[Herra Tohtori]

Link.

Virtual hit men in Europe’s largest video games market could soon find themselves behind real bars if German regional politicians have their way.

Under new legislation drawn up in reaction to a shooting at a school last month, developers, retailers and players of videos featuring “cruel violence” could face up to a year in jail.

The bill - unveiled this week by the states of Bavaria and Lower Saxony and due to be presented to the national parliament next year - is already raising the alarm in the 2m strong German online gaming community.

“We have among the most drastic censorship rules for games,” said Frank Sliwka, head of the Deutsche E-Sport Bund, an umbrella federation for online gaming teams. “Now we are being labelled as a breeding ground for unstable, dysfunctional and violent youngsters.”

(...)

 

It seems that Jack Thompson does not have exclusive rights on making himself a moron on this subject. Perhaps he will sue the German legislators for idea theft if they get this hammered through.

Seriously, what the hell is going on in people's mind? I personally don't believe one second that video games have any more effect on violent behaviour than any other violent content. There are other reasons that cause not only violent behaviour but also many other disturbed behaviour models.

Then again, most people who play any games - violent or not - behave completely normally. People who snap usually have some other reasons than "playing too much violent games". Playing too much any game causes problems if it starts to take time from actual life, that's for sure, but that right is not limited to "graphically violent" games. In fact I think games like WoW and like cause far more problems than violence in games.

So, why would this penalty be limited to "violent" games?

And more importantly, who gets to define which games are too violent and which ones are not?

[Turey]

And more importantly, who gets to define which games are too violent and which ones are not?

Old people. Dull people. Anyone who would never think of playing video games ever.

But not parents. Parent's are too irresponsible to be parenting.

[Tyrian]

Ich heisse Jack Thompson.

I have to disagree on this subject.  It seems to me that in a small percentage of people, playing violent video games does bring out violent behavior.  There was a case out in the Midwest US where a teenager shot at passing cars on a highway with a shotgun, killing one person.  He claimed he got the idea from playing Grand Theft Auto. 

I don't think it's logical to say that we can or will stop all violence in video games, but we do need better regulation of who buys them.  Stores need to be held liable for selling exceedingly violent games, like GTA, to underage players.  We also need to educate parents in a more effective manner about the possible dangers of playing extremely violent games.  We can't just go around saying "Don't buy your under 17 kids violent games, that's bad, bad, bad."  It's the same argument that Health teachers used to tell teens not to have sex, "Don't do it, it's bad, bad, bad."  Nagging people like that just makes them not care, or at worst, go out and do said behavior.

[Taristin]

Ich heisse Jack Thompson.

I have to disagree on this subject.  It seems to me that in a small percentage of people, playing violent video games does bring out violent behavior.  There was a case out in the Midwest US where a teenager shot at passing cars on a highway with a shotgun, killing one person.  He claimed he got the idea from playing Grand Theft Auto. 

How many will do it because they saw it in a movie, or because they heard this kid did it?
These idiots need to be controlled, yes, but blaming video games is too easy a way out.

[Flipside]

I suppose it's sort of the difference between 'Trigger' and 'Cause' that seems to stupify a lot of legislators. It's like trying to say the Beatles 'White Album' was the cause of Charles Manson's behaviour, rather than the trigger for it, he read into the lyrics something that he already wanted an excuse to do. Same deal, I think, with kids who play violent video games and then go do something stupid. They want an excuse to go do something totally insane, and they interpret the game as giving the permission to do so.

I suppose the thing is, if you saw a headline of 'Silence of the Lambs copycat killer caught', you'd just think 'Well, that's one nutjob out of the way', you certainly wouldn't think 'Omg! We must regulate these horrible movies!'.

Germany has incredibly strict laws regarding media anyway, this is just a knee-jerk reaction to something that is an ongoing problem in all media and, more importantly, as the number of people living together in cities is increasing, an ongoing problem in society in dealing with the mentally disturbed.

[Herra Tohtori]

Ich heisse Jack Thompson.

I have to disagree on this subject.  It seems to me that in a small percentage of people, playing violent video games does bring out violent behavior.  There was a case out in the Midwest US where a teenager shot at passing cars on a highway with a shotgun, killing one person.  He claimed he got the idea from playing Grand Theft Auto. 

Certainly. It is also a widely known fact that in a small percentage of people, driving a car brings out violent behaviour called "road rage". What should we do about that? Ban the cars?

It's not everyone's problem. It's a problem to those who suffer from this personality defect or whatever it is, and the solution is not to ban driving a car.

In video games' question, it's also not an aceptable solution to ban one type of games altogether. Age limits are necessary, I have to agree on that just like they are necessary on movies and stuff, but in historical context there has always been potential nutcases. Something will always bring out "violent behaviour" of these said potential nutcases, be it the face of the student sitting next to you, or playing video games, or driving a car or what ever.

I think violent games must be put onto a context here. Media is full of violence. There are sports in which the main goal is to incapacitate the opponent (for real, not just digitally mind you!). The message in the media is that violence is not a serious business in overall, it's not limited to games. Yet these flower-hat aunties and jackthompsons concentrate on video/computer games, as if they were the source of all violent behaviour in society. Interactiveness is blamed to have greater effect than non-interactive gore in media, but I disagree.

Besides, the amount of gore in the game is not really the important point. If there's violence, it remains the same even if the graphical gory pictures are limited.

In fact, limiting the gore may only make things worse, at least according to some opinions of these jackthompsons. They claim that some people become unable to separate reality from violent game, or that they don't understand that a person dies if he or she is severely cut, or for example kicked below the chin hard enough. Wouldn't limiting the effects of violence only increase this separation from reality? I mean, if there is allowed to be killing, shooting and stuff, but there's no blood... and if the games really have that big an impact on kids... How could they understand that when you stab someone or shoot someone, he'll bleed plenty, since there are no such things as "just a flesh wound".

If all, the existing violence in games should be made as disgusting and real as possible in order to make the players look at it in revulsion.

</semisarcastic>

Personally I dislike games in which violence is the end itself. That's why I don't play online FPS games. If there's a good story and viable motives behind the character doing the killings, I can enjoy the game, like in Halo and Halo 2, and some others. Otherwise I prefer flight sims and space shooters. Total War series also kicks some serious butt.

I don't think it's logical to say that we can or will stop all violence in video games, but we do need better regulation of who buys them.  Stores need to be held liable for selling exceedingly violent games, like GTA, to underage players.  We also need to educate parents in a more effective manner about the possible dangers of playing extremely violent games.  We can't just go around saying "Don't buy your under 17 kids violent games, that's bad, bad, bad."  It's the same argument that Health teachers used to tell teens not to have sex, "Don't do it, it's bad, bad, bad."  Nagging people like that just makes them not care, or at worst, go out and do said behavior.

On this paragraph I fully, whole-heartedly agree. Except that it needs to be the parents doing the most supervising of their kids, but obviously the shops should also have more strict policies on to whom they sell the games.

The problem seems to be to make the parents actually look after their kids. Kids may not appreciate it (I know I didn't at the time) but that's how the thing is. If the parents neglect their children, eventually someone will have to set them limits, and in my opinion the government/state is not supposed to be setting that kind of limits to people. Laws are a matter in themselves, but when the state starts to involve itself in tellign parents how their children should be raised you aren't very far from state-organized brainwashing.

I don't know how much more unclearly I could've said things. Oh well.

Pre-Posting Edit.

Last two comments had about the same points in them, but in a better and more condensed form. 

[aldo_14]

Ich heisse Jack Thompson.

I have to disagree on this subject.  It seems to me that in a small percentage of people, playing violent video games does bring out violent behavior.  There was a case out in the Midwest US where a teenager shot at passing cars on a highway with a shotgun, killing one person.  He claimed he got the idea from playing Grand Theft Auto. 

I don't think it's logical to say that we can or will stop all violence in video games, but we do need better regulation of who buys them.  Stores need to be held liable for selling exceedingly violent games, like GTA, to underage players.  We also need to educate parents in a more effective manner about the possible dangers of playing extremely violent games.  We can't just go around saying "Don't buy your under 17 kids violent games, that's bad, bad, bad."  It's the same argument that Health teachers used to tell teens not to have sex, "Don't do it, it's bad, bad, bad."  Nagging people like that just makes them not care, or at worst, go out and do said behavior.

I'd wager that a) stopping kids getting easy access to guns and b) proper parenting that educates on the morality of right and wrong, action and consequence, would both be more effective ways to address the problem; any normal 17 year old is well aware that firing a shotgun into traffic is dangerous.  If games had any sort of influence over people in this way, beyond the influences of all media, then the news would be full of teenage carjackings and prostitute beating-ups; in a small percentage of people, anything can cause violence.

[Quest_techie]

Ich heisse Jack Thompson.

I have to disagree on this subject.  It seems to me that in a small percentage of people, playing violent video games does bring out violent behavior.  There was a case out in the Midwest US where a teenager shot at passing cars on a highway with a shotgun, killing one person.  He claimed he got the idea from playing Grand Theft Auto. 

I don't think it's logical to say that we can or will stop all violence in video games, but we do need better regulation of who buys them.  Stores need to be held liable for selling exceedingly violent games, like GTA, to underage players.  We also need to educate parents in a more effective manner about the possible dangers of playing extremely violent games.  We can't just go around saying "Don't buy your under 17 kids violent games, that's bad, bad, bad."  It's the same argument that Health teachers used to tell teens not to have sex, "Don't do it, it's bad, bad, bad."  Nagging people like that just makes them not care, or at worst, go out and do said behavior.

any moron who is going to do violence after encountering it in a god damned video ame was going to do violence anyway, just because  video game happenss to be the thing that finally makes the nut fall off his tree doesn't mean it's the games fault

[Nuke]

deranged psychopaths are to be expected in any society. people think by getting rid of violence in videogames and movies its gonna make the psychopaths go away. it wont, if anything fake violence gives people a reason not to do it for real. sure its gonna give a few psychos a vacation from reality. if a society refuses to create systems to prevent, detect and treat the crazys, then they deserve the occasional scool shooting or whatever.

[Rictor]

Under new legislation drawn up in reaction to a shooting at a school last month, developers, retailers and players of videos featuring “cruel violence” could face up to a year in jail.

Says the country where sheisse-porn is the national hobby.

I guess violent videogames are also to be blamed for Neo-Nazis, immigrant workers, teenage pregnancy, rave culture, Satanism, the economic slump, hooliganism and losing to Italy in the World Cup semi-finals.