Games such as grand theft auto would of had a strong influence especially on a 11-12yr old boy who's right and wrong judgment hasn't been fully matured, putting things in their face such as getting money for killing, etc.. it really does screw with their head, it's sort of like virtual peer pressure, it makes them see killing other people as something not as poor as we perceive it since we are much older and didn't have that level of violence when we were young... doom vs GTA, big difference but the violence exists, just with more detail/graphics and realism. Since today's games are very realistic kids taking alcohol or drugs probably won't notice the difference!
Mother Claims Videogames Made Her Son Kill
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
Well, I agree with you on this one Arbre.
I'm of two minds about this though. On the one hand, I think that parents just don't pay attention to their kids anymore. Or maybe they never did, I don't know, but they certainly aren't these days. Slapping more rules and restrictions on games won't fix that. I highly doubt that a video game can turn a "little professor" into a killer, there must have been something else going on or the kid was just bloody nuts. I'm not blaming the parents, this is clearly a surprise to them and there is no reason to think that they were negligent either, but clearly their son had major issues.
On the other hand, games do teach you things. Rainbow Six taught me more about modern weapons that some one like me (not in the armed forces) would know otherwise. Sure, it's not 100% accurate, but I bet you I could figure out how to unlock, load and shoot a gun pretty quickly in real life because of what I have seen in video games. Not as well as someone with formal training, but good enough to hurt people.
You can't say that games are this panacea of education and we should all use videogames to teach everything under the sun in the future, without also asking what are all the mainstream videogames teaching us today? When I was young I was very socially inept (to say the least) and I would go home after school and play adventure games. I honestly believe that adventure games are how I learned how to talk to people (I'm talking about the ones with dialogue trees here), and what turned me into the witty charm-machine that I am today. What do kids play today that doesn't involve massive death and destruction? If I grew up 10-20 years later, what would I have had to turn to? Maybe if all I had to play was shooters I would have ended up more violent too (or at least less intelligent)?
I'm of two minds about this though. On the one hand, I think that parents just don't pay attention to their kids anymore. Or maybe they never did, I don't know, but they certainly aren't these days. Slapping more rules and restrictions on games won't fix that. I highly doubt that a video game can turn a "little professor" into a killer, there must have been something else going on or the kid was just bloody nuts. I'm not blaming the parents, this is clearly a surprise to them and there is no reason to think that they were negligent either, but clearly their son had major issues.
On the other hand, games do teach you things. Rainbow Six taught me more about modern weapons that some one like me (not in the armed forces) would know otherwise. Sure, it's not 100% accurate, but I bet you I could figure out how to unlock, load and shoot a gun pretty quickly in real life because of what I have seen in video games. Not as well as someone with formal training, but good enough to hurt people.
You can't say that games are this panacea of education and we should all use videogames to teach everything under the sun in the future, without also asking what are all the mainstream videogames teaching us today? When I was young I was very socially inept (to say the least) and I would go home after school and play adventure games. I honestly believe that adventure games are how I learned how to talk to people (I'm talking about the ones with dialogue trees here), and what turned me into the witty charm-machine that I am today. What do kids play today that doesn't involve massive death and destruction? If I grew up 10-20 years later, what would I have had to turn to? Maybe if all I had to play was shooters I would have ended up more violent too (or at least less intelligent)?
Dear Mr TheNecroswanson,
The story repeats itself...
But in case you missed it, here is a quick history lesson:
- When books came along, people like you wanted to ban them...
- When Rock n Roll came along people like you wanted to ban it...
- When movies came along, people like you wanted to ban them...
- When videos were available, people like you wanted to ban them...
- The today's Scapegoat is Video Games.
I have but one thing to say.
-"Religion."
Why is it that,
...when someone kills in the name of religion, everyone consideres
him/her to be a nutcase.
...but when someone after a murder names as cause, or is implicated as
having played computer games people come screaming "BAN! BAN!
I believe, anything would ultimately have set this kid off. Be it books,
movies, music, getting dumped, getting bullied, "finding" religion... So
banning video games will not prevent ANY future kids going *snap*, only
change what they blame as the cause of going *snap*.
//Yammo
The story repeats itself...
But in case you missed it, here is a quick history lesson:
- When books came along, people like you wanted to ban them...
- When Rock n Roll came along people like you wanted to ban it...
- When movies came along, people like you wanted to ban them...
- When videos were available, people like you wanted to ban them...
- The today's Scapegoat is Video Games.
I have but one thing to say.
-"Religion."
Why is it that,
...when someone kills in the name of religion, everyone consideres
him/her to be a nutcase.
...but when someone after a murder names as cause, or is implicated as
having played computer games people come screaming "BAN! BAN!
I believe, anything would ultimately have set this kid off. Be it books,
movies, music, getting dumped, getting bullied, "finding" religion... So
banning video games will not prevent ANY future kids going *snap*, only
change what they blame as the cause of going *snap*.
//Yammo
As far as I'm concerned, I call them both crazy. But that's just me.TheNecroswanson said:
I just hope this bit is not meant for everyone here. The point is that if the kid is influencable, giving him the material that could influence him is the problem.
Whether because it happened because of a lack of consideration, information or care, the problem is that the kid has been exposed to material which, apparently, he should not have been exposed to.
Now, if at least he tried to stab her with a wiimote...
If you go to the site which talks about the convictions and such, video games aren't mentioned at all, and the kid, Harling, doesn't mention video games, neither does his "suicide watch" guard name Mr. Potter. The reasons he gave was because he fantasized about it after reading up on Serial Murderers on the Internet and watching CSI
Oh gee, I wonder if it was holding a controller and wanking that caused him to go insane or talking to pedophiles and researching loonies? Hmm, a tough choice... a crossroads, even.
The mother of the U.K.'s "most violent teenage murderer" is claiming in a newspaper article that videogames are responsible for turning her son into a killer.
Lorraine Harling claims in the tabloid sleaze-rag News of the World article [http://www.newsoftheworld.co.uk/story_pages/news/news4.shtml] that she and her husband had no idea of the "well of savagery" that had built up in their son Stuart. "Stuart never gave us any reason to think he was violent at all," she said. "He was a very normal boy - quiet and reserved. I used to call him 'my little professor.'"
During his trial, it was revealed that before the murder, which took place while his parents were vacationing in Spain, Harling had spent days online talking to pedophiles and researching serial killers.
Damn it, how stupid can this guy's parents be? "Our son spent vast amounts of time talking to pedophiles and researching serial killers... must have been the Playstation that made him snap."
I played GTA3 when I was ten, only thing I got for it was a sore wrist. (I didn't know how to properly position myself at the time.)
I don't know the situation with this case, but in these kinds of cases I don't believe the kids to be crazy. I believe them to be violent and without concern for the consequences of their actions. And I do believe that part of becoming that way is being exposed to an established culture that encourages that, and certainly games such as GTA (yeah it's an easy one to pick on, but is a great example everyone knows) encourage that violent kind of behaviour. I guess it comes back to age restrictions, but games like this are cool and hip so kids including young impressionable kids are going to want to get their hands on them, and chances are they will be able to.
It then comes back around to the parent to be able to accommodate the reality of this and address it as best as can be done. So teaching the kid it is just a game and certainly not acceptable, and following that up by making sure there are consequences when the kid does bad vs good, otherwise how they gonna learn.
I just don't think it helps that parents, the media, the games industry, the gamers all of them for the most part seem to be pointing fingers and no one seems to want to ask the hard questions. The hard answer is that a combination of factors are coming together here, one is gaming one is parenting.
It's kinda like saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people"... yet the statement is ignoring the role that guns play in this! (or knives of course, but you get the drift).
It then comes back around to the parent to be able to accommodate the reality of this and address it as best as can be done. So teaching the kid it is just a game and certainly not acceptable, and following that up by making sure there are consequences when the kid does bad vs good, otherwise how they gonna learn.
I just don't think it helps that parents, the media, the games industry, the gamers all of them for the most part seem to be pointing fingers and no one seems to want to ask the hard questions. The hard answer is that a combination of factors are coming together here, one is gaming one is parenting.
It's kinda like saying "guns don't kill people, people kill people"... yet the statement is ignoring the role that guns play in this! (or knives of course, but you get the drift).
Very astute, maybe the reporter of this story likes CSI so didn't want to bring it up??FireFox170 said:
I partially agree with your statements. That's why I believe that games should be available only to people of the appropriate age. M-rated games shouldn't be available to twelve year old children. I'm pretty certain that if you looked in a law book somewhere, allowing a child to have access to any sort of adult material could be possibly considered corruption of a minor under the right light, and perhaps video games should be under that umbrella of understanding. I think murder casts its glow on that a little, but should mature adults really be banned from violent or explicit games because it made thirty or forty kids go psycho? I don't think that would be appropriate. I don't agree that all content is necessarily moral in video games, but I don't think they are murder simulators either. I myself really enjoy action and first person shooters/RPG's, and a lot of the more recent games give you the option to do right or wrong, and someone like me is probably more predisposed to do right in the game as opposed to walking around murdering everyone. Perhaps games with a freedom of choice factor are actually telling us what these kids and teens are predisposed to do rather than training them to do it. This statement also makes me frustrated:Alter said:
Even though he was 18, one would have to assume that he probably spent many times alone as a kid, as other examples like this one in the article prove. A lawyer would have to prove motive for the murder in court, and I'm certain that "the game made him do it" argument given by a prosecutor would not cut it for a jury. It probably could be used as evidence that there was underlying mental defect, but it would never stand up that it was the sole cause of the act. There is always more going on behind the scenes in violence caused by video games cases and the info trickles out little by little along side the "Video games are ending the world (ohh by the way he happened to be a practicing satanist and neo-nazi)!" types of statements. These people act like violence has never happen in human society before, which I can't help but laugh at when the blame video games as if violent behavior even in kids is some sort of new advent. Even though this may not be a credible news source, the fact still remains that undue blame is being placed on the game, and it doesn't belong there.Alter said:
Only my second post, but the escapist is a really great site (especially Yahtzee's video reviews) as I've been reading for quite a while now and I'm glad I finally decided to register. Cheers.
He's obviously never read the part of the Satanic Bible which says you should not harm innocents...
My point was that the media downplays other negative factors which possibly would better fit the definition of "cause" for an action just so they can blame the games for the resulting violence. I'll be the first to say that I firmly believe in Christianity, but I was not trying to be dogmatic in my statement. I was merely writing in an extreme manner to make my point. Besides, no matter what way you swing it or what viewpoint you come from, murder is just plain wrong unless you believe a philosophy that nothing in life has meaning.Booze Zombie said:
I don't see how they can use Satanism as an excuse for his actions, the religion is about self-indulgence and free thought.
That neo-nazi part is a bit weird, wonder where they got that from?
Even if life has no meaning, you're still here to exist in this one time energy fest, might as well make the best of it.
I get the feeling this kid was one of those guys who was so stupid that when he thought about life and death for a really long time, he got all weepy and thought of everything as nothing.
Just another brick in the wall. A really thick brick.
That neo-nazi part is a bit weird, wonder where they got that from?
Even if life has no meaning, you're still here to exist in this one time energy fest, might as well make the best of it.
I get the feeling this kid was one of those guys who was so stupid that when he thought about life and death for a really long time, he got all weepy and thought of everything as nothing.
Just another brick in the wall. A really thick brick.
You're misunderstanding me. They didn't say those things in this particular article. That was my point about how comments get presented in the media. Its like they make the major headline "VIDEO GAMES KILLED ALL THE KIDS IN THE SCHOOL!" and other more prevalent issues like the fact that a killer could possibly have had a mental disorder, or have grown up in an extremely negative environment, or have been exposed to things that they emotionally and mentally were not ready for, get left as a mere afterthought in the pursuit to bash the gaming industry for its influence on kids and teens.