Tell Congress Video Games Do Not Cause Real Life Violence

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
I think this is something we can all get behind.

Rep. Joe Baca (D CA-43), along with Rep. Frank Wolf (R VA-10) as co-sponsor, thinks its 2009 again and have introduced H.R. 4204, “The Video Game Health Labeling Act of 2012.” This bill, if passed, would require a warning label be affixed to all games rated E (for Everyone) or up by the ESRB, regardless of the content descriptors. The warning would read: `WARNING: Exposure to violent video games has been linked to aggressive behavior.' The ECA needs your help to make sure this bill does not become law.
Click to expand...
 
God, these stupid laws make me so damn angry. I'm THIS close to going on a violent rampage to get my point across!
 
Stupid crap of course. I suppose next they are going to say food makes you violent. Wait they are trying to say soda makes people act violet actually.
 
Well this is stupid, but I voiced my opinion and sent the message to my local rep.
 
Video games don't cause violence.

#1 Bullying in schools create unstable people.
#2 Parents too busy to deal with their children to teach them.
#3 Pharmaceutical drugs to "balance" create unstable people.
#4 Women having sex with monkeys create unstable people.
#5 Society creates unstable people.

When a person is unstable, they are capable of vicious acts.
 
my rep is going to vote for it anyway. One of the biggest douchebags in the nation.
 
Just some fuel for the fire from a peer reviewed journal :D

Smith, S.L., Lachlan, K.A., & Tamborini, R. (2003). Popular Video Games: Quantifying the Presentation of Violence and its Context. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 47 (1).

  • Boys aged 8 – 18 surveyed in this research spent 40 minutes a day playing computer or video games. The number of violent interactions in a 10-minute play period ranged from 2 to 124.
  • Boys who play Teen or Mature-rated games for a minimum of 40 minutes a day may witness over 180 incidents of aggression per day, or 5,400 incidents per month.
  • In 98 percent of the games surveyed, aggression went unpunished. In fact, in more than half the video games the perpetrators were rewarded for their aggressive actions.
  • The basic prototype for aggression in Mature-rated video games involves human perpetrators who engage in repeated acts of “justified” violence involving weapons.
  • 78 percent of all violent interactions in the first ten minutes of game play featured lethal violence.
  • In almost a quarter of the violent interaction in mature games, players perceived themselves as stalkers.
  • 78 percent of the violent action was shown up close.
  • Almost half of all violent video game segments featured humor.
  • Only 10 percent of all video game perpetrators possessed “good” or “prosocial” qualities.
 
Of course, whether or not the government should be involved is another story. This strikes me as a problem with parenting (or lack thereof).
 
Politicians have caused more violence than video games, look at all the wars being fought today.
 
Speak for yourselves. I've hopped and kicked every turtle I've ever come across.
 
I can tell you that I feel quite violent when I encounter ineptitude by other players in online games.

There are quite a few issues with the form letter ECA is trying to make you send to your representative:

As your constituent, a voter and an active video game player I urge you not to support “The Video Game Health Labeling Act of 2012”, which calls on additional, unconstitutional and onerous labeling of video games.

First, “The Video Game Health Labeling Act of 2012” is unnecessary. Most gamers are adults, whose average age is 37 years old and average purchaser age is 41. In fact, the largest segment of gamers falls in the politically coveted, and increasingly vocal, 18-45 age bracket, most of who grew up playing video games.

Secondly, the video game industry already does a great job of self regulation through the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB). If children are playing ‘M’ (for mature) rated games, they’re getting them from their parents. The Entertainment Consumers Association, the American consumer group representing video game players, supports parental empowerment and the ESRB efforts to educate parents on the ratings system.

Third, the Supreme Court and other federal courts have routinely held that government regulation of video games is unconstitutional. Passing bills such as “The Video Game Health Labeling Act of 2012”, which would then get fought out in court, would cost taxpayers like me millions of dollars. I’d rather see my tax dollars being spent on other things like job incentive packages, building safe bridges, fixing our economy and insuring that our country is kept safe from terrorists.

Fourth, the warning label required by “The Video Game Health Labeling Act of 2012” is false and misleading. There is no scientific consensus showing a causal relationship between violent media and aggressive behavior. In fact, the vast majority of studies show no link at all. Even if such evidence existed, “The Video Game Health Labeling Act of 2012” wrongly singles out video games, which, according to the Federal Trade Commission, are the least likely medium for a minor to purchase alone.

Fifth, the bill also assumes that any game that receives an E or higher rating contains violent content. This simply shows either a lack of understanding of the ESRB’s rating system rating criteria or a willful acceptance of video game stereotypes. Not all R rated movies receive the rating because of violence; the same is true of M rated video games.

It is in your power to stop this type of legislation, and I ask that you represent me, your constituent, by doing so. If you have any questions on this or other similar issues please contact Jennifer Mercurio, the Entertainment Consumers Association’s Vice President & General Counsel, at [email protected].

Thank you for your time and consideration.
Click to expand...

#1, it's way too long, no one will read it.
#2, most gamers being adults is clearly wrong, average purchaser age being 41 is highly questionable at best, mostly likely completely wrong as well.
#3, throwing in that tax dollars spend on this problem will be missed on combating terrorists is over the top at best
#4, failure to use grammatically correct phrases like "most of whom" rather than "most of who"

So before you decide to send the form letter, think about whether you want to associate yourself with the ECA, or whether you just want to send your own letter in your own words.
 
So, they let boys 8-18 play M rated games? I don't let my 12 year old play M rated games. The parents not being parents seem to be an issue. But, if they don't monitor their kids and their gaming habits, what other things are they neglecting on the parenting front?

Games never made me violent (actually one did out of frustration - I threw my controller).

I'd hate to see what these kids do when losing a game of Mario Kart. I wonder what they blamed the kids violence on before the rise of video games (TV, Radio, everything else...). They are always blaming something other than lack of parenting. That's because no one wants to admit they are a shitty parent and aren't teaching their kids right or want to admit that their kid is an asshole that likes to beat up on other kids.

Sad that Adolf Hitler was so violent because of M rated video games.... Poor kid. It wasn't his fault at all.
 
While I agree video games do not cause violence, considering every other kid now is diagnosed with autism or some other "disability" like ADD it's no surprise that any sort of stimuli will be thought of to lead to an adverse result.

After all I'm partially responsible for the pacific pond turtle and death cap mushrooms being nearly extinct from this area.
 
Thuleman said:
#1, it's way too long, no one will read it.

TRUE.

#2, most gamers being adults is clearly wrong, average purchaser age being 41 is highly questionable at best, mostly likely completely wrong as well.

The PURCHASER. Parents buy T or M rated games for their kids. Then wonder why their kid is talking about blowing the face off of a zombie. Shitty parenting. A 10 year old can't buy a T or M game at most places.

#3, throwing in that tax dollars spend on this problem will be missed on combating terrorists is over the top at best

Very true. Just another tactic borrowed from politicians. Well, terrorists will win because we won't have enough money because we spent it on regulating M rated video games.

#4, failure to use grammatically correct phrases like "most of whom" rather than "most of who"

True.

So before you decide to send the form letter, think about whether you want to associate yourself with the ECA, or whether you just want to send your own letter in your own words.
Click to expand...


The ECA does good stuff out there, but like most anti-whatever regulation organizations, they go to the extreme and can manipulate numbers and use rhetoric to get their point across. But, it's politician-ese. It's all bullshit.

Their cause is great. This regulation is bullshit, games don't cause violence just like music doesn't. But, there are other ways to combat the politicans behind this.
 
Calm down. It's just a label. If a parent paid any attention to it they probably wouldn't have bought the game for their kid anyway.
 
Seems like a solid plan. After all, the U.S. is leading the way in the video games industry, and hurting an industry is the best way to...hurt the economy, I guess.

Never mind. Bad idea.
 
Thuleman said:
I can tell you that I feel quite violent when I encounter ineptitude by other players in online games.

There are quite a few issues with the form letter ECA is trying to make you send to your representative:



#1, it's way too long, no one will read it.
#2, most gamers being adults is clearly wrong, average purchaser age being 41 is highly questionable at best, mostly likely completely wrong as well.
#3, throwing in that tax dollars spend on this problem will be missed on combating terrorists is over the top at best
#4, failure to use grammatically correct phrases like "most of whom" rather than "most of who"

So before you decide to send the form letter, think about whether you want to associate yourself with the ECA, or whether you just want to send your own letter in your own words.
Click to expand...

And that has nothing to do with the content of the game.
 
WARNING: Exposure to violent video games has been linked to aggressive behavior.

That's a slippery slope. Next up, suing publishers, developers and everyone but the parent for a child's violent behavior (caused by exposure to violence in video games--no mention of television shows, news etc..)

Then misdemeanors for playing a few of the most violent games, except for games favored by black people: Those will be felonies with mandatory minimums.

Then Rick Santorum as president and his wife starting a War on Violent Video games. Just say no!

PSA's showing graphical messages to inflame popular opinion against violent video games.

Buy stock in Nintendo now.

/hyperbole
 
9 out of 10 terrorists got their start playing video games. Video games should be able to spy on US Citizens. God bless our benevolent protectors.
 
kirbyrj said:
Just some fuel for the fire from a peer reviewed journal :D

Smith, S.L., Lachlan, K.A., & Tamborini, R. (2003). Popular Video Games: Quantifying the Presentation of Violence and its Context. Journal of Broadcasting and Electronic Media, 47 (1).

  • Boys aged 8 – 18 surveyed in this research spent 40 minutes a day playing computer or video games. The number of violent interactions in a 10-minute play period ranged from 2 to 124.
  • Boys who play Teen or Mature-rated games for a minimum of 40 minutes a day may witness over 180 incidents of aggression per day, or 5,400 incidents per month.
  • In 98 percent of the games surveyed, aggression went unpunished. In fact, in more than half the video games the perpetrators were rewarded for their aggressive actions.
  • The basic prototype for aggression in Mature-rated video games involves human perpetrators who engage in repeated acts of “justified” violence involving weapons.
  • 78 percent of all violent interactions in the first ten minutes of game play featured lethal violence.
  • In almost a quarter of the violent interaction in mature games, players perceived themselves as stalkers.
  • 78 percent of the violent action was shown up close.
  • Almost half of all violent video game segments featured humor.
  • Only 10 percent of all video game perpetrators possessed “good” or “prosocial” qualities.
Click to expand...

What isn't stated in the conclusion.......did these "actions" have any effects on the subjects of the study?
Watch enough TV and you'll find similar data......even cartoons like Tom and Jerry or Roadrunner.

Warning: politicians do not think, they are reactionary, with YOUR money.
 
*sigh*

from that link page: "No more than 20 emails can be sent through this page at any one time"

If you want me to help you, don't make me enter information on 3 page refreshes THEN tell me I need to send it from my OWN email. TECHFAIL for the Tech supporters :mad:
 
Most of these articles support (some are just correlation though) congress' argument.

http://psp.sagepub.com/content/31/11/1573.short
http://pss.sagepub.com/content/12/5/353.short
http://pss.sagepub.com/content/16/11/882.short
http://sag.sagepub.com/content/40/3/377.short
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0022103105000983
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0140197103000927
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03637750500111781
http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/se...&ERICExtSearch_SearchType_0=no&accno=ED461420

The list goes on, and on -- so they indeed do have a leg to stand on. Anecdotally, a lot of things in life cause us to be aggressive. Without video game violence, little Timmy is likely to just go off and pull wings off of a bug, or discover what magnifying glasses do to ants on a sunny day.

Either way, it's just a label and it should be word revised to protect publishers/developers from legal action, which will be my objection in writing. It may help some parents in the choices they make with video game purchases. I'd imagine simply not having the game, rather than noticing the game is full of that violence and taking it away after you already gave it to them. I'm sure they'll also just go play it at a friend's house with more lax parents, too.
 
Xeth said:
Calm down. It's just a label. If a parent paid any attention to it they probably wouldn't have bought the game for their kid anyway.
Click to expand...

Do you know how much resources and federal money will be invested in this "label"?

Give them an inch, they'll take a yard.
 
I just can't imagine that saturating someone with violence (of any kind) all day long would have no effect on how that person thinks, which some of you want to believe.

I won't tell my congressmen not to vote because I don't know if violent video games cause aggression in kids or not. Some kids it may not have any effect where some it may have serious effects. I definitely think other factors such as beliefs you were raised with or your social-economic status have more of an effect on how you behave, but it's hard to prove or disprove that violent video games do not have some effect.
 
ninjaturtle said:
I'll point them to soccer games that turn violent where people end up dead.
Click to expand...
Bingo. Last I looked, sports stadiums don't have these kinds of warning labels, but it's in and around sports stadiums where riots (rather violent things) in the U.S. tend to occur, and with greater frequency than most would suspect.

I can't recall having heard about a riot at a LAN party.
 
Exposure to religion has caused and is causing violent behavior. All religious facilities should be required to post signs warning of the dangers of religion.
 
djoye said:
Exposure to religion has caused and is causing violent behavior. All religious facilities should be required to post signs warning of the dangers of religion.
Click to expand...
I come to [H] for the generally mature crowd that is focused on technology and games, not to be insulted with dickery.

I hope this law gets tanked fast, it's pointless. And with games moving to digital media, does it even matter?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top