Grand Theft Auto inspires Thai murder

[Luvian]

Originally Posted by Jaradu There are countless things used responsibly by many and abused by few; why single out video games?

Because it failed with Rock and Roll music.

[Jaradu]

Originally Posted by Luvian Because it failed with Rock and Roll music.

Ah of course. Not forgetting the previous failure of prohibition as well.

[Bungleau]

Originally Posted by Luvian Parenting is hard, shifting the blame is easy.

This just got added to my quotation library. Too true... as I strive to parent every day.

[Yorick]

Originally Posted by SpiritWarrior While I am all for freedom and liberty in this issue, I would have to agree. The rating system just doesn't work. And what's the point when a mother can buy them for her kid's birthday or christmas gift anyways? Certainly there needs to be a system to screen "gifts" presented to minors. And most parent's are ignorant to the level of exposure in games like these in this day and age. Back in the day a video game was about space invaders or plumbers and hedgehogs. An R-rated game isn't limited the way an R-rated movie showing on HBO is. There is no time restriction (i.e. the game doesn't become playable and unlock itself after a certain hour such as when a kid should be in bed!) and furthermore there is no NCA-like organization censoring the airing of the game like there is with TV. Oh, there are parental locks on consoles and even MMO's (see WoW and EQ) but how many parents even know how to access them? Mine don't. There is currently only one screening process in purchasing these games and it is a broken one because anyone over the age of 18 can purchase it for a minor, all the while never realizing how similiar this is to buying beer for a child.

Very well said.

[Yorick]

Originally Posted by Jaradu There are countless things used responsibly by many and abused by few; why single out video games? As Luvian said, it's a fantastic scapegoat for bad parenting.

1. It's being singled out, because it's a current event. The murderer didn't say he had bad parents, took drugs or was angry, he said he was checking out whether the theft was as easy in reality as it was in the game.

If we have a story about a kid being high on rohypnol doing evil he otherwise wouldn't, we'd be talking about rohies.

2. Who is a "good parent"? All parents screw up. Besides, it takes a village to raise a child. Parenting alone doesn't make a child wonderful or evil. Plenty of bad/absent parents result in beautiful people, and plenty of great parents have crims.

Whatever we as a society can do to self improve, we should do. The almighty dollar should stop being the sole motivator when people release art into society. Artists, creators and entrepreneurs need to wake up to their responsibility in shaping society.

[Bahamut]

I agree that it begins with the parents, and that they should be more aware as regards video games. Simply put, they should be involved more with their children (which I do hope is the trend nowadays), in which their children will be comfortable with their parents, and will be able to share problems, no matter how silly it may sound to the general public.

I remember this instance, when my uncle and myself would tease my mom. She would then jokingly reply that we came from an elite school, hence they should have taught us some manners. When I thought about it, I don't think they actually taught anything to that extent. I am pretty sure it has been drowned by all the subjects they flush in our heads. Either way, their focus is on a different path.

The same can be said with the parents. Sometimes people can be too focused on the big picture, when those little things are brewing up to smear the big picture.

I personally enjoy these games since they serve as an "outlet". From a bad day, or whatever-I-can-call-it-day. However, I am always for the betterment of everyone. I'd sacrifice my precious time for a friend in need, I'd try to be there for someone who's in need of an advice. Reason: I want them to feel loved, respected and listened to.

I know how it is to be alone, and I try as much as I can to let others feel that they always have someone to talk to.

[Jaradu]

Originally Posted by Yorick 1. It's being singled out, because it's a current event. The murderer didn't say he had bad parents, took drugs or was angry, he said he was checking out whether the theft was as easy in reality as it was in the game.

I'm no psychologist, but to me that sounds more like a crazy person who picked up a video game than a sane person who picked up a video game and turned crazy.

Originally Posted by Yorick 2. Who is a "good parent"? All parents screw up. Besides, it takes a village to raise a child. Parenting alone doesn't make a child wonderful or evil. Plenty of bad/absent parents result in beautiful people, and plenty of great parents have crims. Whatever we as a society can do to self improve, we should do. The almighty dollar should stop being the sole motivator when people release art into society. Artists, creators and entrepreneurs need to wake up to their responsibility in shaping society.

And who decides how to shape society and what to shape it into? What if some people disagree? How can you force artists to accept responsibility without denying them their right to artistic freedom?

[Bungleau]

There's the rub. If we could all agree on what the ideal world would look like, we could move our way there.

Trying to define that ideal has been the source of more than one war...

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Luvian And neither should M-Rated Games be in their hands either. Kids manage to get their hands on alcohol, so I suppose we should ban alcohol too. Oh! They also manage to get their hands on firearms. I guess we need to ban firearms! Oh no! Some kids could get his hands on his parent's car keys and go for a joyride! Let's ban cars too! What about lighters? Some kid could set fire to something. Let's ban lighters! Do I need to go on, or can we simply agree "Let's ban it because a kid could get his hands on it" doesn't make much sense as an argument? And no, the time argument still doesn't make sense. Kids shouldn't be in contact with these products so that would not be a restriction for kids, but for the legit adult customers. If you want to argue about limiting adults' access to adult products start another thread.

The problem with your examples is that none of them are specifically marketed towards teens and young adults. Video games are. That is why designers of the games need to be held to a better standard.

I agree completely parents bear the brunt of the responsibility. I do monitor the games my boys play, whether on a console or on the computer. However, that does not alleviate the responsibility borne by the manufacturers that produce the game.

[Cerek]

Originally Posted by Jaradu I'm no psychologist, but to me that sounds more like a crazy person who picked up a video game than a sane person who picked up a video game and turned crazy.

To paraphrase the quote added to Bungleau's list, playing games is fun, shifting blame is easy.

Every time this issue comes up, there are two clear cut responses - those that feel the games are not appropriate and those who like the games and say the kid who copied the game was crazy to begin with.

Look at the responses in this thread as an example. Every response from the game supporters say the same thing "this kid was crazy already if he tried to imitate a game". What they are really saying is "I LIKE playing this game (or others like it) and I don't want to risk losing a game I like to play."

Even if their assertions are true that "the kid was crazy to begin with", the company still bears a responsibility not to produce something that could encourage or lead a kid to reproducing the actions in the game.

It's really simple - produce games that do NOT depict illegal activities, assassinations, prostitution or violence against others and manufacturers don't have to worry if kids copy the actions from their games.

Originally Posted by Jaradu And who decides how to shape society and what to shape it into? What if some people disagree? How can you force artists to accept responsibility without denying them their right to artistic freedom?

Yorick already addressed this - the "right" to artistic freedom is NOT absolute, just as the right to free speech is not. Mass producing anti-social "art" is not an acceptable form of "artistic expression".