Quote from moo"I think video games do affect children. For instance, if a young child starts to play GTA and there is no one around him/her to tell them that killing random people on the street is not a bad thing, then that child will grow up thinking this is a right thing to do."

1. why do the cops come after you.

2. why didnt you educate ur children. my little bro has been playing gta since he was 6. educate him on good and bad. if their that young keep telling him that

3. i've been playing them since quake 2 (i was 5) and i dont have a lust tom kill when im upset. im totatly fine.

I don't think computer games really affect kids all that much, I've been playing GTA's since I was about 12, my best friends little brother has been playing them since he was 6.
Granted he's a little bastard but that's due to his parents spoiling him and his sister (who's a complete b**** but not a gamer).
It all comes down to your parents and social circles, my generation are really a generation of gamers and non of my friends have ever tried to emulate something they have seen in a video game.
Perhapse we just don't have moronic parents.
Bring your children up with a good grounding in what common sense is and you won't have a problem.
For god's sake keep them away from Hannah Montanna, actually keep them away from any programs released after 2000, should be safe with 90's stuff xD

Correct me if im wrong but it was the Mother's of America who start this bullcrap...
The same bunch of women who made BootCamp for Marines less intense because it was hurting too many of them....

Bottom line is i fail to see any connection between crime rate and video games, and furthermore if there is any correlation it is like DH said "violent games let an individual take out their anger / frustrations in a way that doesn't harm others"

Originally posted by tr33l3x

---

The same bunch of women who made BootCamp for Marines less intense because it was hurting too many of them....

---

OMFG, are you serious?
That is complete and utter crap. Boot camp is tough so that the soldiers can survive being shot at, hit, punched, totured, etc etc.
But no, make it easier, who cares if they die in a war so long as they don't come home from training with a few scraped knees

Trust me DH i argued the same point.... Im in the Marine Corps and we have new guys coming in that are so shy and timid they can barely hold a rifle without calling home to mommy.... (some over-exaggeration may apply )

Anyways it all boils down to over-babying our youth into the boy-in-the-bubble syndrom.

Well, is there anything that doesn't affect children? But, since we're talking about games in particular, I shall further delve into this.

Leaving the parenting factor aside for a moment (I think we can all agree that you shouldn't let kids below a certain age play GTA or anything of the like), I do think much of it does depend on what a child does with the info it has absorbed. Just like with anything else, there are some children that take it too seriously, other do not at all. Some instictively know the difference between a game and reality, others need it explained (Mommy, why's that guy shooting people?), and then there's those that don't care either way.

Certainly what a child is exposed to does somehow affect children, because they all process what's coming to them, but I do think that the overall effects are overestimated.
I mean, if that theory was the best possible explanation, why wouldn't there be more incidents?

While I wouldn't necessary want to have a child witness any violent act, fictional or not, if it can be avoided, the most important thing is to have your child know what it was all about. He or she should still be able to feel safe, and know that it is wrong to hurt others. Surely, the older they are, the more you can explain to them, and it depends on how willing your child is to listen as well. But it is important to connect.

...

I think I'll start sliding off topic soon, so I'll stop here. XD There's just so many things that tie into this, is all.

I did a ten-page report on this for my technical writing class last semester, so I've done a bunch of research on the subject.

There was a seventeen-year-old kid who became addicted to Halo 3, and when his parents finally put a stop to it, he sneaked into his dad's safe, stole the game and a gun, and shot them both, killing his mother.
Some people make the mistake of reasoning this only happens to kids, but it doesn't. There was another, fully-grown man who killed his eighteen-month-old toddler because she accidentally broke his Xbox.

Ultimately it's not the video games themselves that are the problem, but how they are used. Alcohol is not inherently a bad thing, but if you abuse it it becomes deadly and dangerous to others. Video games are the same way: there's nothing really wrong with so much playing the games; the problem is how they're played.

If anyone starts to play a game to the level of obsession something is wrong, and it doesn't matter how old that person is or what gender they are (yes, some people think gender has something to do with it). After somebody becomes addicted to games, that's when bad things start to happen.

At that point, it's the responsibility of anybody who knows the person to step in and take action. They have to do it immediately or you'll start to see bad effects. People of all age groups have quit jobs to play video games, and that's only the beginning.

The bottom line is that bad effects don't happen as a result of playing video games: it happens as a result of video game addiction. However, I would advise looking at the ESRB ratings and judge based on the maturity and intelligence of the child in question whether you think they should play it. Nobody went on a killing spree because they were addicted to Dora the Explorer. OK, bad example; nobody went on a killing spree because they were addicted to LEGO Island.

Originally posted by Crawldragon

---

I did a ten-page report on this for my technical writing class last semester, so I've done a bunch of research on the subject.

There was a seventeen-year-old kid who became addicted to Halo 3, and when his parents finally put a stop to it, he sneaked into his dad's safe, stole the game and a gun, and shot them both, killing his mother.
Some people make the mistake of reasoning this only happens to kids, but it doesn't. There was another, fully-grown man who killed his eighteen-month-old toddler because she accidentally broke his Xbox.

Ultimately it's not the video games themselves that are the problem, but how they are used. Alcohol is not inherently a bad thing, but if you abuse it it becomes deadly and dangerous to others. Video games are the same way: there's nothing really wrong with so much playing the games; the problem is how they're played.

If anyone starts to play a game to the level of obsession something is wrong, and it doesn't matter how old that person is or what gender they are (yes, some people think gender has something to do with it). After somebody becomes addicted to games, that's when bad things start to happen.

At that point, it's the responsibility of anybody who knows the person to step in and take action. They have to do it immediately or you'll start to see bad effects. People of all age groups have quit jobs to play video games, and that's only the beginning.

The bottom line is that bad effects don't happen as a result of playing video games: it happens as a result of video game addiction. However, I would advise looking at the ESRB ratings and judge based on the maturity and intelligence of the child in question whether you think they should play it. Nobody went on a killing spree because they were addicted to Dora the Explorer. OK, bad example; nobody went on a killing spree because they were addicted to LEGO Island.

---

What research websites did you go to to get that information?

I think that was probably one of the better responses in this thread.

For most kids video games are just another form of entertainment, but for some they become an obsession. Kids spend too much time playing (MMORG's anyone?) and when the game is taken away it's almost as if part of them is gone.

These incidents are few and far between but worth knowing about at least. I doubt most kids or adults get this obsessed about a game, but some do and it's something that needs awareness.

Originally posted by Crawldragon

---

There was a seventeen-year-old kid who became addicted to Halo 3, and when his parents finally put a stop to it, he sneaked into his dad's safe, stole the game and a gun, and shot them both, killing his mother.
Some people make the mistake of reasoning this only happens to kids, but it doesn't. There was another, fully-grown man who killed his eighteen-month-old toddler because she accidentally broke his Xbox.

Ultimately it's not the video games themselves that are the problem, but how they are used.

---

And that's the thing isn't it. It's nothing to do with the games at all.
It's that these people are either mentally unstable or become addicted and snap if things arn't the way they want them.
As someone with OCD I can understand this completely and say that it's nothing to do with the item so much as the frame of mind.
The individual could be addicted to reading books and commit the same crimes, but because books have been around a long time then they are overlooked as a possible scapegoat.
Because that's all that video games are in these cases, a scapegoat to blame someones bad behaviour or sickness on.

Originally posted by Crawldragon

---

I did a ten-page report on this for my technical writing class last semester, so I've done a bunch of research on the subject.

There was a seventeen-year-old kid who became addicted to Halo 3, and when his parents finally put a stop to it, he sneaked into his dad's safe, stole the game and a gun, and shot them both, killing his mother.
Some people make the mistake of reasoning this only happens to kids, but it doesn't. There was another,


fully-grown man who killed his eighteen-month-old toddler because she accidentally broke his Xbox.



People of all age groups have quit jobs to play video games, and that's only the beginning.


nobody went on a killing spree because they were addicted to LEGO Island.

---

1. Well crazy people are crazy , also for the halo 3 issue , main reason why the U.S should ban guns from being owned by normal people with or without pass .

2. Well that's a stupid thing to do , can't him like cool off , that girl is only 18 mouths old (and when my baby brother turned off my wii when I was playing brawl I only addcently kick him because he was near me and I was angry ) .

3. Then the people start to complan on why they don't have money , what they should get a job as a beta tester , not only do they earn money for playing games , they also get to play rare beta versions of a game .

4. They want on a pizza throwing spree .


So over all the main reason why children are affected is because of the sky the lack of games with no online but has a good mutiplayer so the kids can play with their real life friends (games like this are Sonic games and the 1st halo ) , we need more party games or hard both single and mtuiplayer games .

Originally posted by Didowe

---

Originally posted by Crawldragon

---

I did a ten-page report on this for my technical writing class last semester, so I've done a bunch of research on the subject.

There was a seventeen-year-old kid who became addicted to Halo 3, and when his parents finally put a stop to it, he sneaked into his dad's safe, stole the game and a gun, and shot them both, killing his mother.
Some people make the mistake of reasoning this only happens to kids, but it doesn't. There was another,

---

1. Well crazy people are crazy , also for the halo 3 issue , main reason why the U.S should ban guns from being owned by normal people with or without pass .

---

*Crawldragon sucks through his teeth
That's not a good idea, and I'll tell you why: people want marijuana legalized because if people have legal, taxed access to stuff that makes you happy-happy while you're smoking it all of the major drug rings will be taken out, effectively wiping out a good portion of U.S. crime.

The same thing is true of weapon legality: if you illegalize owning weapons for self-defense, you'll crank up the black market for weapons, and only outlaws will own guns. Americans need the right to defend themselves or a lot of innocent people are going to get hurt.

The problem with the teen shooting his parents is twofold: his parents didn't intervene when they should have, letting his addiction and anger boil over; and they didn't keep their gun under tight enough wraps. It's their responsibility to ensure that only responsible people handle their weapon, and they failed to do that. It's not the teen's fault he had access to the gun, it's his fault that he used it.

yeah... I don't think the legalization of gun ownership is the problem. The problem is that people don't have a healthy respect for guns. I've grown up around guns. My grandpa owns a farm (still) and he would take us out shooting with his .22 rifle on a regular basis and he taught us what to do and not to do and we got a respect for what sort of damage a small rifle like that could do. I knew where that gun was stored the entire time I spent time with him and never once did I consider using that when I was mad.

And I agree with Crawl about the black market effect. You make guns illegal and you'll only leave criminals with guns which doesn't make the problem any better. Crime would probably increase resulting in MORE deaths by firearms and not fewer. Sure you might eliminate a few accidental deaths here and there but you would probably triple the gun crime so the benefits are gone.

Originally posted by geeogree

---

we got a respect for what sort of damage a small rifle like that could do.

---

There was a story - I don't know if it's true, but MythBusters proved it was possible - where some hillbillies stuffed a rifle with cigarettes figuring since they were soft they wouldn't do any damage. As it turns out you CAN kill someone with cigarette butts. You should never use a gun on anything you don't intend to destroy. One of the hillbillies killed his friend with the cigarettes.


Oh, and I forgot to answer this earlier:

Originally posted by 1sam234

---

What research websites did you go to to get that information?

---

I got it through a research database run by my college library. You have to be a student there to access it.

well, you could very easily kill someone with a .22 rifle. They're not overly powerful, but powerful enough. You hit the right spot and it would kill someone. It wouldn't do as much damage as some other guns could do... but I wouldn't want to get shot by any gun

Originally posted by Crawldragon

---

The same thing is true of weapon legality: if you illegalize owning weapons for self-defense, you'll crank up the black market for weapons, and only outlaws will own guns. Americans need the right to defend themselves or a lot of innocent people are going to get hurt.

---

Sorry, but that's a load of BS.
Ownership of guns was severly restricted here in Australia back in 1996 and the crime rate involving guns (including deaths, injuries and sales) has not gone up and has decreased.
This is due in part to the police doing their job and with the peoples help under the buyback scheme and informants a majority of criminal weapons trafficking was removed.
So either your facts are BS or you just can't control yourselves as people and we're better then you

and there are instances in other parts of the world where the opposite is true.

and you've added in a lot of other information into the equation DH. Your claim that limiting gun ownership lowers gun crime is dependent on a lot of other things working with that. And while I'm glad gun crime in Australia has gone down it is not only because of the limitation of gun ownership of private law-abiding citizens.

Originally posted by DarkHyren

---

Originally posted by Crawldragon

---

The same thing is true of weapon legality: if you illegalize owning weapons for self-defense, you'll crank up the black market for weapons, and only outlaws will own guns. Americans need the right to defend themselves or a lot of innocent people are going to get hurt.

---

This is due in part to the police doing their job and with the peoples help under the buyback scheme and informants a majority of criminal weapons trafficking was removed.
So either your facts are BS or you just can't control yourselves as people and we're better then you

---

Sorry, but with that line you revealed a large hole in your logic: Restricted crime is not a result of law-abiding citizens not carrying weapons. It's a result of a responsible police force.

When have you ever seen someone try to rob a bank or carjack someone without carrying a weapon? Someone like that must have massive triceps. The fact is that outlaws carry guns, even illegal weapons. If citizens are not given the right to defend themselves the outlaws will have nothing stopping them but the police, and the police can not do every job on the planet. They're not an army of Batmen.


But this is trailing off-topic. If you wanna continue the discussion, I'd be happy to take it to another thread.

Meh, not my fault, I said my peice a few posts back, but you guys brought up the gun thing so I thought I should say how it isn't correct that outlawing guns instantly (or at all) makes a country worse.

To sum some things up:
People are crazy, they like to blame things on everything but themselves, they don't like advancement in technology (one reason why we were in the dark ages so long).
They don't teach their children fiction from reality or right from wrong and need someone or something else to blame so they don't look like "bad parents".
They poison their own genepool with drugs and wonder why their kids are messed up.

Videogames are no more to blame for violence then books, movies or other media.
Everyone likes to forget that it's in alot of peoples nature to be violent, just look at human history and you see it riddled with death and destruction, and not a videogame in sight.

Video games are proven to affect at least 5% of what a child does in the future, whether it's becoming a Game show host from Buzz! or a ------ from GTA. Of course, most people won't follow the 'lighter' footsteps, so I guess video games are quite bad (Because, as mentioned earlier, people won't follow good video game instances, as they would rather play Action-type games)