking of?

One "teaches" you how to point and pull a trigger, while the other "teaches" you what happens when you point and pull the trigger.

I think this is a good thing too. It's always been a stupid argument. It should always be up to the parent.

My son is 9. He plays CoD. We allow him to play it with the graphics and language on, and he's also allowed to play online. But the Xbox is right here in the living room. We can monitor what he's seeing and hearing and explain anything that might seem questionable. We're doinitrite.

The comparison to Looney Toons is right. I grew up on those, watched them religiously and so far I've only painted one dog's tongue red.

Um, he didn't. There is no antacid currently on the market called Xantav.

You make hemorrhoids seem tolerable.

Anger is perfectly natural and vital to a healthy population, too.

Also, there's tons of positive stuff to say about violence in video games; it serves as a great basis for a set, indeed many sets, of game mechanics that are fundamentally enjoyable.

I don't doubt that some kids who play violent video games will exhibit violent traits themselves. However, most kids - not so much. I'm not so sure about the cause and effect of entertainment spurred violence. Perhaps some kids show more aggressive behavior after 5 hours in front of a PS3, simply because they've been 5 hours in front of a PS3.

I've never really looked at any studies though.

I do agree that our societies dealing with sex is often downright puritanical.

This has always been my argument. Since when is violence a new thing? Public draw-and-quarter might be another nice thing also.

I have that same feeling about people that can't be bothered to know the difference between two completely different words.

I don't know, maybe. I might watch some gladiators.

His name is spelled correctly in the link because it's spelled correctly in the title of every show. If you were anyone else I'd wonder how you could be that dense.

Totally. I may feel differently about it were it real though. Maybe.

He probably was thinking about Zantac.

If regulated correctly, I could definitely see a market for brutal gladiatorial fights.

I thought we agreed to encourage the practice of Alma limiting his posts to snippets from Stewart and Colbert.

Story in NPR today.

In a nutshell a study was done with college-aged kids. Some played 'violent' games, some played non-voilent games. Then the students did an activity where they were to blast others with loud noises. They student could control the type of noise and the volume.

Apparently the kids that had been playing the violent video games were more aggressive in shooting people with noise.

Another researcher, interpreted the behaviors a bit differently. Defining the behaviors as minor acts of aggression and compared it to little kids sticking their tongues out at each other.

I guess I more with the second viewpoint. I don't think shooting somewhat with loud noise can be extrapolated to violent behavior.

Clearly what kids do and see and experience impacts behavior. Kids listen to loud be-popping music they get loud and rowdy. I mean we've been telling/reading kids stories or singing them lullabies before bed forever because these are activities that tend to calm and mellow kids.

But rowdiness isn't violence. I think one could just as easily make the case that kids who are exposed to slow dull witless entertainment, exhibit slow dull witless behavior.

Edit - Ooops the story.



Edited, Jul 7th 2011 3:08pm by Elinda

And do any of these things indicate a need for legislature? Methinks not without a ton of completely un-scientific conjecture.

The important part of Allegory's post was that this is not in any way indicative of a long-term trend, much like you wouldn't say that golf players are necessarily more violent than chess players.