Skip to main content

View Diary: NRA response: It's Hollywood, video games, and won't anyone think of the gun manufacturers? (473 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  It's true, we can't allow ourselves (0+ / 0-)

    to become distracted.  Guns are a problem and I hope no one out there is going to suggest that we need more evidence.

    That said. I will never understand why we are willing to approve of  violence and death as entertainment.  

    N.B. considering something to be unacceptable and banning it outright are two different things.

    •  We approve (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Prinny Squad, salamanderempress

      because it's not real. Like...really, really, not real. At all. There is nothing whatsoever real about it. It's not even real actors pretending to do violent things; it's actually, totally, 100% fake.

      I'm not shooting people in Halo 4. (Or even aliens and robots.) I'm shooting pixels. With other pixels. In fact, that's not even true. No pixels are harmed. I'm pressing a button, which is instructing the console to display a pattern of pixels that looks like a gunshot.

      If I'm successful, the computer will pretend that the thing I shot at died. Temporarily, of course. Nothing actually 'dies' even within the context of the game universe - they're just temporarily defeated. Even chess has a more convincing form of 'death.'

      "Let’s just move on, treat everybody with firmness, fairness, dignity, compassion and respect. Let’s be Marines." - Sgt. Maj Michael Barrett on DADT repeal

      by kyril on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 02:25:28 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  The same argument (0+ / 0-)

        that gun enthusiasts state about target practice. 9 - 10,000 deaths every year in the US by gun makes your unscientific anecdotal laugh fest less funny.

        YOU can tell the difference. YOU are not compelled. YOU haven't let it get to you. Because we all know the entirety of the human experience can be summed up by your personal reactions to stimuli.

        Put down the controller, pick up a science book. Of any sort, really.

        •  The studies are, unfortunately, mixed. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          fuzzyguy

          For obvious reasons, I've looked out for these.

          I've seen no long term studies; the short term studies have produced mixed results.

          Believe it or not, those of us who make games do pay attention to this sort of thing.  It's less clear cut than your comments presume.

          My advice to parents, of course, is to pay attention; look beyond the single letter rating to the full description - easily available on the web.  Halo is not Call of Duty.  Call of Duty is not Grand Theft Auto.  You have to know your own kid and know what they'll be able to handle.

          (I have my own rant about half written on the ESRB, totally unrelated to this incident. Eventually it will appear in my own diaries.)

    •  Why shouldnt we aprove of it? (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      kyril, fuzzyguy

      Show us a data based reason why and you will change a lot of minds. So far its all Speculation, and speculation can  be everything. It could be that i strongly believe that all depictions of bears on tv support violence, so i want to ban Winnie the puh. Without having to support my belief with data, just as you dont support yours with data, who is to say I am wrong? maybe without winnie the world would be a perfect place, I just have a gut feeling about that you know, so lets ban him and see......

      "We judge ourselves by our ideals; others by their actions. It is a great convenience." -- Howard Zinn

      by Mudderway on Tue Dec 18, 2012 at 02:56:46 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site