Sign in / up

* Posts by Luke Kandia

3 publicly visible posts • joined 21 Feb 2009

California ban on violent video games killed on appeal

Luke Kandia
Thumb Down

Studies on aggression and video games

This study was done in 2000. http://www.apa.org/releases/videogames.html

This is the ongoing controversy on Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_game_controversy

Violence and video games: http://www.thestar.com/entertainment/article/419019

Even Microsoft appears to have a conscience: http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2009/02/20/videogaming.html?ref=rss

Someone else who doesn't get it: http://gauntlet.ucalgary.ca/story/13256

Violence begets violence http://mentalhealth.about.com/cs/familyresources/a/vidgameviolence.htm

Video game industry won't stand behind its own ratings system: http://www.peace.ca/videoviolence2.htm

Violence in video games: myths, facts and unanswered questions. http://www.apa.org/science/psa/sb-anderson.html

0 0
Luke Kandia
Thumb Down

Atta boy Graham - another one who doesn't "Get it"

We're talking about kids. Not adults people. Kids. What you do as a grown adult, is up to you. As long as you don't hurt another person, the state allows it.

We've legislated child pornography, why? To protect the kids.

Yet we think NOTHING of slapping an 8 year old in front of a monitor and letting him/her snipe away at characters 6 or 7 times their own age. Let alone the language that goes on it those Internet games. Because, the story goes, there is no PROOF that it messes with their brains.

Have you read "Playstation Nation"? Read it and then you can comment about whether games effect kids. You just have to be around them and actually "pay attention" to see that it does. Especially violent games.

Parents should watch their kids. But they don't. Thats why there are child agencies, that eventually take children away from parents and make their wards of the state.

We've legislated guns away from minors for a reason. They aren't responsible enough to handle them. We've legislated Pornography away from minors. We don't give them booze at 13.

Because they're not responsible enough yet. We've done the same with cigarettes, marijuana (oops - big boys can't have that EITHER :), narcotics, etc.

But its okay to put a virtual uzzi in their hands, to blow the head off the neighbor down the street. Because why? You don't have enough time in your day to spend with your kid? Or if you do, its at the other end of a sniper rifle?

You like killing games and therefore you figure they should have the same rights? Its a great way for the kid to unwind - by blowing away a few hundred people before bedtime? What possible reason would you have to allowing them to play GTA, Unreal, Half Life, DOD, etc? They all depict people killing other people? What FUN is that?

There are a LOT of useless games out there. In the beginning, lot of them made very little sense. Hand eye coordination was the excuse we used with our parents. Then the sports games. But killing games? How can they take THOSE skills and translate them into every day life?

Don't you think they are a little young to make the distinction? Between Good and Evil and Right and Wrong?

Do we check what they read? Yep. Do we check the movies they watch? Yep. Don't you? Kids talk to you much? Do you actually have kids?

It may not ever keep them out of the state pen. Who knows what could happen in the next 10 years. But they're kids. They should laugh, play games, have fun. What fun is it to watch decapitations, maiming, dismembering, headshots, etc? Where did you get your definition of fun?

You married? I would LOVE to hear your wife's opinion.

What are you trying to teach the child by exposing them to violent M Rated games? It isn't a tough question. Answer it.

I didn't have an answer. Because there isn't a sane one. Other than how to kill another human. And unless you're training them to be Marines, killing shouldnt be for kids. They should have a relatively normal "fun" life.

And then decide for themselves when they're 18, whether that sort of thing is for them or not.

0 0
Luke Kandia

Parents just don't get it - its all about the money

Its illegal to sell alchoholic beverages to minors. A fine for those who disobey. What's the difference between a 17 year old and 18 year old kid? The 18 year old, in most places, is felt to be responsible enough to cast a ballot to decide how the country should be run. The 17 year old, though close, isn't trusted to do the "right" thing just yet.

Thats pretty well where the sale of violent video games is at. We say that kids shouldn't be exposed to violence, because very likely, they will either become violent themselves or insensitive to it. But woe to the judge that lets that baby pass legislation. For where would it stop? Television stations would eventually become liable for showing CSI to their young audiences. And PG-13? Try and name me a movie these days that DOESN'T have violence in it and ISN'T a chick flick.

You quickly see, its all about the money. Not so much about protecting your freedom of speech.

The video game industry is quickly becoming the #1 Entertainment industry out there. Sure movies make a lot, but who wants to watch a movie, when instead YOU can become the leading actor/actress in one instead? And kick a few heads in to boot!

As far as the raw violence goes, most parents, just don't get it. They see video games as "games". Not much more. The ones that DO take the time to sit down and actually watch what it is that the games portray, fall into two categories. They either become hard liners and never let their kids see another M or R game again OR they simply "let it slide", because they're enamored with the genre themselves. They just don't realize the effects that these games have on their children. They just see it as a way of getting the kid out of their hair. They don't realize that the gaming industry has basically "sold their soul" a long time ago, in order to reap a single benefit - the all mightly dollar. That the gaming industry doesn't give a damn about "their kids", otherwise they would welcome legislation with open arms. If the bulk of their sales comes from 18+ adults, then what do they possibly have to fear?

About a year ago, I had the good fortune to read the book "Playstation Nation". Amazing. It was about video game addiction. The author barely touched on the subject of violence. Her premise was that video (or computer) gaming was addictive to the point that people who were seriously hooked, did ONLY video gaming, to the exclusion of everything else. The only cure, was cold turkey.

Violence in video games? That should ONLY be an option for Adults. Kids should NEVER see it until they can understand the difference between right and wrong / good and evil and be able to elucidate those differences both orally and on paper. And of course be of legal age.

You simply have to ask yourself ONE simple question:

"What am I trying to teach my child by letting them play violent video games?"

You will quickly see that there is absolutely NO merit to allowing little ones to experience them. Unless we're training our kids to be soldiers. But then even the government waits until they're 18 to sign them up to train.

Ask little Johnny, what he finds fun about violent game "X"?

"Its fun!" goes his reply.

"Whats fun?" asks the parent.

"Shooting things" replies the little one.

So this is where we have come as an advanced society. When 9 out of every 10 new games that come out, are VIOLENCE based (killing something is the ultimate goal). That the absolute BEST and ADVANCED graphics games out there have KILLING something as a central theme.

Pretty pathetic. Especially in the light of where the rest of our society could be if we concentrated on BUILDING things, relationships, entities instead of destroying them.

But hey. That wouldn't sell would it?

0 0