#51 Posted by Overbite (206 posts) -

THANKS OBAMA

#52 Posted by C0V3RT (1377 posts) -

I'm in the minority, but I'm kind of OK with this? If there is risk that can be found with violent means of media and someone with a mental condition that prohibits them from being able to distinguish truth from fantasy, by all means get that out there. What I don't want for this is to become a witch hunt with the ultimate goal of finding something to act as a catchall the place the blame on.

#53 Edited by Phished0ne (2521 posts) -

@sissylion said:

Man, it's going to be a real bummer for you guys when the research reveals that there's totally a connection between the consumption of violent media and the expression of violence.

I mean, except for the stuff that already exists. Of which there is a lot.

Except the caveats: Violent video games increase violent FEELINGS, not violent BEHAVIOR. There is quite a large difference. What about the idea that people that are predisposed to violence are more likely to enjoy violent video games. Have you ever read Grand Theft Childhood? they do a great job in that book of summing up some of the problems with the nature of these studies. Their conclusions were quite good also. Violence in media isnt the issue, improper parenting is. The problem is that the guberment's reaction to these findings is to attempt to ban violent media, instead of helping parents learn the rating scale, or trying to get parents to be parents and actually pay attention to what their kids are consuming.

#54 Edited by Kyodra (140 posts) -
#55 Posted by RenMcKormack (1074 posts) -

@Thoseposers: MAD ENOUGH TO KILL.

Meh. I would like to see the results of this study. My gut says that there will not be a correlation between violent behavior and consumption of violent media, in normal folks. you may get increased like testosterone/adrenaline or something for brief periods in young boys, maybe those spikes that are repetitive over time have an impact on the brain. seems unnatural right to have sustained spikes of adrenaline test etc over long periods for repeated sessions, as you could get playing modem action games, which affect brain chemistry differently than the way brains traditionally develop (i.e. diff than the experiences of the brain of a caveman running away from a bear for an hour or of some kid playing football boxing or something for a short period of time every now and again) It might make you more aggressive or depressed or something.

But I AINT NO DOCTOR.

also 10 million is a drop in the bucket. we are trillions of dollars in debt you guys. trillions. with a T.

#56 Posted by Gaff (1814 posts) -
The same entertainment is enjoyed across all cultures and nations, but tragic levels of gun violence remain unique to our country. Scientific research and international and domestic crime data all point toward the same conclusion: entertainment does not cause violent behavior in the real world.

Even if the ESA is a lobby for self-congratulatory publishers who can see nothing wrong with their products, this is one statement I can agree with.

#57 Posted by FCDRandy (238 posts) -

@C0V3RT said:

I'm in the minority, but I'm kind of OK with this? If there is risk that can be found with violent means of media and someone with a mental condition that prohibits them from being able to distinguish truth from fantasy, by all means get that out there. What I don't want for this is to become a witch hunt with the ultimate goal of finding something to act as a catchall the place the blame on.

Yep. If the freedom that is being infringed upon is the freedom to not be shot by a crazy person, I will gladly present my ID to buy a violent video game or whatever.

#58 Posted by Milkman (17016 posts) -

@Phished0ne said:

@Milkman said:

Question: if we as "gamers" or whatever are so sure that there's no link between violence in real life and violence in video games, why are we so afraid of an official study?

Because there's already been so many studies. They all say the same thing: "Sure video games can cause some violent tendencies but its not enough evidence to show a causal link"

Plus, studies are bullshit. Especially when conducted by government offices. Its so easy to omit facts or twist them to make it go your way. Plus, the public has no interest in reading the actual findings, so they will just read the news reports that saty "oh there may be a link between violent media and violence in children" without understanding all the caveats.

Yes, there's been studies before but this seems to be the most involved study into the subject yet, as far I know of anyway. But if the results come back and say "nope, there's no meaningful link" then the discussion is over. Maybe it wouldn't be a bad thing for us to take a step back and look at violence in video games and say "you know, maybe it's a little much."

Either way, no one's going to take away our games or anything like that so I don't see where the outrage comes from.

Online
#59 Edited by Gerhabio (1977 posts) -

@Brodehouse said:

@tacticalfatty said:

@Brodehouse: What free speech are we giving up? It's the announcement of a study.

Wait for it.

I think you're being a bit paranoid. More information is always better and even if they found that violent videogames do cause real violent behavior (extremely doubtful), that does not translate into a repeal of the 1st Amendment or anything like that.

I, for one, am glad they're doing this. Government research will have more credibility than any other private institution. They will of course find that there are no significant links between gun violence and violent media and, while it probably won't shut up everyone, it will mean video games will be less of a scapegoat in the future.

#60 Edited by Tarsier (1069 posts) -

"We don't benefit from ignorance. We don't benefit from not knowing the science of this epidemic of violence." yes you do you criminal scum. thats the reason youre spreading so much misinformation. this is part of their plan people. wake up.. this isnt an alex jones kookoo crazy conspiracy.. these people are evil and they want full control. they will never blame the real problem which is DRUGS.. these drugs that are one of the main reasons theyve been in afghanistan in the first place. soldiers came back wondering why they had been guarding poppy fields... this is why. so that the mass pharmaceutical drug epidemic can spread and cause suicide and death across america, so they can blame it on the 2nd amendment and continue to take more and more freedoms while the sheep eat up every bit of bullshit they put out, because theyve been brainwashed since childhood through school and media.. if people dont start shifting their ideas about what is going on in the world, outside of the spectrum of what they see on TV and what theyve been taught in school, we are not going to have liberty for much longer.

#61 Posted by billyhoush (1192 posts) -

The rest of the world plays violent video games. We just don't have guns to shoot at each other once we're done prestiging in COD.

#62 Posted by Jay_Ray (1110 posts) -

@SpicyRichter said:

Asking the CDC to do the study?

Doesn't the CDC have anything better to do?

Hey guys, I am going to ask this guy who just played 4 hours of GTA4 if he's feeling violent. Do not touch this vial of small pox gets put away.

An hour later...

Hey, where'd the small pox go.

#63 Posted by FCDRandy (238 posts) -

@Overbite said:

THANKS OBAMA

I was going to make this joke before you but was certain someone else did. I can't believe we got to 3 pages of comments before it happened.

#64 Posted by Grondoth (256 posts) -

Do not fear science. It can only show us the truth.

#65 Posted by FCDRandy (238 posts) -

@Tarsier said:

"We don't benefit from ignorance. We don't benefit from not knowing the science of this epidemic of violence." yes you do you fucking criminal scum. thats the reason youre spreading so much misinformation. this is part of their plan people. wake up.. this isnt an alex jones kookoo crazy conspiracy.. these people are evil and they want full control. they will never blame the real problem which is DRUGS.. these drugs that are one of the main reasons theyve been in afghanistan in the first place. soldiers came back wondering why they had been guarding poppy fields... this is why. so that the mass pharmaceutical drug epidemic can spread and cause suicide and death across america, so they can blame it on the 2nd amendment and continue to take more and more freedoms while the sheep eat up every bit of bullshit they put out..

lol

#66 Posted by heatDrive88 (2362 posts) -

@C0V3RT said:

I'm in the minority, but I'm kind of OK with this? If there is risk that can be found with violent means of media and someone with a mental condition that prohibits them from being able to distinguish truth from fantasy, by all means get that out there. What I don't want for this is to become a witch hunt with the ultimate goal of finding something to act as a catchall the place the blame on.

I agree with this. If we should be so confident to say that there is no link between violent video games and actual gun violence, then we have nothing to be scared of and we should be welcoming and even accommodating to a CDC investigation.

If anything, since we pretty much know that there is no link between the two things, the real debate should be that this is kind of a waste of public resources and money.

However, if this CDC investigation can put the official nail in the coffin that there is zero link, then I would say that this won't be a waste of resources at all. Given the current political landscape and generally the popularity of Congress, I can't say I have full confidence of that.

#67 Posted by Blimble (302 posts) -

@Grondoth said:

Do not fear science. It can only show us the truth.

The truth only mater if people listen. We have studies saying there isn't a link, they don't care they just need a simple enemy

#68 Posted by TruthTellah (9309 posts) -

@Tarsier said:

"We don't benefit from ignorance. We don't benefit from not knowing the science of this epidemic of violence." yes you do you fucking criminal scum. thats the reason youre spreading so much misinformation. this is part of their plan people. wake up.. this isnt an alex jones kookoo crazy conspiracy.. these people are evil and they want full control. they will never blame the real problem which is DRUGS.. these drugs that are one of the main reasons theyve been in afghanistan in the first place. soldiers came back wondering why they had been guarding poppy fields... this is why. so that the mass pharmaceutical drug epidemic can spread and cause suicide and death across america, so they can blame it on the 2nd amendment and continue to take more and more freedoms while the sheep eat up every bit of bullshit they put out..

Okay, this is a strong start to the responses.

Come on, duders. I believe we can do even better.

#69 Posted by Ben_H (3381 posts) -
@Blimble said:

This is just silly. It is this dam Rock and Roll that is causing violence and perversion. Someone needs to stop this Elvis Presley before he corrupts or children any further

And all that gosh darn jazz music too! The blues? That stuff causes violence!  Swing music is listened to by those inflicted with reefer madness from marijuana when they go into a frenzy and chop people up with axes! 
 
The US needs to stop lying to itself.  Guns are the problem. They've been the problem for a long time.
 
And yes that thing I wrote about swing music is true. I'm taking an elective class on the history of pharmaceutical and recreational drugs in the US and people back then actually believed that crap about swing music and marijuana turning people insane (one article we had to read even had a quote from a "expert" back then that claimed marijuana had more severe side effects than opiates like heroin or morphine such as psychosis, hence the term reefer madness).  Basically what I am saying is that the religious right in the US has always been delusional.
#70 Posted by Phoenix87 (481 posts) -

Dear Obama, if you want to decrease real-life violence there's a simple solution. Not only legalize marijuana on a federal level, but make it mandatory.

#71 Edited by BaconGames (3487 posts) -

Sure, I guess it wouldn't necessarily hurt but if the president really wanted to put money towards research that would get them answers, dump them into mental health and criminology research. That it's violent media only speaks to the fact that the public is concerned and what's someone to do something about it, hence this is "doing something about it."

If you also pay attention, he mentions "youth" which is age group that the government already regulates outside the realm of the Constitution and kind of always had. The only way the government would even begin to limit violent media would be harsher bans on children being exposed to violent media, which probably won't do much to actually address any problems. Unless there is as clear as day absolute proof of causation, the US will unlikely move toward the direction of censoring video games. We've been through all this before, we'll go through it again but hopefully this is one of the last.

As I said, if research into the issue of violence, media, or anything along those lines were really the point, you wouldn't give it to the goddamn CDC to do psychology research. The real benefit would be more of a justification for other scholars to get grants to do their research related to the topic but the president's grant itself is more of a political move than anything.

It's weird though that video games can't really win. If it's a niche concept, then it can be pinned as a creepy basement dweller creep that is deranged/detached from society (much like how the Japanese have done with men who've killed women labeled as "otaku"). If it's popular, then there exists a great correlation between the male population and those who play video games which when one of them invariably commits a violent crime, that they play games is brought into the mix when really it's equivalent to saying they watch movies or read books. Of course, both are derived from a greater sense of unease and discomfort with games, which is really what's going on and has always really been the issue.

#72 Posted by RenMcKormack (1074 posts) -

CHEMTRAILS cause violence man. Obama is just doing this so you won't see the shadow government that's telling you what to do.

#73 Posted by Brodehouse (10072 posts) -

@bricewgilbert said:

@Brodehouse: lol again who's giving up free speech? A study is a being done. No one is even saying that if the study gives positive results than they would even do anything. They would need to replicate such results even more. I would be surprised if that were possible considering the research so far, but there is nothing wrong with fine tuning around knowledge. Being sure about something. This brings up a scary thought too. What if violent video games DO cause people of a certain age to act violent? I don't believe this, but what if it was conclusive? Would you still scream free speech? We are talking about children here and we do curtail certain rights for them.

YES I WOULD STILL SCREAM FREE SPEECH.

We're not talking about children here, we've already prohibited children from buying M rated games with graphic violence. We're talking about adults, and their right to say, think, view, hear WHATEVER THEY WANT.

#74 Posted by Renahzor (994 posts) -

The wording in this is all you need to know to determine the outcome. The CDC and it's researchers/scientists are being paid to: “Conduct research on the causes and prevention of gun violence, including links between video games, media images, and violence". There is a pre-determined outcome here, that states very clearly IS a cause-effect relationship between them, and they're being paid to study it. It isn't science, it's research into a cause-effect relationship that must be assumed for the research to continue (and, much more importantly, the funding).

"If it can save even one child's life, we must do whatever it takes" is a pretty dangerous slippery slope. But hey it's not like they're trying to ban shit that has, at best, a dubious link to violent crime in the US anyway right?

#75 Posted by Dagbiker (6978 posts) -
God loves you as he loved Jacob.
#76 Posted by heatDrive88 (2362 posts) -

@billyhoush said:

@GooieGreen said:

@billyhoush said:

What a waste of 10 million. I guess at the very least it will create some bullshit jobs in academia that may stimulate a bit of the economy.

No, you're right. We as a society know the impact of everything on everything.

My point is they already have studied it and there are current studies in progress. Obama just did this to try to shut up the NRA's use of scapegoating video games. There is nothing wrong with trying to appease everyone and 10 million really isn't that much money. It's just eye rolling bullshit politics.

If you really think about it, everyone should have zero problem with a $10 million dollar investment aimed at building a checklist of "things the NRA can't use as a bullshit excuse for gun violence".

#77 Posted by Phished0ne (2521 posts) -

@RenMcKormack: I can tell you what previous studies have said. Consuming Violent media IS one of the many many many risk factors for violent behavior. Heres some of the laundry list(in no particular order):

physical or sexual abuse

media violence

underage sex

being bullied at school

drug use

hereditary factors

brain damage from head injury

The problem is, the nature of our society wants one single issue to blame. There is no one single "cause" for violent behavior, but instead it comes from any combination of risk factors.

#78 Posted by alibson (165 posts) -

I don't know about violence, but I feel like all this sexism in video games these days is turning me into a rapist. I saw a woman in a game once with her tits out, now I can't help but treat all women like objects.

#79 Posted by Loki311 (2 posts) -

In a way, to me, it's a good thing, because maybe the CDC will find that games have barely any impact on violent tendencies. Then for once we can finally not have video games scapegoated, and politicians will finally stop with this.

#80 Edited by ManicMyna (69 posts) -

so violence is now some form of communicable disease, when was this discovered or has osama just gone mental reagan style

#81 Posted by ThePickle (4186 posts) -

Altogether now...

THANKS OBAMA.

#82 Posted by RecSpec (3852 posts) -

This is just a study, no big deal. They won't find anything. Although, IF by some chance they do find a link, this will just snowball and drag movies and tv along with it.

Online
#83 Posted by GioVANNI (1288 posts) -

And they are going to find exactly zero.  Studies have been done on this before, and violence has only been going down since the prevalence of videogames.

#84 Posted by shodan2020 (679 posts) -

@FCDRandy said:

@C0V3RT said:

I'm in the minority, but I'm kind of OK with this? If there is risk that can be found with violent means of media and someone with a mental condition that prohibits them from being able to distinguish truth from fantasy, by all means get that out there. What I don't want for this is to become a witch hunt with the ultimate goal of finding something to act as a catchall the place the blame on.

Yep. If the freedom that is being infringed upon is the freedom to not be shot by a crazy person, I will gladly present my ID to buy a violent video game or whatever.

Me too. I get carded for booze all the time and i'm 30. Doesn't bother me, besides I rarely ever visit brick and mortar anymore. The internet knows how fucking old I am. :)

#85 Posted by Crixaliz (782 posts) -

The plan that is outlined in that PDF link is pretty impressive, covers the issue quite well.

#86 Posted by Branthog (5583 posts) -

I like that the only thing to justify the need for a president to demand that we conduct these studies is that a bunch of ignorant busy-bodies scapegoat it. I mean, if we're going to demand studies of the link between a bunch of random bullshit, just because a crazy segment of society is making assertions, where is the government study on exorcisms? How about a study on how "lesbians and assorted liberals" cause all of this country's natural disasters?

Again, it's worth repeating that the latest round of violence which spurred all this had nothing to do with video games. A crazy dooms-day prepping mother stockpiling firearms that she left accessible to her mentally unstable son who was reportedly also a player of Star Craft II.

@Brodehouse said:

@sissylion said:

Man, it's going to be a real bummer for you guys when the research reveals that there's totally a connection between the consumption of violent media and the expression of violence.

I mean, except for the stuff that already exists. Of which there is a lot.

Because of course there is. Because if I'm a violent fuck who wants to kill people, why wouldn't I involve myself in media that involves killing people? In the same way if that I'm the type of person who kidnaps babies, I'm probably watching a lot of programming about parenting and babies. Neither justifies censorship.

And this is exactly the kind of absurdity they're pushing. Because people are left ignorant, in this society. Science is ridiculed and so is logic, so things like "most rapists have viewed pornography at some point" equate to "pornography turns men into rapists with absolutely no question in the head of many of the moronic citizens.

Of course, in the long run, it doesn't even matter. Great, in some magical fantasy land, it is determined that ABOUT ONE OUT OF FIFTY MILLION PEOPLE goes on a shooting spree BECAUSE OF VIDEO GAMES. Since we have the unbridgeable protection of free speech in this country, it really doesn't matter. And since those who would do such a thing, even if there was some conclusive causality, also already have to have various other issues going on with them, then things like having access to firearms and being mentally unstable are far more meaningful indicators than "plays Star Craft".

This is all an awful lot like "security theater", frankly.

#87 Posted by sonicrift (303 posts) -

"We don't benefit from ignorance. We don't benefit from not knowing the science of this epidemic of violence." He's testing. For science! That's good. I totally respect the president taking this approach, and hope there's cake. And if these studies say there's no link, as previous studies have, then the US government says there's no link. Then when some nutball says "ban all the video games!" we can point to this government sponsored study.

#88 Posted by SUPERSTEFF1 (12 posts) -

If we're all so sure that videogames don't cause violence, let them do their research and show the people who are in doubt.

#89 Posted by GaspoweR (3168 posts) -

If anything that money would have been better spent on improving the mental health system.

#90 Posted by Milkman (17016 posts) -

@Brodehouse said:

@bricewgilbert said:

@Brodehouse: lol again who's giving up free speech? A study is a being done. No one is even saying that if the study gives positive results than they would even do anything. They would need to replicate such results even more. I would be surprised if that were possible considering the research so far, but there is nothing wrong with fine tuning around knowledge. Being sure about something. This brings up a scary thought too. What if violent video games DO cause people of a certain age to act violent? I don't believe this, but what if it was conclusive? Would you still scream free speech? We are talking about children here and we do curtail certain rights for them.

YES I WOULD STILL SCREAM FREE SPEECH.

We're not talking about children here, we've already prohibited children from buying M rated games with graphic violence. We're talking about adults, and their right to say, think, view, hear WHATEVER THEY WANT.

No one is talking about that. They're talking about doing a study. That's it.

Online
#91 Posted by Atepsflame (3 posts) -

@Majkiboy: Actually, a local official in Sweden pretty much did just that. Said effectively that highly technical simulators are so easily available that learning how to actually operate a train would be trivial. I'd link to the story, but... I'm lazy.

#92 Posted by Seaborgium (100 posts) -

LISTEN UP YALL I GOT ME SOME OPINIONS

#93 Posted by Phatmac (5726 posts) -

I'll be interested in the results.

#94 Posted by vinster345 (131 posts) -

@Brodehouse said:

@WinterSnowblind said:

@Brodehouse said:

And here is where an entire nation gives up their right to free speech with triumphant applause.

Who's giving up free speech and why would you quote that movie?

Hopefully there's no parallel in a massive ignorant crowd, paralyzed by fear and doubt, extinguishing the one thing that has allowed them to come as far as they have. Free speech fucking matters, and anyone who wants to curtail it for 'safety' is a fucking Sith Lord in disguise.

Oh, you're 12 years old. Fair enough.

#95 Posted by Video_Game_King (36272 posts) -

*clicks link, reads plan a bit*

The President’s Plan includes:
1. Closing background check loopholes to keep guns out of dangerous hands;

Uh, you may wish to check the wording on that, sir.

#96 Posted by mystakin (100 posts) -

As someone who studied media effects in college for reasons such as this, I can only view this news as positive. Video games aren't being singled out, thankfully, and there is a wealth of research the CDC can pull from to begin their own studies. Media studies is an infinite process of testing, retesting, and testing with slight variations, so more studies can only lead to greater understandings.

#97 Edited by JDillinger (155 posts) -

They'll find what other studies have found. There is little to no correlation between violent media and violent behavior in real life. If this will finally get the legislative and executive branches to shut the fuck up about it then I'm all for it.

#98 Posted by FCDRandy (238 posts) -

@GaspoweR said:

If anything that money would have been better spent on improving the mental health system.

Sure, but $10MM isn't going to improve the system, while it will adequately fund this study.

#99 Edited by buft (3320 posts) -

Hey we got games outside the US too, we have much tighter gun laws and the stats show it

per 100,000 people the united states has 10.7, in the UK that number is 0.25,

must be the videogames, it has to be.

signed the NRA

#100 Edited by Seaborgium (100 posts) -

@Atepsflame said:

@Majkiboy: Actually, a local official in Sweden pretty much did just that. Said effectively that highly technical simulators are so easily available that learning how to actually operate a train would be trivial. I'd link to the story, but... I'm lazy.

Clearly if she had played more video games, she wouldn't have crashed the train.

TRAIN SIMULATOR 2013 SAVES LIVES, PEOPLE.