Top 10 Things - Kids most want and need from their parents (http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/parenting/top-10-things-kids-most-want-and-need-from-their-parents-491790/)

"There are two lasting bequests we can give our children. One is roots. The other is wings." - Hodding Carter, Jr.

Top 10 Things - Kids most want and need from their parents (http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/parenting/top-10-things-kids-most-want-and-need-from-their-parents-491790/)I am not really sure how the top ten list connects to the question about video vs. real life violence, but the list is well worth reading.

As for the question in the thread title, I do not think there is such a correlation. Besides, we always tend to blaim violence on something: Right now it is video games. I clearly remember video films being blamed when they entered the market not so many years ago, and before that we had other things taking the heat.

The fact remains though, that we are all responsible for our own actions.

/Claes

I am not really sure how the top ten list connects to the question about video vs. real life violence

Me neither. Nil, I think.
:confused:

I don't believe there is any connection here.
There have been gangs and violence for as long as I can remember.
Besides, we always tend to blaim violence on something
Rock & Roll, Rap, etc. It's never the individual always some outside influence.

But I'm thinking that this is how the title comes into play.
If we do instill those listed traits, do we spare them from the violence?

I don't think you can say that it works 100%. It is up to that individual to conduct themselves properly.
:2cents:

http://www.trufax.org/paradigm/paradigm/video.html

Lots of people seem to think so. I wouldn't say its the games alone.

As a fromer educator I can say at high school ages there is absolutly a tie between parental influence, time spent in video games, and time spent getting in trouble. The kids who were consistently in the most trouble spent immense amounts of time on video games (violent and otherwise). These same students had parents who were the least interested in whether or not their child did well in school... or were the least interested in their child in general. Will all of these kids become mass murderers? No. Will many of them do some jail time? Probable. A few might even find themselves up for the Darwin Awards.

I suppose it's the same link that was a while back between teens playing Indians vs Cowboys and the violence in that time.

Personally I have been playing video games for many years, from my formative teenage years through to my current ripe old age of 25 and I have taken an active interest in the video-game related violence topic.

I do believe there is a correlation between time spent playing video games and anti-social behaviour, however from the data I've seen and my own experience within some of the more dedicated gaming communities I have seen this mainly as a symptom of other issues from which antisocial behaviour is also a symptom.

Purely by looking at the statistics, if you compare the occurrence of violence with non-gaming young people and the occurence with those who regularly play video games, there is practically no difference. The sheer numbers of young people playing video games will virtually guarantee there will be those playing violent video games who have a mental state that is pre-disposed to violence (I am referring to those whose up-bringing has not instilled in them the same moral values as the remainder of mainstream society, or those with mental illnesses)

There is an ongoing feeling of persecution within the computer-gaming community, especially in Germany after they passed the latest anti-violent game legislation. This sentiment is often embodied by the phrase "Correlation not causation".

That being said, I also support a more regulated computer game industry, where just like with film ratings, the more offensive material should not be available to those under the age of 18. The current systems are completely inneffective, just the other day I was playing a fairly violent game (Counterstrike Source if anyone's interested) against a team including at least one 13 year old. I don't think a game where the aim is to kill your opponents time & time again is really suitable for a 13 year old.

But that brings my little soliloquy back to the parenting & support structures available to the younger generation at the moment.

[EDIT] I have just finished reading the link provided above (http://www.trufax.org/paradigm/paradigm/video.html)

Not once have I seen games advertised in such a manner described, maybe I have been desensitised to such graphic terminology and I will be keeping an eye out for it on the next video game advertising I see, but I would love to see the original source for these claims.

I am also very skeptical about the claims made about the games 'training' young people to be killers ("The violent video games teach criminal behavior") - I refer back to my original statements ragrding people pre-dispositioned by their environment towards violence.

I am not supposing myself to be more well informed or have a fuller view of the data behind these claims than the author however I would encourage people to keep an open mind when reading this document. It is a very emotive debate at points and people from both sides have become very vociferous on the matter and become blinded to evidence opposing their views.

On August 18th, 1981 @ 3:00AM I was seriously injured as a result of a high speed chase involving a reported stolen motor vehicle whose occupants were firing upon the pursuing police vehicle from another city. I acquired two broken vertabrea in my neck (2C & 3C, a crushed throat and a couple of broken ribs and spent 4 days unconscious in the hospital and an additional 6 months recovering....I still have a few problems to this day)

During the courtroom testimony for attempted capital felony murder the defendants (2 boys and 1 girl ages 14-16) testified that they were playing "Dukes of Hazard" and that nobody got hurt on TV and everybody ends up laughing having gotten one over on the cops.

What do you think my feelings are about games where cop killing, murder of bystanders, rape and other violence is "FUN"?

On August 18th, 1981 @ 3:00AM I was seriously injured as a result of a high speed chase involving a reported stolen motor vehicle whose occupants were firing upon the pursuing police vehicle from another city. I acquired two broken vertabrea in my neck (2C & 3C, a crushed throat and a couple of broken ribs and spent 4 days unconscious in the hospital and an additional 6 months recovering....I still have a few problems to this day)

During the courtroom testimony for attempted capital felony murder the defendants (2 boys and 1 girl ages 14-16) testified that they were playing "Dukes of Hazard" and that nobody got hurt on TV and everybody ends up laughing having gotten one over on the cops.

What do you think my feelings are about games where cop killing, murder of bystanders, rape and other violence is "FUN"?

I understand your feelings towards games containing such subject matter.

In my personal opinion these should be restricted to adult purchases only, some people would advocate banning them entirely, however this is a draconian measure that would turn the government into a censor deciding what people should see and what people shouldn't see. This is not a position I would support. Adults are responsible for their own actions and are responsible for what their offspring see and do.

[EDIT] To clarify - I do not advocate the inclusion of rape or sadistic violence in computer games, but I do not support the idea of one governing body "nannying" the population.

Top 10 Things - Kids most want and need from their parents (http://shine.yahoo.com/channel/parenting/top-10-things-kids-most-want-and-need-from-their-parents-491790/)

"There are two lasting bequests we can give our children. One is roots. The other is wings." - Hodding Carter, Jr.

The poll question makes no sense because we all know (or should) that correlation ≠ causation. It could be (if there is a correlation) that "teen violence" and attraction to violent video games have a common cause. In such cases attacking a symptom won't help anything.

The poll question makes no sense because we all know (or should) that correlation ≠ causation. It could be (if there is a correlation) that "teen violence" and attraction to violent video games have a common cause. In such cases attacking a symptom won't help anything.

Environment plays such an important role on what you think, do or say.. if you are expose on a negative thing (e.g. video game violence) that makes it easy to go off track

if you are expose on a negative thing (e.g. video game violence) that makes it easy to go off trackI have been playing computer games (violent as well as "peaceful" ones)more or less daily since the dawn of home computing in the early 80's. So have lots of my friends, and not a single one of us have displayed even a tendency to resort to violence.

Properly wired people can tell the difference between fact and fiction (even in their early teens). Neither access to, nor absence of violent video games will make even the slightest difference to the minority that lack that ability. It may provide them with an excuse though, if we allow them to use it as such. I do not: They are still responsible for their actions... Just like the rest of us.

/Claes

I have been playing computer games (violent as well as "peaceful" ones)more or less daily since the dawn of home computing in the early 80's. So have lots of my friends, and not a single one of us have displayed even a tendency to resort to violence.

Properly wired people can tell the difference between fact and fiction (even in their early teens). Neither access to, nor absence of violent video games will make even the slightest difference to the minority that lack that ability. It may provide them with an excuse though, if we allow them to use it as such. I do not: They are still responsible for their actions... Just like the rest of us.

/Claes
Too much (violent games) is dangerous.

Too much (violent games) is dangerous.

Too much (eating apples) is dangerous.

Too much (eating apples) is dangerous.

That's what Eve said....and Adam wasn't too happy about it, either....:notme:

Too much (violent games) is dangerous.

An interesting position - can I ask what led you to this decision?

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not deriding your opinion in any way, I'm just interested in what experiences or data it is based upon.

Also, to the group as a whole - what do you class as a violent game? Mario Kart for example, (:topic: quite possibly the most fun racing game created thus far), involves driving at high speed, sometimes through a city-esque landscape, firing weapons at each other and barging each other off the road, but is considered family friendly.

An interesting position - can I ask what led you to this decision?

Please don't get me wrong, I'm not deriding your opinion in any way, I'm just interested in what experiences or data it is based upon.

Also, to the group as a whole - what do you class as a violent game? Mario Kart for example, (:topic: quite possibly the most fun racing game created thus far), involves firing weapons at each other, but is considered family friendly.

Not a specific to a game but too much of something in general is dangerous. Too much sugar can cause diabetes. Too much salt can cause kidney disease. :lol:

If a child/teen is exposed of too many violent games, then a child/teen might think that it is normal. If there is killing in the game, tendency child/teen will think that it is normal to kill. If the game doesn’t excite them anymore, they might start killing real beings. They start with animals then progressed to human beings just like in the movies but in real life as well.

I knew of instances where peopled get killed because they’re playing with their mobile phone while driving. It’s not a violent game but rather too much of using mobile phone is dangerous.

Satisfied? :DI’m going to sleep now. Too much internet is dangerous because I can’t rest and I have to go to work tomorrow early.:lmao::lmao:

I have been playing video games since the Tandy computers first came out (those of you too young - it was a big deal because it was orange monochrome not green!). Needless to say, I also have many friends that enjoy playing video games on the computer and otherwise (consoles). Except for one couple that are extremely anti-social (they play Warcrack - AKA World of Warcraft), I have never had a person show any signs of personal violence or active violence.

I believe the real link is a combination of factors one of which may be excessive use of computer-related games - but the biggest influence is parental involvement/interest in the activities of their children. In cases where I have seen friends/schoolmates get into trouble had very little to do with computer games but had much to do with the involvement of their parents combined with other environmental impacts (i.e. violence in home, major emotional trauma such as divorce, etc.)

Just my experience over the last 30 years (and many gaming friends).

yeah yeah yeah - I heard the same crap growing up only for me it was about Dungeons and Dragons and the PMRC.

I played Dungeons and Dragons as a pre-teen and teen when preachers and priests were saying it promoted devil worship and I never turned to evil. Neither did any of my friends.

The same sort of argument was put forth against rock music in the 80's by the Tipper Gore and the PMRC resulting a a sticker. Big Deal. Today the old "filthy fifteen" can be heard on any "oldies" station.

I think Penn & Teller covered this in the latest season of "Bullshit".

IMHO, for the most part, if parents held their children accountable instead of making excuses for them, there'd be a lot less deviant behavior. As stated, this is my opinion. It goes against all the psychobabble that is popular today. I can't get behind the "oh, we have to make every child feel good about themselves in every instance". Nope, if your kid kills the neighbor's cat, he needs to get his assets whipped. Just my :2cents:, I'm a grumpy old lady, and even though my kids are not perfect, they sure aren't going to kill someone and I've let them play video games since before they were old enough to go to school. Age appropriate, as decided by me.

I have been playing video games since the Tandy computers first came out (those of you too young - it was a big deal because it was orange monochrome not green!). Needless to say, I also have many friends that enjoy playing video games on the computer and otherwise (consoles). Except for one couple that are extremely anti-social (they play Warcrack - AKA World of Warcraft), I have never had a person so any signs of personal violence to active violence.

I believe the real link is a combination of factors one of which may be excessive use of computer-related games - but the biggest - parental involvement/interest in the activities of their children. In cases where I have seen friends/schoolmates get into trouble had very little to do with computer games but had much to do with the involvement of their parents.

Just my experience over the last 30 years (and many gaming friends).I think this said it the best. There isn't a clear, heavy line correlating violent video games with violent behavior, and video games alone don't have the effect (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32333480/ns/health-mental_health/). But I do think there's an effect of removing consequence from action and the need to constructively interact with real life forms in person. I think it can feed the personal fable and depersonalize, and studies have shown links to increased aggression (http://www.apa.org/releases/videogames.html).

yeah yeah yeah - I heard the same crap growing up only for me it was about Dungeons and Dragons and the PMRC

Too much (violent games) is dangerous

Scott, I agree. It was always blamed on something else.

dQ, I have to disagree. As for Randys' example, I'm not saying I don't believe it because I do believe, but how dumb are people?
You mean to tell me that those kids had never been hurt in a fall, fight, etc. Not to make light of it, but was the chase begun by "Hey, watch this!"

The kids who were consistently in the most trouble spent immense amounts of time on video games (violent and otherwise). These same students had parents who were the least interested in whether or not their child did well in school... or were the least interested in their child in general.

I was in HS when Pong came out. Not a violent game and we couldn't afford it.
I was consistently in trouble (violent and otherwise). I was suspended for 2 games (for fighting) from the Basketball team once and the Baseball team the next year for insubordination with an Administrator.
My dad was at every game, every meet, etc. that I was in. I was an A-B student, I would have graduated in January but I had to take the US Government class the 2nd half of the year (alphabetic, mandatory for seniors), the only class I had and I had more credits than needed to graduate.
Judge Margret Shaffer saved my life by telling me I needed to get out of Farmington.
I never placed blame on anyone else, I always to responsibility for my own actions.

can't get behind the "oh, we have to make every child feel good about themselves in every instance".

One question I like to ask about this philosophy; Did you have to teach your child to be selfish or did you have to teach your child to share?

We are born with a sense of self preservation, no matter how well we can fulfill the need. Even a baby will cry in order to get help to sustain itself.
I guess there could be one out there somewhere, but I know mine never failed to let me know when they were hungry. I don't know of anyone that tried to pass off SIDs as, they starved to death because they never let anyone know they were hungry!:lol:

There are a lot assumptions here. First, the question was whether there is a correlation - and as we know about statistics, there could very well be one. Does that conclude anything about fault or responsibility? No, that is not the test we are looking at - just correlation.

Beyond that, people may be forgetting that human behavior is a group of continuua. There is the continuum of knowledge - from the severely mentally handicapped to the genius. Even that strand consists of sub-continuua of capabilities, such as math, art, language. There are other continnua, such as fear vs. fearless, generosity versus greed, etc. Each individual lands on different points in these continuua, and for some violence is a cognitive choice. For others, it is not. Do outside influences shift the location of one's place on the various continuua? It seems logical that - as in any learning -if the capability is there, as well as a dose of will, they will shift. Physical causes (e.g. trauma) can also generate shifts - positive or negative. What locations on this array of continuua would be considered psychologically "normal"?

So to attempt to look at one outside influence on these continuua, and expect to show a significant shift in all significant locations - such as loss of fear, loss of care, inability to extrapolate the result of an action, loss of connection to others, etc. - is going to be a real stretch.

You are better off trying to measure threads in go/no go gages.

Here is my :2cents: - violent video games - NIMH (not in my house). I believe that, even as teenagers, children still need our help in sorting out some of lifes issues.

I have always been pretty liberal with the teenagers - I don't censor their reading or their music - but video games are a different story.

When my middle son was 17 he brought home a copy of grand theft auto. Because of the type of kid he is, I didn't demand that he remove it - but I did ask him to think about what the game was about, and was that something he really wanted to be involved with. The next day, on his own - he took it over to the game store and sold it for another game.

That was a unique situation - but all the other kids know that these types of games aren't allowed here. My oldest son never brought games like these into the house and now that he is out on his own, he doesn't own any of these types of games.

JMHO

I didn't demand that he remove it
:applause:
Tell a teenager they can't do something and guess what they'll do?
As parents, we should not try to destroy their will with demands. We need to channel that will and allow them to make decisions. Show them the right way, don't demand they take it. Some lessons have to be learned the hard way. When they start to learn these lessons they make decisions like the one you mentioned.
Carol, that not only shows his respect for his parents, it also is a display of your respect for your children.
:agree1:

I don't believe there to be a correlation in the majority of cases, though there may be odd occasions when it is one of a number of contributory factors - there are other mitigating circumstances in a large number of the publicised cases.

Reminds me of the time when there was a case against Ozzy Osbourne, relating to the youth (late teens? I can't quite remember now...) who had taken his own life and was found with the Ozzy song 'Suicide Solution' on his turntable (which, presumably, was the entire 'Blizzard of Oz' album, which contains an additional 7-8 songs but hey - let's not mention that). It was claimed that the song directly influenced the youth and contained subliminal messages saying 'Do It - Get The Gun'. Of course, this was sensationalised at the time. What wasn't publicised with quite as much fervour was the fact that the guy was a manic depressive with a drink and drug habit. Same with the Judas Priest case.

I grew up with a love of horror movies (moreso the old Universal classics but stuff from the past 30-40 years also). Getting hold of these wasn't an issue and, quite often, my parents knew I was watching such stuff. I also loved horror literature and played a fair amount of computer games in my younger days too, as well as listening to a lot of heavy rock. However, I had a strong and stable family background and was taught, from a very early age, to have good manners, be repectful and treat others as I'd expect to be treated myself. As a result (and whether rightly or wrongly), I believe that a strong, grounded upbringing based around respect and civility is a much more decisive factor.

I don't believe there to be a correlation in the majority of cases, though there may be odd occasions when it is one of a number of contributory factors - there are other mitigating circumstances in a large number of the publicised cases.


Good point - is the question of correlation to 'being a contributor' or 'being the cause'? Two very different questions...

...now that he is out on his own, he doesn't own any of these types of games.

I am just fascinated by the amount of time people (not just kids) are able to to dedicate to play video games. It was always my goal to be away from the house as much as possible...:tg: