Death By Video Game! White Kid Gets Away With Murder!

FYI, the scene that Stir referenced from Pulp Fiction is fucking hilarious. :cof1:

It was because we are perfectly capable of separating fact from fiction.

Pulp Fiction is twenty years old and crime rates were an issue then. Our media has become more violent and crime rates have dropped. I am not implying there is a connection but the idea that media violence leads to higher crime should seem absurd.

There is no epidemic of crime, black on white, white on black, intraracial, due to immigrants, due to guns or of any other kind in which various fearmongers trade.

Things are improving maybe because we are a better people than the degenerates of past eras.
 
Indeed it was. So she blamed the victim in this shooting according to the same reasoning.

I don't see her comments as "blaming the victim". But since you do, I went to the effort to point out that she is correct in her statements and since you agree, and you claimed she blamed the victim, then you blame the victim as well. By your own logic.
 
I don't see her comments as "blaming the victim". But since you do, I went to the effort to point out that she is correct in her statements and since you agree, and you claimed she blamed the victim, then you blame the victim as well. By your own logic.

I do. I also blame the purported "victim" in the Martin/Zimmerman case.
 
It was because we are perfectly capable of separating fact from fiction.

Pulp Fiction is twenty years old and crime rates were an issue then. Our media has become more violent and crime rates have dropped. I am not implying there is a connection but the idea that media violence leads to higher crime should seem absurd.

There is no epidemic of crime, black on white, white on black, intraracial, due to immigrants, due to guns or of any other kind in which various fearmongers trade.

Things are improving maybe because we are a better people than the degenerates of past eras.

Where did I say higher crime? You are putting words in my mouth. Re-read what I wrote. And I linked examples
 
If a game or a show has inspired some sociopath to kill and later openly explain how they loved identifying with the character, don't you think that type of programming is too dangerous to allow random sociopaths to potentially see, and shouldn't the film maker face charges or at least liability since we can show that this type of programming can lead to such events. We can't expect to keep the material from sociopaths, so wouldn't it be better to pass legislation to assign liability to artists whose works inspire violence? That way, the film makers would stop pushing the envelope on how graphic and demented they make their art.
 
If a game or a show has inspired some sociopath to kill and later openly explain how they loved identifying with the character, don't you think that type of programming is too dangerous to allow random sociopaths to potentially see, and shouldn't the film maker face charges or at least liability since we can show that this type of programming can lead to such events. We can't expect to keep the material from sociopaths, so wouldn't it be better to pass legislation to assign liability to artists whose works inspire violence? That way, the film makers would stop pushing the envelope on how graphic and demented they make their art.

Are you for gun control?
 
It's an interesting discussion. I don't agree with you Tinfoil, but you raise some interesting points at least. I know the Army has used violent video games for recruitment purposes, so I am guessing they have some good studies on this. But I don't agree with your position anyway.

The thing that has always made me crazy is how the most violent films can get a PG13, but if you show a woman having an orgasm it's hard to get an R, they try and put kiss of box office death, NC17 on it. I find it absurd to live in a culture that glorifies and normalizes violence and attempts to censor sexual love. That is some messed up culture, I will tell you that.
 
It's an interesting discussion. I don't agree with you Tinfoil, but you raise some interesting points at least. I know the Army has used violent video games for recruitment purposes, so I am guessing they have some good studies on this. But I don't agree with your position anyway.

The thing that has always made me crazy is how the most violent films can get a PG13, but if you show a woman having an orgasm it's hard to get an R, they try and put kiss of box office death, NC17 on it. I find it absurd to live in a culture that glorifies and normalizes violence and attempts to censor sexual love. That is some messed up culture, I will tell you that.

THIS!!!!

Why is it worse for a child to see sex than to see murder & cruelty?
 
Where did I say higher crime? You are putting words in my mouth. Re-read what I wrote. And I linked examples


If a game or a show has inspired some sociopath to kill and later openly explain how they loved identifying with the character, don't you think that type of programming is too dangerous to allow random sociopaths to potentially see, and shouldn't the film maker face charges or at least liability since we can show that this type of programming can lead to such events. We can't expect to keep the material from sociopaths, so wouldn't it be better to pass legislation to assign liability to artists whose works inspire violence? That way, the film makers would stop pushing the envelope on how graphic and demented they make their art.


You are not making much sense. If violent media causes criminal acts, as you claim, then it would stand to reason that more violent media would cause more crime. Violence in media has increased while crime has decreased.


No, I don't think we should hold an artist responsible because a criminal claims to have been inspired by them. That's an absolutely crazy idea.
 
Back
Top