Topic: Lieberman Talks Videogame Violence... Again

[WindyMan]

He's back, and this time, he's interested in what violence does to the kids who play the games.

Videogames and violence have always been a hot topic in society, and the mainstream media always seems to uncover some link between social problems and videogames as a whole.  Senator Joesph Lieberman from Connecticut is usually seen as public enemy #1 in the eyes of the honest gamer, and he's returned with a new plan.

Sen. Lieberman is looking to pass a bill that would lead to the setting up of a program to study the effects of various forms of media and entertainment, but singled out videogames as the big target.  Here's a bit from Cnet's news story:

Lieberman, a Connecticut Democrat, singled out video games as a particular area of concern and took yet another swing at "Grand Theft Auto III," the mega-selling PlayStation 2 game in which players take on the role of a small-time hoodlum.  

Lieberman said in the statement that the game links violence with sex and rewards players for degrading and killing women. "This is sick and indefensible," Lieberman said. "But beyond being offensive to our values, we should know whether this is helping to nurture misogynistic views and behaviors among young boys."

For the whole story, hop over to Cnet's news.com

[The Omen]

  Yes, Mr. Lieberman, i play GTA3.  I agree with you, I have now been programmed to beat on hookers to get my money.  Where as I used to feel ashamed when I stole a police car , I now feel nothing.  

This dope will not be president , for a variety of reasons, and this is one of them.

[Berto2K]

How this guy can be a democrat with such conservative views as this mistifies me.

[ruby_onix]

Thought #1 - Reads headline. "Hmmm. Lieberman is back in videogame news."

Thought #2 - "I hoped that the ratings system had gotten rid of him. Perhaps there's a fault with the ratings system (like stupid retailers selling DOA to 10-year-olds) that needs to be addressed. I'll give him the benefit of the doubt."

Thought #3 - "...uncover some link between social problems and videogames..." "...Grand Theft Auto III..." "...the game links violence with sex and rewards players for degrading and killing women..." "This is sick and indefensible," Oh great. He's being the morality police. Go take on pornography. Or kids in the schoolyard who swear. Don't go sticking obstructive rules onto my quirky-weird Japanese stuff just because of what Rockstar likes doing.

Thought #4 - "...we should know whether this is helping to nurture misogynistic views and behaviors among young boys..." Ooooh. It's back to the children again. Damn that GTA! How did it get away with an "E" rating? It was supposed to get an "M" to stop this kind of thing from happening! Oh wait. It did get an "M". Young boys aren't supposed to be able to play it, anymore than they're supposed to steal into their Dad's Playboy collection.

Though #5 - Go away Lieberman. Go away Leberman. Go away Lieberman. Damnit! How come don't I have telepathic powers! I blame Earthbound! Putting absurd ideas into my head!

[Black Knight]

I just beat up a hooker a few minutes ago. I got some good cash from her, Lieberman was her last client and he payed her plenty. I hate people who blame violence on the entertainment rather than the parents, or the people who commit the violence.

[SuckLikeAFox]

When the hell is this guy gonna shut up...cant he just croak already...

[fiveironalex]

Maybe our nation's leaders should be more concerned with real violence.  I'd say that seeing our president use violence as a justification for getting what he wants is more of an influence than a made up video game world.  The people who play games like GTA3 know that they are playing a game, not acting out reality.  The president however is real, and he is supposed to be a role model.  Think about it.

[Ian Sane]

Lieberman has obviously not done any research.  GTA: Vice City is the current scapegoat.  GTA3 was last year's.

Videogames are just one of those things that you can't expect someone like Lieberman to understand because he's too old to have ever been exposed to them.  Once the current generation becomes the world's leaders videogames will be largely ignored by politicians.

One thing I always mention when the violence in videogames issue comes up is that a violent person by nature is going to be interested in violent videogames but not everyone who plays violent videogames is a violent person.  Protesters have the cause and effect mixed up.

[Rellik]

Hey, I like Lieberman...

And I guess now you see what it's like to be on this side of a controversy?  Oh well... next time I see him, I'll talk to him about it.

Next time I see him... oh well.

Some level-headed person needs to gather together the general sentiment and make it visible, and make it actually make a difference.  A hacker, maybe?  You know, take over some site... that seems to be the best way.  Or you could do something legal like make your own site, but the message is confined by how many visitors you can get.  Sending e-mails doesn't help... that gaggle of blitches over at MAVAV don't even answers letters if they don't like them.

[NarmaK]

Somebody get me a bat . . . or maybe a tank.

Hah take that liberman i dont even have gta 3 and i want to kill you with a tank, that proves it,  no need for a study, its not the games that induce violence its your rinkly ass.

GIVE ME GAMES OR GIVE YOURSELF DEATH

[SuckLikeAFox]

Quote
Originally posted by: Rellik
Hey, I like Lieberman...

that gaggle of blitches over at MAVAV don't even answers letters if they don't like them.

MAVAV was fake man...

[Perfect Cell]

Thank god Lieberman lost the presidential election with Al gore.

[the_wenzel]

dang... Lieberman just keeps shoving his thumbs up his ass.  the question is... simultaneous? or alternate?

[Strell]

There was a huge discussion about this exact thing a month or two ago on another message board I go to.

The best argument people like Leiberman can muster is that "Studies show that when you let a five year old watch violent movies or play violent video games, they immediately begin to act more aggressive and hostile."  Yea well, that's great argument in theory, IF WE WERE ALL FIVE YEARS OLD.  The only way they could possibly have a point would be to follow several people (hundreds, if not thousands) for their entire lives, and see which ones develop violent tendencies dependent on which media they are exposed to.  You'd have to monitor so many different factors - environment, which games are played, family history, any possibly psychological illnesses...etc etc etc, the list goes on and on.  In the end, you're left with a bunch of scattered facts and generalizations that ultimately prove nothing.

Yea, I wouldn't be surprised if a kid played GTA, Mortal Kombat, Postal, etc., all his life, if he wouldn't become desensitized to violence.  But MAKE him violent?  That's a completely different tangent.  

Using non-sequiter logic, however, is every politician's ace in the hole, so I'm not surprised to see the same argument being utilized over and over.

[Djunknown]

Last I checked, 1st amendment rights have not been suspended. I don't see him talking about Conflictesert Storm, or Medal of Honor. If its a game about shooting America's enemies,  I'll bet no politican is going to gripe.  At least he didn't mention Nintendo, or else that'll be one stigma you can't shake.

Unless he can prove the ESRB is ineffective, he needs some other issue to tackle. Doesn't he have a war to protest? Oh that's right, its almost over....

[mouse_clicker]

This guy doesn't know how much videogames help America's precious economy, and violent videogames are some of the best sellers. If they ban or even just restrict violent videogames, expect our economy to take a blow.

Besides of which, he should realise nobody has to make sure there's nothing offensive in videogames- it's our right to say ANYTHING we want- anything less is unconstitutional.

[Perfect Cell]

Its simple... theres videogames worldwide... they arent more violent because of them...

[Orange Soda]

I don't plan on becoming a regular forum member, but I read the article and replies, and thought I'd just mention this:

http://web.archive.org/web/20001019044619/www.dailyradar.com/news/game_news_5142.html

Make of it what you will. (Slight warning: Takes a while to load.)

[Michael_82]

I say, let him do his study.  Let him see hes wrong and then we'll be done with it.  Badda-Bing Badda-Boom.  Do they also consider that aggressive children are more likely to watch violent programming on tv and what not.  The end result is not it turning someone agressive, but someone agressive tuning it.

[D_Man]

After reading all the replies, i came to this conclusion:

LIBERMAN, GAMES DON'T MAKE GAMERS VIOLENT, YOU DO!!!!!!

Screw you, joe.

[Illini4]

He isn't trying to end videogames!  

Being planetgamecube, not many of us need to worry about the type's of games he is talking about.  Someone on this site put a link to an interview with Lieberman and he clearly says he doesn't want to ban video games.  He clearly wants to make sure that little kids (7 year olds!) can't just walk in to a store and spend the money they have saved up for a year on a game that getting life back is picking up a hooker and doing "things" in your car.  I agree with that!  He isn't saying they can't put that in the game, he is just saying CHILDREN shouldn't be able to purchase it.

I was in a video game store (nameless) once and these two boys (age 12 MAX!) went to the manager of the store and said "yeah how much will a gamecube and metroid prime cost" the manager looked at them and said "you boys should get an Xbox and Dead to Rights.  It is only a little more expensive and there is actually blood in that game, metroid is childish."  First of all, trying to get little kids to buy the more expensive system is slimey, but then to make a sales pitch with the only thing being LOTS OF BLOOD is sick!  I decided i should make a comment to the salesman and told him if the kid looks like he still beleives in santa, don't push the blood.  So he says "I am only selling them what they want."  First off, they didn't ask for that game, second off YOU CAN'T SELL THEM THAT GAME!  The ESRB is nice, it just needs to be enforced.

Just don't eveybody start screaming for Liebermans head!  He isn't trying to take our fun fun games!  He is just making sure kids aren't buying BMX XXX without their parents knowing about the game.  I am sure many parents don't know that actual breasts are in BMX XXX, and if they did, i am sure many wouldn't want their kids to have it.  But if they dont' mind, that is fine too, but as long as they are informed.  Liebs is just trying to INFORM!

[Rellik]

Hah... once again, I say Lieberman is good to be thinking about this.

He has points... although, from our standpoint, it seems like he's being stupid, I think he does have points.  If studies show something, then there's some validity to it... think what you want, but there's not just some guy somewhere who makes up these studies.

Why do people not actually listen to what he has to say?  Just go to that last link, the Daily Radar's interview with Lieberman.  He's probably wrong, but it's good to be concerned, and he is not advocating that video games are bad for you and everyone who plays them must be either juvenile delinquents or screw-ups who failed college because they were too drunk.

Doesn't it annoy anyone that nobody is really listening to what he has to say?  Don't be so defensive... it's not like he's accusing you of anything, and you don't have to lash out at him.

[Kyosho]

Well when I use to be a sales associate at a video game store, a lot of kids come in and buy those so called violent games.  

This one time, this guy who clearly looks like he's over 16 wants to buy Mortal Kombat Annhilation.  So I'm ringing him up, and all of a sudden the woman behind him who actually was his mother asked, "are you going to check his ID? You're suppose to check him if he's underage.  It's against the law if you dont and you can get arrested." I responded with "i didnt know that." Keep in mind the lines were somewhat long but she was making a big scene.  She started lecturing about how the sales associates should be responsible for kids buying violent games and such.  So jokingly, i responded, "ok is it ok for your son to purchase this game." And she smiled and said, "yes" and lectured me some more about morals and such.

The instant she walked out of the store, a lot of customers behind her were just trash talking about her.  I personally feel it is the parent's responsibility to take an active role in their child's life if they dont want them to play a violent game.  Personally, I have been watching Rated R movies since I was little and playing violent games.  It really depends on how you're raised.  If a parent has to blame a sales associate for their kid's development, then they are a bad parent.  

As for buying games w/o the parents knowing, I use to do a lot of stuff w/o my parents knowing illegally and legally.  If the parents are really offended by it, they need to get in on a kid's life, and really participate in it.  Fortunately, my parents took everything like a grain of salt, and just told me what is bad and what is not.  It's ok to try, but not get caught up in it.

[LOP Posse]

To claim that violent video games have zero effect on violence is rubbish.  Without getting into the Nature vs. Nurture debate, I think we can safely admit that who we are and the choices we make are largely determined by what we have experienced in life.  Whether it's friends, media, moral teachings, video games, etc.,  What goes into our minds is processed and becomes part of who we are.  Just because the large majority of us (myself included) have played video games all our lives and haven't shown the slightest inkling of manifesting that violence into real life, does not mean our personal experience is proof that violent video games are in no way connected to real life violence and crime.  This is especially true in cases of younger children that may have a difficult time differentiating between reality and fiction and may not have the home support to help teach that difference.  By saying this I don't mean that violent video games should be banned.  i enjoy my first ammendment right to zoom in with a sniper rifle(this being a video game of course) on the back of the head of an unknowing victim, and cackle as I bust a cap(Even if that means I'm desensitized to violence, I'm thankful for that right).  I'm just annoyed that people make claims that violent media has no bearing on real life violence, because they feel threatened they make uninformed judgements.  I'm likewise annoyed with politicians that use violent media as a scapegoat instead of the real problems (decline of the american family, corruption, etc)  They use this scapegoat to further promote their own political agendas.  Video games don't make anybody commit crime,  bet they definately can influence people to, even if that influence is minor.

[The Caucasian Cubist]

You are all ridiculous. Surely you don't seriously think that Senator Lieberman is stupid and doesn't have any point at all. I think you guys are an excellent example of what he's talking about. I'm reading through and see things like "can't he just croak already?" and "I wish he would die". Guys! That is NOT helping your side of the debate; if anything it's affirming Lieberman's point. I agreee with him. I think it is ridiculous that GTA can be the Number one game in the country, and the rating system nearly entirely ignored. Something should be done. And y'all who say "It's not GTA's fault," or the like, well, the GTA-affect has already taken hold of you. It's games like this that are ruining everything (alright generalization, but whatever)

Y'all don't find anything wrong with an 8-year-old beating an old lady to death than chuckling, "Huhu, that's cool?" C'mon, people, you're freaks.

In conclusion, I'm right, you're wrong, resistance is futile, so just shut up.