Video games may be curbing crime in the U.S

[DocMcCray]

/snip

I am going to need a source for that, that crimes like vandalism and drug dealing(?!!) are being prevented through games. Second of all the article is talking about violent crime primarily, crimes that rarely fall into the category of "crimes of necessity" and more in the lines of "because sociopathic assholes exist"

Look bad apples and youth delinquency is going to exist regardless of the medium around them, angry violent anti-social youths will harm other people video games or not. There is no praise or blame to be given to any entertainment medium only the actions of the individual.

For the sake of argument lets say you are right and video games influence criminal behavior, are we not saying that Jack Thompson was right all along, that we can profile people by the entertainment that they consume, or don't consume? That we are indecisive muppets with no will. Can you imagine a kid being court ordered to play video games because of his violent tendencies?

The idea that when people become bored they turn into violent lunatics is ludicrous. Violent crime is committed by individuals who have a predisposition to it due to either mental malfunction, lack of morals or empathy, these people will find a way to hurt others no matter how great the new Wiistation One is.

I'll reiterate that before games there also existed law abiding citizens, that didn't go mad in violent rage because of lack of stimulation, or they used their free time on something that wasn't criminal. You make it sound like our parents generation were living in anarchy.

I know it is tempting to jump on this story and have it as a badge of validation for our pass time, but you can't have it both ways. This kind of "study" or rather assumption as far as I could tell from the source, is just as harmful for diluting the discourse about violence and its cause, prevention and remedy. There are no quick fixes to society's problems.

The article also goes on to talk in depth about concurrent social changes like demolishing of project housing and online illicit drug trade instead of street corners. Not attributed to games but rather societal and technological changes.

There are several false assumptions in your reply. First off is that there are people who's only existence revolves around committing crime, the "sociopathic assholes." You make it sound like they don't have free will and cannot choose whether they commit crime or not. This is not a dichotomy. It is a spectrum that starts with "actively avoiding criminal activity" and ends with "actively searching out criminal activity." In every case, a person has a choice and there is no guarentee that they will choose the murder/battery/violence option.

For Jack Thompson, he stated that video games were the cause of violence and violent games would make people more violent even if they did not have violent proclivities. This study states that people who already have violent proclivities might turn to video games to satiate these desires rather than inflict them on other humans.

I am not saying that playing games is the silver bullet that will end crime. As the article itself states, the data may merely be correlational. However after a risk vs benefit analysis, I am more than willing to give the whole video games thing a shot.

For the sake of disclosure, I should let you and everyone else know that I have a Bachelor's degree from Purdue University in Criminology and Cognitive/Behavioral Psychology. I do know quite a bit about criminal behavior.

 

[MCerberus]

Hey guys, this is the same causation fallacy that we complain about whenever someone says that games CAUSE crime.

 

[Scars Unseen]

This is preposterous. It's bad enough when crime comes straight at you. How on earth are we supposed to stay safe when crime starts curving around all of a sudden?

 

[Aramis Night]

It isn't as though kids these days have a lot of other legal options outside of video games for things to do. Many places have overzealous cps agents or other social workers who have taken children from parents because those parents allowed the children to play outside unattended by an adult citing neglect as the justification. And even though this has only happened a handful of times, it does have a rather chilling effect on the parents who learn that there kids can be taken from them so easily when they hear of such cases.

And then you also have the current legal environment kids currently live in where what was considered normal mischievous behavior that in the past would have been handled by parents or a stern talking to from an adult about such behavior is now handled by police and judges which also puts the parent into the position of severely curtailing their children from doing the very things they did themselves as children that had minimal if any harm. Take trespassing as an example. In my day, if you were caught trespassing where you didn't belong, you would simply be shouted at or told to leave by the owners and that would usually be the end of it. It was a very common thing for kids to do. Now if you are busted for trespassing, the cops are called and rather than just a talk and maybe a ride to your parents to scare the kid straight, its a juvenile record and the parents paying a hefty fine.

Under these conditions, it's not surprising that parents would encourage there kids to stay home and play video games.

 

[Tayh]

So what you're saying is... Criminals favor the xbox?

 

[Scars Unseen]

It isn't as though kids these days have a lot of other legal options outside of video games for things to do. Many places have overzealous cps agents or other social workers who have taken children from parents because those parents allowed the children to play outside unattended by an adult citing neglect as the justification. And even though this has only happened a handful of times, it does have a rather chilling effect on the parents who learn that there kids can be taken from them so easily when they hear of such cases.

And then you also have the current legal environment kids currently live in where what was considered normal mischievous behavior that in the past would have been handled by parents or a stern talking to from an adult about such behavior is now handled by police and judges which also puts the parent into the position of severely curtailing their children from doing the very things they did themselves as children that had minimal if any harm. Take trespassing as an example. In my day, if you were caught trespassing where you didn't belong, you would simply be shouted at or told to leave by the owners and that would usually be the end of it. It was a very common thing for kids to do. Now if you are busted for trespassing, the cops are called and rather than just a talk and maybe a ride to your parents to scare the kid straight, its a juvenile record and the parents paying a hefty fine.

Under these conditions, it's not surprising that parents would encourage there kids to stay home and play video games.

No kidding. My sister nearly got taken away from my mom(I lived with my grandmother at the time) for sneaking out of the house and going to a friend's house late at night. She ended up being forced to see a psychologist for normal teenager behaviour. I have something of an abiding loathing for government agencies that try to interfere with family life.

 

[McMarbles]

Don't you mean "curbing" crime?

 

[Racecarlock]

This article by NBC says there is a "Xbox effect" Causing youth to stay inside and play video games instead of going out side and causing crime. http://investigations.nbcnews.com/_news/2014/01/04/22177302-are-the-xbox-and-unleaded-gas-helping-keep-you-safe-from-violent-crime?lite

So suck it Politicians who blame video games on corrupting the youth. Although I do think it may lead to bad eating habits when Taco bell, mountain dew and Doritos are always the sponsors for a popular video game. I am happy that Uncharted was sponsred by subway at least some gamers are being advertised to be healthy

Dude, you most likely apply a lot of scientific skepticism to any study that says games increase violence, so you should probably think about applying that same level even when a study supports your side.

It's only fair.

 

[Qvar]

Although I do think it may lead to bad eating habits when Taco bell, mountain dew and Doritos are always the sponsors for a popular video game. I am happy that Uncharted was sponsred by subway at least some gamers are being advertised to be healthy

I don't really see the relevance of this to the rest of your post, and how is subway healthy?

I don't really see how this makes anything more than a short term change, less people committing crimes to play games today doesn't matter as tomorrow they may not have any more games to play, and crimes of necessity wont be hindered by games.

Actually, two things (among others) are considered facts of the criminology:
1. The older the individual, the less likely is he to comit crimes.
2. Premeditate criminal activity is, in most of it's manifestations, a learnt conduct (from parents, friends, a criminal mentor...).

If you get the youth of today to stop commiting crime, they won't be doing it later, and they won't be teaching the youth of tomorrow.

 

[Redlin5_v1legacy]

I like how a small slight at Subway, which was an innocent joke, lead the majority of this thread.

I too chortled at that.

OT: As it has been said before, I find it odd that I keep having to say it again... People are accountable for their own actions, they aren't programmed by the media they ingest.

If person is really violent, you can't just sate them by throwing an xbox at them. Likewise, that xbox isn't going to turn a mild mannered person into a lunatic. Those are things with root causes far deeper than losing in COD.

 

[Qvar]

I'm surprised that the fine, intelligent people of this forum is confusing "videogames brainwash our youth so they not commit crimes" with "videogames maintain our youth occupied, so they won't commit crimes".

The first one is the opposite to "videogames make youth people violent", the second one, which is what is being discused here, is not.

 

[Comocat]

I don't believe it. This is as ridiculous as claiming that video games are a catalyst for crime. games don't cause crimes, and they don't stop them either.

Why is it that we can't hold people accountable to their own individual actions without giving the credit or blame to some medium. Bored teenagers are not the main factor in crimes, moral upbringing and social and economic situation are main factors.

criminals and law abiding citizens were here long before games ever came into existent.

I don't think its crazy. Crime has seasonal distributions generally peaking during the summer. If teens are entertained and staying inside, rather than bored and wandering the streets- I could see how crime rates would fall. I doubt the dip in crime is for murder or fraud, but I could see a drop in petty crimes like vandalism or shop lifting.

 

[thewatergamer]

GASP You mean video games can actually be GOOD FOR YOU???

WHAT IS THIS WORLD COMING TOO!!!

Seriously though not suprised tons of studies with this same trends have shown up recently, too bad the spineless morons we call politicians and "news anchors" won't bother taking notice or right them off as "bias"

 

[JoshGod]

I don't really see how this makes anything more than a short term change, less people committing crimes to play games today doesn't matter as tomorrow they may not have any more games to play, and crimes of necessity wont be hindered by games.

Actually, two things (among others) are considered facts of the criminology:
1. The older the individual, the less likely is he to comit crimes.
2. Premeditate criminal activity is, in most of it's manifestations, a learnt conduct (from parents, friends, a criminal mentor...).

If you get the youth of today to stop commiting crime, they won't be doing it later, and they won't be teaching the youth of tomorrow.

Yes, but I'm questioning how much games are actually stopping crime, maybe briefly when a GTA is released, but mostly games won't stop much crime the idea that a youthful teenager who would offend stops completely because he has games to play is silly.

 

[O maestre]

I don't believe it. This is as ridiculous as claiming that video games are a catalyst for crime. games don't cause crimes, and they don't stop them either.

Why is it that we can't hold people accountable to their own individual actions without giving the credit or blame to some medium. Bored teenagers are not the main factor in crimes, moral upbringing and social and economic situation are main factors.

criminals and law abiding citizens were here long before games ever came into existent.

I don't think its crazy. Crime has seasonal distributions generally peaking during the summer. If teens are entertained and staying inside, rather than bored and wandering the streets- I could see how crime rates would fall. I doubt the dip in crime is for murder or fraud, but I could see a drop in petty crimes like vandalism or shop lifting.

The article was talking about violent crime not petty crimes.

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Snip

I think it'd be worth noting that, Daily Mail aside, that's not necessarily applicable in the US.

The chart with all the food additives was relating to the US chains, so it's Subways are using the same premise of sourcing cheap meat that has lots of preservatives and diluted crap added into it to reduce the price.

And frankly I'm not sure why it would be surprising that a 6 inch sub contains more calories than a McDonald's burger, as terrible as they may be for you. Especially one that contains beef itself. I don't know about everyone else, but if I'm going to be getting something from Subway, I generally treat it as an entire meal. And I don't even get the drink or junk food.

Also additives and preservatives are going to be in practically everything you eat unless you only eat home-grown foods, so... you know.

You have the right attitude with subway, the issue is when people believe the PR of Subway being a healthy alternative to the unhealthy fast food joints. Eating at Subway is fine as long as you treat it as you would McDonalds, because generally the meals are the same amount of calories, and the meat is the same cheap stuff that the others use.

 

[Qvar]

Yes, but I'm questioning how much games are actually stopping crime, maybe briefly when a GTA is released, but mostly games won't stop much crime the idea that a youthful teenager who would offend stops completely because he has games to play is silly.

Why exactly is it silly? I don't know if they do or they do not stop crime, but it sounds worth of a deeper analysis to me. Along all human history people has had their bread and circuses to keep them entertained and not thinking about rebellion. It's not so farfetched that viodeogames would be this generations circuses, or the "opium", as Marx put it.

And yes, youth gang violence is highly related with rebellion and identity-seeking (mainly the seek of a social status away from the society that initially rejected them. Inside those gangs, crime is THE way of gaining status).

 

[kilenem]

The article also goes on to talk in depth about concurrent social changes like demolishing of project housing and online illicit drug trade instead of street corners. Not attributed to games but rather societal and technological changes.

Knocking down the projects solved some problems created other problems. You had the drug dealers from one area have go into another area and compete for territory. Also Section 8 replaced was the replacement but these people couldn't take care of their housing. My neighborhood was right next to the projects and went down in quality pretty quick.

I'm not saying the Projects shouldn't have been torn down because their was child prostitution in the one near my house. The projects were also in Detroit So when they took them down no one had money to develop the area so it was just a vacant lot for almost a decade and they promised the people who lived their they could return. It would've been nice if there was some foresight into what problems can happen when close down the projects.

Also people still sell Dope in the streets. When I was in high school in 2009. While I was waiting for the bus sitting on a bench in Downtown. This crack head sits next to me, opens up his book bag up, takes a nap sack out starts selling crack. I can see the police from where I'm sitting. At first I wanted to warn the dude because times are tough but I thought again. He's selling crack right next to a school student he needs to go to Jail. Walked away from him and 5 minutes later he was arrested. If you look like your not from Detroit people will try to sell you weed because a lot people from the suburbs come to Detroit for drugs and prostitution.

 

[O maestre]

/snip

I am going to need a source for that, that crimes like vandalism and drug dealing(?!!) are being prevented through games. Second of all the article is talking about violent crime primarily, crimes that rarely fall into the category of "crimes of necessity" and more in the lines of "because sociopathic assholes exist"

Look bad apples and youth delinquency is going to exist regardless of the medium around them, angry violent anti-social youths will harm other people video games or not. There is no praise or blame to be given to any entertainment medium only the actions of the individual.

For the sake of argument lets say you are right and video games influence criminal behavior, are we not saying that Jack Thompson was right all along, that we can profile people by the entertainment that they consume, or don't consume? That we are indecisive muppets with no will. Can you imagine a kid being court ordered to play video games because of his violent tendencies?

The idea that when people become bored they turn into violent lunatics is ludicrous. Violent crime is committed by individuals who have a predisposition to it due to either mental malfunction, lack of morals or empathy, these people will find a way to hurt others no matter how great the new Wiistation One is.

I'll reiterate that before games there also existed law abiding citizens, that didn't go mad in violent rage because of lack of stimulation, or they used their free time on something that wasn't criminal. You make it sound like our parents generation were living in anarchy.

I know it is tempting to jump on this story and have it as a badge of validation for our pass time, but you can't have it both ways. This kind of "study" or rather assumption as far as I could tell from the source, is just as harmful for diluting the discourse about violence and its cause, prevention and remedy. There are no quick fixes to society's problems.

The article also goes on to talk in depth about concurrent social changes like demolishing of project housing and online illicit drug trade instead of street corners. Not attributed to games but rather societal and technological changes.

There are several false assumptions in your reply. First off is that there are people who's only existence revolves around committing crime, the "sociopathic assholes." You make it sound like they don't have free will and cannot choose whether they commit crime or not. This is not a dichotomy. It is a spectrum that starts with "actively avoiding criminal activity" and ends with "actively searching out criminal activity." In every case, a person has a choice and there is no guarentee that they will choose the murder/battery/violence option.

For Jack Thompson, he stated that video games were the cause of violence and violent games would make people more violent even if they did not have violent proclivities. This study states that people who already have violent proclivities might turn to video games to satiate these desires rather than inflict them on other humans.

I am not saying that playing games is the silver bullet that will end crime. As the article itself states, the data may merely be correlational. However after a risk vs benefit analysis, I am more than willing to give the whole video games thing a shot.

For the sake of disclosure, I should let you and everyone else know that I have a Bachelor's degree from Purdue University in Criminology and Cognitive/Behavioral Psychology. I do know quite a bit about criminal behavior.

Still waiting for a source, on the Mexican drug cartels being foiled by video games.

You must have misread what I was saying about violent individuals, I was most dinitley making a case for free will, and that we are not muppets subject to the media we consume, for good or for ill.

Is true or false that society, all societies contain individuals with predisposition towards acting on violent tendencies?

Charles Manson twisted the Beatles into an apocalyptic vision of racial warfare, the Beatles of all things.

We can't embrace the same arguments now that they favor us and throw logic away. Violence does not happen just because of boredom, certain individuals are predisposed and prone to violence, the causes can be many and can be complex. These predisposed anti-social individuals will find a way to act out their tendencies regardless of what media they consume. That was the factual argument we made and the defenders of free speech made, when the likes of Jack Thompson blamed the world's ills on our hobby. It was a sound and logical argument then and it still is now.

Lets look at extreme metal music, we have on one side a vast majority of law abiding people who enjoy it and claim that the music mellows them out. Then we have a small minority in the scene that embraces extreme right wing politics, murder and burning of churches. Do we blame metal for the crimes? do we praise metal for the mellow headbangers? or do we blame/praise the individuals for their morals or lack there of?

We hold the individual accountable of his/her actions be they peaceful or malicious actions, not their hobbies. People may find inspiration for their actions in the media but not controlled by it, from a batman spree killer to someone gamifying learning process for kids with learning disabilities.

I may buy that petty nuisance crimes may be affected, but not violent crime and that is what the article was talking about, that is another beast entirely, and cases dealing with violence are treated differently as you may know. This is merely diluting what should be on the forefront in the discussion about violent crime, ethics, upbringing, parenting societal culture and so forth. Not hobbies.

I don't know what to say about your last disclosure though, congratulations?