• Welcome to League Of Reason Forums! Please read the rules before posting.
    If you are willing and able please consider making a donation to help with site overheads.
    Donations can be made via here

Seriously?again with this sh!t?

ajh

New Member
arg-fallbackName="ajh"/>
http://www.optimum.net/Entertainment/AP/Article?fmId=50522930

come on man!i thought we were past this moronic shit!doesn't the supreme court have BETTER things do deal with other than violent video games which have NO IMPACT ON CHILDREN S MINDS WHATSOEVER?!like,oh i don't know,fixing things like don't ask don't tell and maybe gay marriage?!but oh no,we need to waste time with things like this,because its not the parents responsibility to govern what their kids do,its the states!

i hate my country so much.....
 
arg-fallbackName="SagansHeroes"/>
"It's common sense. You don't pick a weenie off the grill with your hands because you know your hand will get burned. We shouldn't let children buy something violent that they don't think will affect them."

That's my favourite part... like lolwhat?

"It's just common sense" is terrible logic. What a waste of the courts time. Don't they have big, sugar daddy, corporations to suck off and give freedom to do what they want?
 
arg-fallbackName="Daealis"/>
This is such a futile and pointless struggle. Parents think it's the latest media they didn't grow up with that is the reason for every problem in the world. The radio was of the devil. When the radio got accepted it was the new music that was to blame, after that came the TV and instantly it was the one driving our kids into madness. Now that parents have been watching TV their whole life and are addicted to it, they have to find another scape goat. Video games are for the most part beyond the current generation of idiots, so they'll blame that. When we become the next generation of idiots parenting, I'm looking forward to what is the thing we'll blame.

On the issue, Stan Lee tells his story about parents trying to ban comics for the very same reason. It just gave me the chuckles, thinking that it hasn't been that long since parents were just as convinced as these morons are today that it was the new popular thing of violent comics that was to blame.
 
arg-fallbackName="lrkun"/>
This is a good law. It's better that kids play in the real world rather than play in game.
 
arg-fallbackName="SagansHeroes"/>
lrkun said:
This is a good law. It's better that kids play in the real world rather than play in game.

Is it better for kids to be out playing on a highway in the real world? With real world guns? With real world Tigers? With real world snakes? With real world Lava?

I know I'm exaggerating... but you're subjectively stating an opinion as fact >.<
 
arg-fallbackName="lrkun"/>
SagansHeroes said:
lrkun said:
This is a good law. It's better that kids play in the real world rather than play in game.

Is it better for kids to be out playing on a highway in the real world? With real world guns? With real world Tigers? With real world snakes? With real world Lava?

I know I'm exaggerating... but you're subjectively stating an opinion as fact >.<

I mean what I say. I prefer kids hiking, doing sports, having fun with their friends, making forts or tree houses. Now if you want kids to fire real guns, that's something which you added on your own.
 
arg-fallbackName="Your Funny Uncle"/>
False dichotomy fallacy. It's not either or. I grew up playing video games AND going out hiking, cycling and playing sports.
 
arg-fallbackName="lrkun"/>
Your Funny Uncle said:
False dichotomy fallacy. It's not either or. I grew up playing video games AND going out hiking, cycling and playing sports.

There is no dichotomy in my reply.
 
arg-fallbackName="Your Funny Uncle"/>
lrkun said:
There is no dichotomy in my reply.
Hmmm... Perhaps not explicitly, but "kids shouldn't play videogames, they should go out and play instead" is very much the implication.
 
arg-fallbackName="lrkun"/>
Your Funny Uncle said:
lrkun said:
There is no dichotomy in my reply.
Hmmm... Perhaps not explicitly, but "kids shouldn't play videogames, they should go out and play instead" is very much the implication.

No. It's a correction to the person who says that I prefer kids to shoot themselves in real life. I clarified by saying that kids do physical fun and not shoot people in real life. If you apply false dichotomy in this case where you say I'm wrong, then @.@ shooting people in real life and playing physical games is okay.
 
arg-fallbackName="Your Funny Uncle"/>
lrkun said:
No. It's a correction to the person who says that I prefer kids to shoot themselves in real life. I clarified by saying that kids do physical fun and not shoot people in real life. If you apply false dichotomy in this case where you say I'm wrong, then @.@ shooting people in real life and playing physical games is okay.
The inference was drawn from your posts in the thread as a whole, not just the one you mention. Anyway, there's no point hijacking the thread further. I accept that you did not intend to present a dichotomy. Let's move on. :)
 
arg-fallbackName="DepricatedZero"/>
My initial response was a little harsh.

lrkun, why do you think a law should be used to make up for bad parenting?
 
arg-fallbackName="Your Funny Uncle"/>
In the late 90's I used to work in a video game shop here in the UK. The first GTA had come out and had an 18 certificate meaning that it was illegal to sell it to minors. Many parents just came in and bought if for their kids anyway...
 
arg-fallbackName="Daealis"/>
Lazy parents who are afraid of a tantrum so they won't tear their kids away from the TV are just blaming the next new thing for their inabilities to parent. The story of every generation, like Stan Lee points out with the same bullshit happening to his comics back in the day.
 
arg-fallbackName="DepricatedZero"/>
I posted this earlier in another thread but. . .

http://watchmythreat.com/docs/Culture%20of%20Catharsis.pdf
 
arg-fallbackName="lrkun"/>
DepricatedZero said:
My initial response was a little harsh.

lrkun, why do you think a law should be used to make up for bad parenting?

Anything that helps children become better citizens is always beneficial to society. Where games with violence usually have mature themes within. These kids, if their parents didn't take time to explain a certain theme, might be taken in real life as a norm. Knowing which games are for the right age is a start. Proper guidance is necessary, where we can't expect kids to know what's right or wrong when they're understanding hasn't fully matured.

To illustrate, games show death, violence, and acts where the gamer himself or herself commit these. How will the child know that it's not the proper norm in society? Besides, when he/she's 18 or up, he/she can always play it then.
 
arg-fallbackName="DepricatedZero"/>
lrkun said:
DepricatedZero said:
My initial response was a little harsh.

lrkun, why do you think a law should be used to make up for bad parenting?

Anything that helps children become better citizens is always beneficial to society. Where games with violence usually have mature themes within. These kids, if their parents didn't take time to explain a certain theme, might be taken in real life as a norm. Knowing which games are for the right age is a start. Proper guidance is necessary, where we can't expect kids to know what's right or wrong when they're understanding hasn't fully matured.

To illustrate, games show death, violence, and acts where the gamer himself or herself commit these. How will the child know that it's not the proper norm in society? Besides, when he/she's 18 or up, he/she can always play it then.
Yet research has shown that, and I'm quoting myself here, "violent children like violent games, but non-violent children do not become violent." These games, indeed, help prevent acting out by being a source of catharsis. Children who would become violent, would become violent without video games. It's a matter of good parenting, not enforcing your morality at the point of a gun.
 
arg-fallbackName="lrkun"/>
DepricatedZero said:
Yet research has shown that, and I'm quoting myself here, "violent children like violent games, but non-violent children do not become violent." These games, indeed, help prevent acting out by being a source of catharsis. Children who would become violent, would become violent without video games. It's a matter of good parenting, not enforcing your morality at the point of a gun.



http://psychcentral.com/blog/archives/2008/05/17/the-link-between-video-games-and-violence/

Prevention is better than cure. ^,,.^ I'm sure there are other factors out there, but this law helps prevent teens who are already violent from engaging in more violence of which will suggest they do more violence.
 
Back
Top