Active Shooter Video Game

in the game the shooter is going through school corridors trying to kill students

from advertising for the game:

"Be the Good Guy or the Bad Guy. The choice is yours. Only in Active Shooter will you be able to pick the role of an Elite Swat Member or the actual shooter."

a parent of a student who was shot dead said this:

"They are profiting from the murder of my daughter. They are putting out a game that glorifies what happened to my daughter."

who wants to step up and say its just a game?

how about a game where you get to play the killer and decapitate and dismember people and then destroy what's left of their bodies in a vat of acid?

again, just a game?


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/us/parkland-shooter-video-game.html?action=click&contentCollection=us&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront

Of course it's just a game. Much like games where you play serial killers, hit men, Nazis or a monopolist.

What else is it?

In poor taste and well marketed I guess.

Quote: lilredrooster

in the game the shooter is going through school corridors trying to kill students

from advertising for the game:

"Be the Good Guy or the Bad Guy. The choice is yours. Only in Active Shooter will you be able to pick the role of an Elite Swat Member or the actual shooter."

a parent of a student who was shot dead said this:

"They are profiting from the murder of my daughter. They are putting out a game that glorifies what happened to my daughter."

who wants to step up and say its just a game?

how about a game where you get to play the killer and decapitate and dismember people and then destroy what's left of their bodies in a vat of acid?

again, just a game?


https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/29/us/parkland-shooter-video-game.html?action=click&contentCollection=us&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=1&pgtype=sectionfront

Quote: Rigondeaux

Of course it's just a game.

how about a game where a posse of gang bangers gang rape a 14 year old girl on her walk home from middle school?

and you get to be the girl or the lead banger. or one of the followers

would you say the same thing?

it's just a game? no adverse action should be taken against the producers, marketers?

The consumer has the ultimate choice and if they are against it they will not buy it and it will be a failure. And other companies will see it’s not a good marketing idea and not bring something like it to market. But the success of other games where you are a car thief , terrorist or gang member and killing is part of it shows there is a market.

Sad, absolutely but it’s the public’s job to not support products they disagree with.

What action do you feel should be taken against the producers and marketers? And who makes that decision in your mind?

Quote: Boz

The consumer has the ultimate choice and if they are against it they will not buy it and it will be a failure.

that statement is very misleading and basically just false.

the population of the U.S. is 326 million

325,995,000 could hate the game and if 5,000 buy it and love it the game could be a success.




note: I should have ramped that figure way down because only those over a certain age are capable of making an informed and intelligent decision
but the point stands

I think it'd be very unlikely for a game with 5k purchases to be even anywhere breakeven. Video games aren't easy to make and cost quite a bit of money to develop. For a large corporation like Steam...yeah, it's gonna cost a lot to make the game.

Where's the outrage for games like Grand Theft Auto? I've never played it, but from I understand you're basically a gang member dude probably and go around killing people and raping others, I'd guess. Not to mention, you can't even play as the "good guy" in GTA....I don't think. I read it cost (estimated) $265 MILLION to create GTA V.

Even if this new shooter game cost less than 1% of that, at $2 million....5,000 purchases isn't going to even cover that cost, unless the game costs $400+. Even then, it's just breaking even, not making money and certainly not a 'success'.

Quote: lilredrooster

that statement is very misleading and basically just false.

the population of the U.S. is 326 million

325,995,000 could hate the game and if 5,000 buy it and love it the game could be a success.




note: I should have ramped that figure way down because only those over a certain age are capable of making an informed and intelligent decision
but the point stands

How can a statement of free market and supply and demand be false. If it's not breaking any laws and people want to purchase it, that's what a free society is all about. Should we not have WWII games because peoples grandfather's died in it? Just because you don't like something doesn't mean you get to decide what others do.


ZCore13

We will probably have to disagree on this one.

I’m just not a fan of censorship and feel the marketplace should decide.

But I agree it’s a terrible product.

civilized societies sometimes make decisions restricting individual rights

in this country you can't legally possess heroin

I'm pretty sure that in a few other countries you can

the father of the politician Rand Paul advocated for the legality of all drugs for individual use

I'm not necessarily saying that censorship should be applied to these games

but it's something I need to think about to come up with what is a satisfactory answer for myself and that is why I put the questions out there

Just saw on the news the game is being pulled.

Here is a link.

http://time.com/5294874/active-shooter-video-game-school-shooting-canceled/

Sports team named "Tornados". If you had a relative who died during one how would you like to see it in the news every day?

How about "Sharks"? If you knew someone who was mauled by one, yo think they would like to cheer on that team?

I go with the free speech guys here. Hope the pressures from groups kill such a game (pun intended), but do not make them illegal.

Quote: RS

I think it'd be very unlikely for a game with 5k purchases to be even anywhere breakeven. Video games aren't easy to make and cost quite a bit of money to develop. For a large corporation like Steam...yeah, it's gonna cost a lot to make the game.

Where's the outrage for games like Grand Theft Auto? I've never played it, but from I understand you're basically a gang member dude probably and go around killing people and raping others, I'd guess. Not to mention, you can't even play as the "good guy" in GTA....I don't think. I read it cost (estimated) $265 MILLION to create GTA V.

Even if this new shooter game cost less than 1% of that, at $2 million....5,000 purchases isn't going to even cover that cost, unless the game costs $400+. Even then, it's just breaking even, not making money and certainly not a 'success'.

https://www.quora.com/How-is-the-gaming-industry-profitable-if-the-titles-are-only-sold-once-per-user

Good story on exactly what you are talking about.

Quote: lilredrooster

the father of the politician Rand Paul advocated for the legality of all drugs for individual use

Rand Paul's father was/is correct on most other issues as well. He's an excellent resource if you want perspective from a logical thinker.

I've only seen one clip from the game and it only lasted a few seconds. Did the game actually exist or was it just a publicity stunt of some sort?


If it is a real game, it will be back. Steam says they pulled the game but that won't stop someone else from publishing it.

Quote: HugoSlavia

Rand Paul's father was/is correct on most other issues as well. He's an excellent resource if you want perspective from a LOGICAL thinker.

I wouldn't deny that he's logical. And I wouldn't say that people on the opposing side are illogical.

Most hot button issues have reasonable logic on both sides.

The society as a whole must decide which logic is stronger and which it wants to follow.

In our internet driven society many just want to call their opponents idiots or other names to discredit their point of view.

This thread made me wonder: are there in fact any subjects which are illegal to use as a theme for a video game?

The one possibility which comes to mind would be a video game whose aim is to kill the president.

I only ask because it is a federal crime to threaten to kill the POTUS.

Quote: MrV

This thread made me wonder: are there in fact any subjects which are illegal to use as a theme for a video game?

The one possibility which comes to mind would be a video game whose aim is to kill the president.

I only ask because it is a federal crime to threaten to kill the POTUS.

There are lots of movies that center around killing the President. Not illegal.

Quote: lilredrooster

In our internet driven society many just want to call their opponents idiots or other names to discredit their point of view.

Some issues can be reasonably argued from both sides, others not.

In gambling, we can reasonably debate whether a card counter should play rated or unrated. But if someone argues they can overcome the house edge by quitting when ahead, that's just wrong.

Quote: MrV

This thread made me wonder: are there in fact any subjects which are illegal to use as a theme for a video game?

The one possibility which comes to mind would be a video game whose aim is to kill the president.

I only ask because it is a federal crime to threaten to kill the POTUS.

Nope, not illegal. Rosie O'Donnell recommended this one


ZCore13

So.

Awful concept. Too soon. Can't imagine buying it myself. Even if my Christmas list included a nephew who put it #1.

Would prefer nobody bought it, marketed it, played it. Hope it was going to be a complete dud and money hole for the developers and distributors.

That said, there's a market for a huge swath of products I would never buy or enjoy. Shock value alone in owning it might have appealed to some.

The thing that occurs to me, though, is there's a huge disconnect between identifying who might be the next mass shooter and who's just a disaffected teenager or young man. And, in a police state (that we don't have), this or something like it could be the single best way to approach finding them before they go over the edge.

NOT advocating this, but...

If a game allowing people to commit this crime WAS on the market and required an Internet connection to play, and...

If a cookie tracked who bought it and played it, which character they chose to be, and how often they used it...

There could be a threshold after which a discreet look should be taken at that person's life for other indications they may be a risk to themselves and others.

One thing that seems to be very common to studies of serial killers and mass killers is that they practice-fantasize-work up to-document in advance their "moment". The desire to act as the killer mowing down innocents could result in timely intervention.

Just thinking out loud. It would only be a possible indicator of a closer look needed, not a smoking gun. And a very anti-freedom move to implement.

But it also might work. "At what price freedom?"

FWIW, my Master's thesis was on a somewhat analogous theme. So this doesn't seem like a stretch to me, but YMMV.

Quote: beachbumbabs

So.

Awful concept. Too soon. Can't imagine buying it myself. Even if my Christmas list included a nephew who put it #1.

Would prefer nobody bought it, marketed it, played it. Hope it was going to be a complete dud and money hole for the developers and distributors.

That said, there's a market for a huge swath of products I would never buy or enjoy. Shock value alone in owning it might have appealed to some.

The thing that occurs to me, though, is there's a huge disconnect between identifying who might be the next mass shooter and who's just a disaffected teenager or young man. And, in a police state (that we don't have), this or something like it could be the single best way to approach finding them before they go over the edge.

NOT advocating this, but...

If a game allowing people to commit this crime WAS on the market and required an Internet connection to play, and...

If a cookie tracked who bought it and played it, which character they chose to be, and how often they used it...

There could be a threshold after which a discreet look should be taken at that person's life for other indications they may be a risk to themselves and others.

One thing that seems to be very common to studies of serial killers and mass killers is that they practice-fantasize-work up to-document in advance their "moment". The desire to act as the killer mowing down innocents could result in timely intervention.

Just thinking out loud. It would only be a possible indicator of a closer look needed, not a smoking gun. And a very anti-freedom move to implement.

But it also might work. "At what price freedom?"

FWIW, my Master's thesis was on a somewhat analogous theme. So this doesn't seem like a stretch to me, but YMMV.

It would be impossible to even guess close to the number of people I have shot, stabbed, run over and killed with grenades, trip wires and claymores in video games. Yet I've never actually done any of this or even thought of it in real life.

I would never buy or play this game if it was real, but games don't make sane people crazy. They don't make good people bad. And they don't turn compassionate people into killers.



ZCore13

Quote: Zcore13

It would be impossible to even guess close to the number of people I have shot, stabbed, run over and killed with grenades, trip wires and claymores in video games. Yet I've never actually done any of this or even thought of it in real life.

I would never buy or play this game if it was real, but games don't make sane people crazy. They don't make good people bad. And they don't turn compassionate people into killers.



ZCore13

I agree. I'm looking for something that signals or indicates the impulse in a very small subset of those who would play the game.

Quote: lilredrooster

how about a game where a posse of gang bangers gang rape a 14 year old girl on her walk home from middle school?

and you get to be the girl or the lead banger. or one of the followers

would you say the same thing?

it's just a game? no adverse action should be taken against the producers, marketers?

Yes it would just be a game.

What answer are you looking for here? It is not just a game, it is..... What?

I guess any game where you have sex w a 14 yo might be considered child porn.

What is the nature of your objection? You disagree with the taste of the game, or you think it promotes the real life activity?

Quote: Rigondeaux

I guess any game where you have sex w a 14 yo might be considered child porn.

What is the nature of your objection? You disagree with the taste of the game, or you think it promotes the real life activity?

it may not be considered child porn if it's not a real person but just a digital creation.

my concern is that it desensitizes the user to the pain that these kinds of events cause and that person may disconnect from the reality of these types of events. it's better imo if ALL people feel the pain of these events so we can all appreciate the importance of trying to reduce their frequency.

I don't know for sure if it promotes the real life activity. I don't think that that is impossible for every game user. Surely, for the vast majority it does not do that. If a person is already close to the edge of a psychotic break it may be the straw that broke the camel's back. Maybe. I'm no expert. The games are disturbing to me. I'm not sure what the answer is. I'm just listening to other opinions.

Quote: lilredrooster

civilized societies sometimes make decisions restricting individual rights

in this country you can't legally possess heroin

I'm pretty sure that in a few other countries you can

the father of the politician Rand Paul advocated for the legality of all drugs for individual use

I'm not necessarily saying that censorship should be applied to these games

but it's something I need to think about to come up with what is a satisfactory answer for myself and that is why I put the questions out there

Hiding behind "Free market" is a cowardly argument. We don't have a free market in this country. Rooster, you're right. The government makes plenty of laws that are for the betterment of society. Let's just make another one. Right now, I'm pretty sure it's illegal to create digital child porn. Just add to a child porn law a sentence saying "any graphic depiction of the murder of anyone under the age of 18 is illegal."

Done.

Quote: FinsRule

Right now, I'm pretty sure it's illegal to create digital child porn.

Digital and other non real depictions of child porn were at one time made to be illegal. (see link) that decision was challenged by the Free Speech Coalition and was reversed by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court reviewed the case and agreed with the 9th Circuit Court's decision. Chief Justice Rheinquist dissented.

Based on this it would appear that a video game depicting child porn would not be illegal.

What a horrible, horrible thought.




https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashcroft_v._Free_Speech_Coalition

Wow...

Quote: FinsRule

Just add to a child porn law a sentence saying "any graphic depiction of the murder of anyone under the age of 18 is illegal."

If we are going to ban the depiction of murder, why would we put an age limit on it?

Duck Hunt didnt decenitise me to killing ducks.

How about all you guys( And gals, BBB and possibly Nathan (-;)?

Quote: DRich

If we are going to ban the depiction of murder, why would we put an age limit on it?

I agree, but we do put an age limit on porn.

Quote: lilredrooster

it may not be considered child porn if it's not a real person but just a digital creation.

I guess they had a big problem with this on Second Life.

I'm not sure what the laws are and I'm not a big porn efinuanodo, but don't they have porn stars who act as is they are under 18 year old school girls and what not? If that's not illegal, I don't know how a digital act could have ever been.

There was an episode on Law & Order: SVU where they basically took pictures of naked peoples then photoshopped them so they look way younger. Olivia Benson and Elliot Stabler weren't too happy about that.

Quote: AxelWolf

Duck Hunt didnt DECENITISE me to killing ducks.

you may be desensitized to the killing of ducks and you just don't realize it

when discussing their killing you didn't even care about spelling desensitize correctly

that seems very insensitive to me. just to write about the killing of ducks as fast as you can (insert smiley faced emoji here)

There was a very strange case on Long Island a few years ago when a very respected elderly man was arrested for what they called child pornography. He had taken photos of high school kids, cut their faces out of the picture and pasted them onto nude and semi nude photos of adults. He had thousands of images, going back years.
I never understood the charges.

Quote: lilredrooster

my concern is that it desensitizes the user to the pain that these kinds of events cause and that person may disconnect from the reality of these types of events. it's better imo if ALL people feel the pain of these events so we can all appreciate the importance of trying to reduce their frequency.

I don't know for sure if it promotes the real life activity. I don't think that that is impossible for every game user. Surely, for the vast majority it does not do that. If a person is already close to the edge of a psychotic break it may be the straw that broke the camel's back. Maybe. I'm no expert. The games are disturbing to me. I'm not sure what the answer is. I'm just listening to other opinions.

Its just a game
I love 1st person shooters
When the 1st Doom came out, I was in heaven
Still love FPS games
yet
I don't own a gun
I have absolutely no interest in owning one

Its akin to murder mystery books
Love them. Eat them up
yet
Any murder in real life I find horrific.

Quote: terapined

Its just a game
I love 1st person shooters
When the 1st Doom came out, I was in heaven
Still love FPS games
yet
I don't own a gun
I have absolutely no interest in owning one

Its akin to murder mystery books
Love them. Eat them up
yet
Any murder in real life I find horrific.

that is an anecdote. zcore had a similar one. I don't doubt for a minute that you and the vast majority are not dangerous due to these games.

but I'm concerned about the small minority that might do harm at least partially because of these games.

therapy is expensive. a lot of people who need it don't get it. there's a LOT of unhinged people out there. A lot.

Agree with terapined with it being a game... Is it a game in horrible taste? YES. Is it a game that probably won't do well and clearly just wants attention? YES.

However, is it a game that will desensitize someone to school shootings? NO.

I've played First Person Shooters (FPS) my entire life, from being just a kid to now I still play them (PubG, Fortnite, CS:GO, etc, etc). I've never once shot someone, or made any plans to shoot anyone. I played grand theft auto, where one of the funniest things (to me) in the entire game is running and crow-hop punching some old lady on the side of the street. I just think they got the physics/sounds pretty accurate... have I or would I ever do this myself? OF COURSE NOT.

I've played shooting games my entire life, and I own guns, but my oh my "shockingly" I've never shot anyone nor had any plans to ever shoot anyone and I never will (illegally... try to break in to my home, and I'd have no problem shooting you then). The games are just games, and people are looking for scapegoats to blame.

Quote: lilredrooster

...but I'm concerned about the small minority that might do harm at least partially because of these games...

This is a huge disconnect a lot of people have. They think "well there must be like 1% of people who do shoot people because of video games!" but there really has never been ANY links to people playing violent video games and shooting people... and if that were the case let's start banning shooting in movies, TV shows, etc, etc, because of course there would be 1% of people there too, right?!?!

As Freud said, we're all products of our environment... and I believe that to be something that has very clearly withstood the test of time. The whole having guns easily available for these troubled people is a completely other debate, but is one that we should be having given they're objects that can do so much damage. But alas, back to the 'ol video game blame...

Quote: Romes

Agree with terapined with it being a game... Is it a game in horrible taste? YES. Is it a game that probably won't do well and clearly just wants attention? YES.

However, is it a game that will desensitize someone to school shootings? NO.

I've played First Person Shooters (FPS) my entire life, from being just a kid to now I still play them (PubG, Fortnite, CS:GO, etc, etc). I've never once shot someone, or made any plans to shoot anyone. I played grand theft auto, where one of the funniest things (to me) in the entire game is running and crow-hop punching some old lady on the side of the street. I just think they got the physics/sounds pretty accurate... have I or would I ever do this myself? OF COURSE NOT.

I've played shooting games my entire life, and I own guns, but my oh my "shockingly" I've never shot anyone nor had any plans to ever shoot anyone and I never will (illegally... try to break in to my home, and I'd have no problem shooting you then). The games are just games, and people are looking for scapegoats to blame.

This is a huge disconnect a lot of people have. They think "well there must be like 1% of people who do shoot people because of video games!" but there really has never been ANY links to people playing violent video games and shooting people... and if that were the case let's start banning shooting in movies, TV shows, etc, etc, because of course there would be 1% of people there too, right?!?!

As Freud said, we're all products of our environment... and I believe that to be something that has very clearly withstood the test of time. (bolding added) The whole having guns easily available for these troubled people is a completely other debate, but is one that we should be having given they're objects that can do so much damage. But alas, back to the 'ol video game blame...

Romes...aren't you making my/our point quoting Freud, while arguing the opposite? There is a component, unmeasured AFAIK, that encourages numbing and apathy to consequences. Another that makes an antihero a worthwhile role model, or why all the stylistic similarities to the Columbine shooters?

Movies, music, video games are immersive experiences, increasingly so over the same period that shootings have increased. It's too much to call it programming, but it's reinforcing to other triggers and events to play them, fan-boy with others about them, score your own value by how well you do killing others.

No question the availability of guns is a component, and IMO a larger one. But even though guns are and have been available to me all my life, I've never had the inclination to pick one up and kill the people around me. Sa me with nearly everyone I know.

So.where does the idea that it's acceptable under any circumstances at all come from? Perhaps:

Bitterness from failure or ostracism.

Inability to find fulfilling purpose or partnership.

Desire for revenge, notoriety, infamy.

You have several accomplishments in your life of which you can take pride. What about the guy who has none? The introspection that either overcomes or, alternatively, completely escapes random killers take over from any acceptable sense of self and community. The video game blaring "you're a winner!" at a life loser who's just blown up more people than anyone else has GOT to have some resonance in their brain. It's only logical that a small portion of people are not able to see it as simply a game.

Quote: beachbumbabs

...Romes...aren't you making my/our point quoting Freud, while arguing the opposite?

Quite the opposite in my opinion... environment comes down to home/life environment and especially the one you grew up in. Freud famously said "Give me 10 children and tell me what 10 professions you want them to be in... I'll make all 10 of them think they're interested in those professions and become professionals in their respective fields." I believe this 110%... when you're young maybe you went on a trip with your parents, aunts, uncles, whatever and you saw someone gambling and win big... Well that child is going to grow up with a different subconscious thought about gambling than another child that had an addicted parent that always blew the rent money and came home a loser 99% of the time. We're quite capable of changing ourselves throughout our lives, but like a river 99% of people chose the path of least resistance. Thus, if you grew up without anger, violence, etc, etc, you're not going to suddenly become angry/violent... REGARDLESS if you play a violent video game or see a violent movie. And when I say grow up I'm more referencing the 2-8 year age range. Once we're in our teens we're quite able to be molded, but we have enough home experiences that our subconscious has already developed it's opinions on most things based on our personal experiences... it's how open to new information, facts, and change that separates some of us from others #politics. That's why so many that grow up in republican households will vote republican no matter how horrid the candidate, putting party over country... because it's what just feels right to them because that's how it was as far back as they can remember... so in their brain that's the "safe" and "right" choice, and they'll make up their own reasons/excuses/facts with their own confirmation bias, irregardless of the facts at hand.

Quote: beachbumbabs

There is a component, unmeasured AFAIK, that encourages numbing and apathy to consequences. Another that makes an antihero a worthwhile role model, or why all the stylistic similarities to the Columbine shooters?

Movies, music, video games are immersive experiences, increasingly so over the same period that shootings have increased. It's too much to call it programming, but it's reinforcing to other triggers and events to play them, fan-boy with others about them, score your own value by how well you do killing others.

Movies, music, and gaming are all found to be releases and "escapes from reality" which is why people dive in to them so much... Didn't get that promotion? Stuck in a job you don't like? Not happy with where life has taken you? In these other realms people can escape and become someone else, such as James Bond, who does have that killer life with an awesome car and hot women in every country... And they don't all have to be negative reasons, but even positive reasons and a desire for escapism... Or the need to sooth a busy mind with something tactical, which yes could even be a first person shooter game (at any kind of competitive level all of these games are insanely intellectual/statistical/mentally exhausting - very similar to high level AP'ing). Others might also want to release their rage in a healthy way and shoot up the city in Grand Theft Auto so they don't have the desire to do so in real life. In that scenario the games are offering a release in a HEALTHY and non-reality impacting way, actually taking the anger/rage AWAY from the player whom otherwise might do something in real life. Thus, violent video games to some extent SAVE lives.

Quote: beachbumbabs

You have several accomplishments in your life of which you can take pride. What about the guy who has none? The introspection that either overcomes or, alternatively, completely escapes random killers take over from any acceptable sense of self and community. The video game blaring "you're a winner!" at a life loser who's just blown up more people than anyone else has GOT to have some resonance in their brain. It's only logical that a small portion of people are not able to see it as simply a game.

I think maybe you have the wrong perception of video games? Do you game much, or ever? Most games are NOT like slot machines. They don't blare out "You're a winner!" in the end, but usually tie the story line together very similar to a movie... with each level on the way to completion becoming harder and harder so that if/when you do finally beat the last chapter you have a great sense of accomplishment and achievement having put in the hard work and dedication to complete the tasks at hand. It's VASTLY different from a no-skill slot machine that rattles and screams "winner" in someones face.

Quote: Romes

Quite the opposite in my opinion... environment comes down to home/life environment and especially the one you grew up in. Freud famously said "Give me 10 children and tell me what 10 professions you want them to be in... I'll make all 10 of them think they're interested in those professions and become professionals in their respective fields." I believe this 110%... when you're young maybe you went on a trip with your parents, aunts, uncles, whatever and you saw someone gambling and win big... Well that child is going to grow up with a different subconscious thought about gambling than another child that had an addicted parent that always blew the rent money and came home a loser 99% of the time. We're quite capable of changing ourselves throughout our lives, but like a river 99% of people chose the path of least resistance. Thus, if you grew up without anger, violence, etc, etc, you're not going to suddenly become angry/violent... REGARDLESS if you play a violent video game or see a violent movie. And when I say grow up I'm more referencing the 2-8 year age range. Once we're in our teens we're quite able to be molded, but we have enough home experiences that our subconscious has already developed it's opinions on most things based on our personal experiences... it's how open to new information, facts, and change that separates some of us from others #politics. That's why so many that grow up in republican households will vote republican no matter how horrid the candidate, putting party over country... because it's what just feels right to them because that's how it was as far back as they can remember... so in their brain that's the "safe" and "right" choice, and they'll make up their own reasons/excuses/facts with their own confirmation bias, irregardless of the facts at hand.

Movies, music, and gaming are all found to be releases and "escapes from reality" which is why people dive in to them so much... Didn't get that promotion? Stuck in a job you don't like? Not happy with where life has taken you? In these other realms people can escape and become someone else, such as James Bond, who does have that killer life with an awesome car and hot women in every country... Or they sooth the need for their busy mind with something tactical, which yes could even be a first person shooter game (at any kind of competitive level all of these games are insanely intellectual/statistical/mentally exhausting). Others might also want to release their rage in a healthy way and shoot up the city in Grand Theft Auto so they don't have the desire to do so in real life. In that scenario the games are offering a release in a HEALTHY and non-reality impacting way, actually taking the anger/rage AWAY from the player whom otherwise might do something in real life.

I think maybe you have the wrong perception of video games? Do you game much, or ever? Most games are NOT like slot machines. They don't blare out "You're a winner!" in the end, but usually tie the story line together very similar to a movie... with each level on the way to completion becoming harder and harder so that if/when you do finally beat the last chapter you have a great sense of accomplishment and achievement having put in the hard work and dedication to complete the tasks at hand. It's VASTLY different from a no-skill slot machine that rattles and screams "winner" in someones face.

You and I are talking about very different types of video games. One type (with many popular titles), you are in some elaborate maze or structure, and your only objective is to get to the other end by killing everyone in your way, using all the weapons you can find, capture, buy, steal.. Sounds like....moving through a school, hunting people hiding and running, before anyone can stop you. Maybe you have remote teammates, maybe it's last man standing. No?

I think you might also be discounting how many children are no longer socialized. Between homeschooling, both or only parent working, greatly increased use of electronic babysitters (tv, gaming, social media), loss of most team sports and arts programs in schools, kids are increasingly less part of a world where they aren't the center of their own universe. Offsetting influence activities and active parenting are way low. Playing outside with the neighbor kids almost non-existent.

It all matters in social development and maturity.

CNN reports porn is a root cause of school shootings; https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/29/politics/diane-black-school-shootings-pornography/index.html

Digital Child Porn could be a good thing. What if some users find the porn is enough of an outlet to satisfy them and they are able to resist acting out on real people?

I don't know for sure about desensitization. However, we do know that in first world countries where games, movies and TV have become more and more violent and sexual, crime has decreased.

The mass shootings in particular, seem to be a mostly American phenomenon, with a few exceptions. Many millions of people in other countries play the same video games and the only consequence seems to be that they waste their lives on toys.

Quote: petroglyph

CNN reports porn is a root cause of school shootings; https://www.cnn.com/2018/05/29/politics/diane-black-school-shootings-pornography/index.html

Not even close

CNN is reporting the insanity of a Republican Rep. Diane Black of Tenn blaming school shootings on Porn
Some of these republicans in the House are just plain bat sh*t crazy

The news is not that porn causes shootings
The news is that elected republicans actually believe this BS

Quote: terapined

Not even close

CNN is reporting the insanity of a Republican Rep. Diane Black of Tenn blaming school shootings on Porn
Some of these republicans in the House are just plain bat sh*t crazy

You guys should just blame Trump for everything, like always. That's not directed at you, I don't know if you are a Trump Blamer or not.

Quote: Rigondeaux

Digital Child Porn could be a good thing.

You are now on a list.

Quote: AxelWolf

You guys should just blame Trump for everything, like always. That's not directed at you, I don't know if you are a Trump Blamer or not.

Credit and blame are overused in many instances regarding the President
Take the economy
Economy is doing well and its not because of Trump so he shouldn't get the credit
We are due for a downturn. If it happens, he shouldn't get the blame

Quote: terapined

.....The news is that elected republicans actually believe this BS....

I didn't see that in the link.

I find it funny [not ha ha, but odd] to watch the interpretations of people that align closely with either of the main two party's, being an outsider. Either can watch or read the same article and come out with completely different opinions on what was reported. It is like there are liberal/conservative colored glasses to view the world through

Yep, it's goofy regardless of what it was.

My take was, why would a so called world news provider, report on this at all? Other than it being wrong, why report this, if they aren't trying to further an agenda?

Quote: petroglyph

My take was, why would a so called world news provider, report on this at all? Other than it being wrong, why report this, if they aren't trying to further an agenda?

If just some clown was spouting this, its not really news
but
They are reporting this because a congress person that has been elected to pass laws that govern the people believes this crap

Quote: AxelWolf

You guys should just blame Trump for everything, like always. That's not directed at you, I don't know if you are a Trump Blamer or not.

Notice no one was blaming trump... soooo... in your post you kind of counter-pointed yourself?

Quote: petroglyph

My take was, why would a so called world news provider, report on this at all? Other than it being wrong, why report this, if they aren't trying to further an agenda?

Because it demonstrates that a federal politician, responsible for passing laws affecting hundreds of millions of people, believes in and is promoting something completely nonsensical and absolutely unproven in order to further THEIR agenda.

People like that need to be called out and put on the spot and shown how wrong they are before they do serious legislative damage. THAT'S why world news providers should be reporting things like that.