What is wrong with Connecticut?

[BigBallinStalin]

There's nothing wrong with a healthy amount of compulsory unity!

[DoomYoshi]

I knew Stalin would agree.

[AAFitz]

[

Do you feel inspired to contribute aggressiveness, fear, anxiety and desensitizing children within this continuous stream of violence and killing within a culture of
violence and a recreational culture of violence? It's a bit sensational, don't ya think? .

Sure, its sensational, but not overly so given the context, to be honest.

Let's compare this alleged culture of violence in the US to.... children in Rwanda who survived during that genocide in the 1990s. Which event seems more aptly described as a "culture of violence"? The US with its video games, or Rwanda during and after the 1990s genocide?

Rwanda of course, but there might be more child porn there too, but that doesn't justify the amount there is in the states.

(When someone says, "X is violent, and culture of violence, and blah blah blah,"
We must ask: "compared to what?")

or we can say, x is violent, and there is scientific proof it is affecting children, and has the ability to affect children, so we should limit it, and educate people about this, as much as possible.

And again, the fact that there are more children starving in Ethiopia than Virginia, doesn't mean we should ignore those kids starving in Virginia. Relativity is irrelevant to some degree when you are caring for your own children. The fact that many have worse lives, should not stop us from providing ours with better ones.

And if there's a way to decrease the number of school slaughters, even a little....I think perhaps its worth a shot.

[AAFitz]

If anyone is assuming that violent games are just games and cannot be taken seriously, they do not understand psychology.

Your subconscious, and your brain, can not tell the difference between seeing something on a screen, and seeing something in real life. When you play poker online for fake money, your brain reacts the same way it does for real money.

Obviously, you (hopefully) know the difference consciously, but much of our personality is affected by our subconscious, which you simply do not have as much control over as you think, or pretend you do.

So, the wish to not subject your children and neighbors children to something that absolutely affects them subconsciously, is a very valid cause, and while I hardly advocate going too far...there are absolutely games, that children under a certain age should never play, and some that arguably no one should play.

Do not be so naive as to delude yourself that you can filter and understand everything you see in this world, simply because it is on a screen. Your subconscious is far more powerful than you realize, and you ignore the countless studies that prove it at your, and your families own peril.

[AAFitz]

I think it's pretty weird to hear about liberal folks burning video games when conservative folks were the ones burning comic books and rap albums.

Indeed, though as I pointed out before, they probably just felt they had to do something. My gut reaction though is that $25 is insanely too large a figure, since one could easily go on craigslist and buy them and sell them back for a profit....which as speculative as that may be...has to have happened already.

My initial reaction was "Why not sell the games and use the profit to give to the grieving families?" And then I realized we live in the United States.

Your suggestion was for them to sell what they consider a possible factor in the tragedy, to raise money to help the victims of said tragedy.

Actually, that sounds exactly what would be done in the United States.

[Lootifer]

If anyone is assuming that violent games are just games and cannot be taken seriously, they do not understand psychology.

Your subconscious, and your brain, can not tell the difference between seeing something on a screen, and seeing something in real life. When you play poker online for fake money, your brain reacts the same way it does for real money.

Obviously, you (hopefully) know the difference consciously, but much of our personality is affected by our subconscious, which you simply do not have as much control over as you think, or pretend you do.

So, the wish to not subject your children and neighbors children to something that absolutely affects them subconsciously, is a very valid cause, and while I hardly advocate going too far...there are absolutely games, that children under a certain age should never play, and some that arguably no one should play.

Do not be so naive as to delude yourself that you can filter and understand everything you see in this world, simply because it is on a screen. Your subconscious is far more powerful than you realize, and you ignore the countless studies that prove it at your, and your families own peril.

Source please.

[BigBallinStalin]

@AAFitz, and anybody else who doubts the power of "compared to what?"


But a comparison at least allows us to imbibe the magnitude of any perceived problem. If the problem is not as serious as the advocate imagines, then the response should not be as serious. For example, "In DoomYoshiTown, Crime has run rampant; we need stricter rules and harsher punishments." But the crime there is the lowest in the world, so obviously that statement is extremist. We can tell it's extremist by only comparing its claim with other situations/events/places/etc. Since it's extremist, (or rather, since the imagined crime level is not at all rampant), then we don't need to take seriously the advocacy of stricter rules and harsher punishments.

That's one reason why we need to ask, "compared to what?"

So... "x is violent"
How violent is X compared to other goods? Resources should be allocated efficiently, and this requires prioritization; therefore, we need to compare the violence of X to the violence of other things.


Comparison is always extremely important. "there's evidence of it affecting children, then and has the ability to affect children, so we should limit it"

All political action comes with a cost, and that is the opportunity cost. As we spend resources on dealing with this problem, what else could we have spent those resources on? We must compare the perceived net benefits of policy A with other policies; otherwise, we would always scramble for any public policy promised by any politician to any gullible voting public. Gee, that may even lead politicians to favor deficit spending, thus creating long-term systemic problems which are overcome unpleasantly.

That's why making comparisons matters and why we need to ask, "compared to what?," when someone expresses concern about something.

(if you use this method against people like PLAYER, it undermines their arguments too).

[AAFitz]

If anyone is assuming that violent games are just games and cannot be taken seriously, they do not understand psychology.

Your subconscious, and your brain, can not tell the difference between seeing something on a screen, and seeing something in real life. When you play poker online for fake money, your brain reacts the same way it does for real money.

Obviously, you (hopefully) know the difference consciously, but much of our personality is affected by our subconscious, which you simply do not have as much control over as you think, or pretend you do.

So, the wish to not subject your children and neighbors children to something that absolutely affects them subconsciously, is a very valid cause, and while I hardly advocate going too far...there are absolutely games, that children under a certain age should never play, and some that arguably no one should play.

Do not be so naive as to delude yourself that you can filter and understand everything you see in this world, simply because it is on a screen. Your subconscious is far more powerful than you realize, and you ignore the countless studies that prove it at your, and your families own peril.

Source please.

Its all out there man. Research it or dont, it makes no difference to me.

[AAFitz]

@AAFitz, and anybody else who doubts the power of "compared to what?"


But a comparison at least allows us to imbibe the magnitude of any perceived problem. If the problem is not as serious as the advocate imagines, then the response should not be as serious. For example, "In DoomYoshiTown, Crime has run rampant; we need stricter rules and harsher punishments." But the crime there is the lowest in the world, so obviously that statement is extremist. We can tell it's extremist by only comparing its claim with other situations/events/places/etc. Since it's extremist, (or rather, since the imagined crime level is not at all rampant), then we don't need to take seriously the advocacy of stricter rules and harsher punishments.

That's one reason why we need to ask, "compared to what?"

So... "x is violent"
How violent is X compared to other goods? Resources should be allocated efficiently, and this requires prioritization; therefore, we need to compare the violence of X to the violence of other things.


Comparison is always extremely important. "there's evidence of it affecting children, then and has the ability to affect children, so we should limit it"

All political action comes with a cost, and that is the opportunity cost. As we spend resources on dealing with this problem, what else could we have spent those resources on? We must compare the perceived net benefits of policy A with other policies; otherwise, we would always scramble for any public policy promised by any politician to any gullible voting public. Gee, that may even lead politicians to favor deficit spending, thus creating long-term systemic problems which are overcome unpleasantly.

That's why making comparisons matters and why we need to ask, "compared to what?," when someone expresses concern about something.

(if you use this method against people like PLAYER, it undermines their arguments too).

I fully appreciate the power of comparison, but again, relativity can be used to discount everything. Someone is always worse off than you, and always better off than you.

The comparison that is relevant to this discussion, is there are way more mass murders in schools by schoolkids now, than before, so maybe we should address that.

Your assertion that priorities must be realistic, is absolutely valid, and trust me, my view of the world is based fully on comparisons, and statistics, so I know what you are saying fully.

However, the implications of making decisions simply based on comparisons, would mean inaction and stagnation in many areas. The entire system of capitalism is based on each person making their own life better in their own way, so if we instead just made our lives better in comparison to others, that would actually be more like communism.

Also, I am not suggesting any laws or restrictions whatsoever. I do however parents should be made aware of the situation, so they can make informed decisions for themselves.

[DoomYoshi]

Ok, AAFitz, when was before?

I agree that there are more schoolkid shootings now than there were during the 1700s. However, there are more schoolkids now. How can you say this has anything to do with video games and not with more kids being forced to go to school?

[Army of GOD]

Barack Obama is a martian.

Want a source? Its all out there man. Research it or dont, it makes no difference to me.

[Dukasaur]

I spent all of today in a hospital waiting room so I had time to catch up on my reading.

I immediately thought of this thread when I was reading the Macleans article about the shootings. According to Macleans, one kid is credited with saving himself and five friends (four? I don't remember if it was himself and five friends or five kids including himself) . The kid, who apparently spends most of his free time playing Call to Duty (Call of Duty? Something like that, anyway) has learned from his gaming that the proper time to move is when the bad guys are reloading. Apparently, when the killer stopped to reload, the video game kid immediately took the opportunity to gather up five of his friends and rush out the door. So, at least five lives were saved by this kid's violent video gaming.

[notyou2]

I think it's pretty weird to hear about liberal folks burning video games when conservative folks were the ones burning comic books and rap albums.

Indeed, though as I pointed out before, they probably just felt they had to do something. My gut reaction though is that $25 is insanely too large a figure, since one could easily go on craigslist and buy them and sell them back for a profit....which as speculative as that may be...has to have happened already.

My initial reaction was "Why not sell the games and use the profit to give to the grieving families?" And then I realized we live in the United States.

Your suggestion was for them to sell what they consider a possible factor in the tragedy, to raise money to help the victims of said tragedy.

Actually, that sounds exactly what would be done in the United States.

Why don't they go door to door selling bullets. Everyone in amuricah the mugnifisent has guns, and guns need bullets. They could make a fortune for the grieving familys and I'm sure their appreciation and prayers would be substantial, thus making amuricah a better place for everyone. Winzors.

[tzor]

You want to know what is wrong with the Communist State of Connecticut? (Just north of where I live.)

Where do I begin?
Without resorting to
Drinking all the gin?

Well, let's start with this one. Back when I was a child and the family used to drive all over New York and New England I used to notice these signs on the interstate upon entering the state.

"NOTICE: Highway under repair ... this road is LEGALLY CLOSED."

It wasn't closed, but that was how they waved the liability for any accidents.

Did you know that all truck convoys must be registered by the state. That means if you are driving a U-Haul and you accidentally get behind another U-Haul (a convoy of U-Haul trucks) you could be pulled over and forced to go to the state capital to pay the fine.

I used to take the Port Jefferson / Bridgeport ferry a lot. Until recently Bridgeport was a dump; I'd feel safer in the Bronx than in that city, especially right where the ferry was. They since got themselves two sporting facilities right next to the ferry so it's a little safer, but not much.

Now there was that time when portions of that big bridge in Bridgeport fell into the river ...

Ages ago the Governor derailed a proposed bridge to Long Island; she felt that the natives would all flee the state.