What is this... Violence and Video Games?

     Violence? Video games? Surely those two aren't connected... are they? Short answer: NO. Long answer: maybe. Allow me to explain...

     To start off, we're going to derail the train before it even gets out of the station. What a great way to start, right? Before we get to the problem everyone blames, we need to look at the problems everyone tends to forget...

     When a shooting like Sandy Hook happens, everyone immediately looks for something to blame. Who does this the best? The media. So first off, forget everything the media has told you about how violence and video games are undeniably connected... Have you forgotten? Good. You've just taken your first step to becoming an intelligent individual who doesn't merely soak up all the drivel the media tries to shovel-feed us every day!

THE MEDIA: THE BLAME GAME
     For the past month, the media has been abuzz about one thing: the Sandy Hook shooting. It's been on television, in the newspapers and magazines, and all over the internet. The government is trying their hardest to ban guns and put restrictions on violent video games. Parents are pulling their children from the public school system. All of this because of the shooting in Connecticut. It's a tragedy... and what has the media done with it?

     Money. They've turned it into a cash cow. They've plastered the killer's name and face all over the front page of their newspapers and magazines. They've run hours of newsroom footage where they bring in "experts" to explain it happened. They explain exactly which guns the killer had, how many bullets he used, and what he was wearing. They say what violent video games the killer, and his siblings, were playing. They do this because they know it will sell product. They blame everything they can so that it can draw the attention of as many types of people as possible. For them, it's all about the money. People don't want to hear about war! They want to hear about how the president loves their soda more than any other!

     For others, it's about something else: FEARMONGERING. This happens when the media plasters it all over the screen or page and tells you that your children, or even yourself, aren't safe to go outside or be in school. They play the "blame game" and blame guns and video games for the killer's actions. "If guns were restricted or banned, this sort of thing wouldn't happen," or, "Video games will turn your child into a mass-murdering psychopath." The media portrays the tragedy in such a way as to keep you scared, because a scared populace, is an obedient populace. The media and government do this because they have an agenda to try and push, and with a tragedy like this, they can very easily sway public opinion to get their laws passed. Wow... I'm definitely starting to sound like a conspiracy theorist. However, take a moment and use your common sense to really think about it. Don't believe me? I'll let fellow gamer Totalbiscuit explain it better (and with more charts to back him up).

    "Because it's unethical. I should not be making money on the backs of dead children, and neither should these television networks." Such a powerful quote that sums up the state of modern day media. The news portrays these shooters as some sort of icon, something for others to aspire to be. It gives rise to copy-cats and those who would seek to do better. The media points the finger at so many things, yet misses the one thing that is truly to blame...

RESPONSIBILITY: THEY ARE YOUR ACTIONS, NO ONE ELSE'S
     When we look for something to blame, people tend to blame everything except for that which is staring us straight in the face: the shooter. A video game didn't kill those people, nor did a gun. The shooter killed those people. The media, and just about everyone else, tries to blame video games and guns, because pinning it on the actual shooter just isn't good enough. As I said above, they're trying to push their political agenda, and anything that can be used, will be used.

     In several cases, the shooter is a teenager. As most experts will try to tell you, video games, as well as any other form of media, can desensitize a person to violence. I agree with this. Children are especially at risk, because young minds are incredibly impressionable. What you learn as a child will define the way you view things as an adult. If children play these violent games, they will learn from them. It is important to keep them away from violent games until they know and understand that violence is usually a bad thing. Which brings us to the crux of our problem: their parents.

     "I blame my child's inclination for violence on these terrible, violent video games!" I've heard parents say this time and time again. Even my grandma has said it to me a couple of times. But here's the kicker: if you don't want your child playing violent video games, why do you let them play violent video games? The carelessness of parents and the neglect they show their children is the source of many problems with today's society; not just violent children, but other issues as well. "HOW DARE YOU!" I know, I know. Most parents would probably leave the table right now and storm out of the room in anger over being called the problem. Look at it this way: as a parent, you are tasked with raising your child to be a responsible adult. This is not the television's job, or the schools system's. Today's parents believe that the television or video games are a babysitter, or that the school system is responsible for teaching their children about right and wrong. That is not their responsibility. As a parent, you need to be an active part of your child's life.

     "Well these violent games should be restricted!" They already are! On the cover of every game there is a little letter that tells you what a game is rated:

     This is the American version of a video game content rating system, put out by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB), similar to the Motion Picture Assossiation of America's rating system for movies. It allows everyone to know what it in a game before they ever pop it into their console. Most game retailers won't sell an 'M' rated game to anyone under the age of seventeen. "Is that law?" No, but I believe it should be. The government is going about it the wrong way by trying to ban violent games altogether. These violent games are meant for adults, and they should only be played by adults. So, ban minors from buying violent games? Yes. Ban violence in games altogether. No.

      "Well how do all these teenagers get their hands on these violent games?!" Short answer? They most likely got their game from their parents.

     FLASHBACK: September 13th, 2011; 11:30 PM; standing outside of my local Gamestop. I stand in a line of over 200 people waiting for midnight so that I can get hands on a copy of the long awaited Halo: Reach. I'm close to the front of the line, but there are a few people in front of me. Who are these people? Not hardcore gamers in Halo paraphernalia, or cosplayers wearing Master Chief outfits. The people in front of me are 30+ year-old women with their obnoxious, screaming children. I wish I'd had the audacity to ask them if they knew anything about the game they were buying for their children, just so I could see the horrified look on their face (and the furious look on their child's face) when I told them all about it. However, this sort of thing is not a rare occurrence: it happens all the time.

^ THIS

     I can recall other times when I've walked into Gamestop or another game store and watched a parent buy their kid an 'M' rated game without ever looking at the rating or asking what it's about. At several other midnight releases, I've found myself stuck behind a bunch of obnoxious teenagers and their moms, because they wouldn't have been able to get the 'M' rated game we were all waiting for otherwise. Then there are those times when I get cursed out on Call of Duty by some ornery twelve year old. Parents ask how their children got such a terrible game when they're the ones who more than likely bought it for them.

     Do you, as their parent, know what games your child is playing? Did you do any research beforehand on that 'M' rated game you just bought your child? It's the same issue you would have with a violent television show or movie, and it has the same solution. If you are so afraid of your child being desensitized to violence because of a video game, DON'T let them play it.

GOONGALA'S FRIENDLY PARENTING TIP: "BECAUSE I SAID SO."
     Now, hold on a minute. Before you go and raid your child's game collection, let me give you some simple advice. If your child has already played the game, taking it away from them is probably worse than letting them continue playing it. If it is a game that you absolutely don't want your child playing, take it away, but give them a valid and well thought out reason. But please make sure that reason isn't, "Because I said so."

No more Call of Duty for you, little lady...

     All throughout my childhood,  my parents told me I couldn't do something, "Because I said so." That is not an acceptable excuse. Kids these days are smart. What, "Because I said so," means to them is, "I want you to be miserable." That phrase tells them nothing of 'why', no "It's too violent" or "There's too much language in it". It's a phrase that means, "I don't want you playing it because I don't want you to be happy." As a child, I found this utterly frustrating. So frustrating, in fact, that I played those games anyway. I'm sure I'm not the first one to have done this, nor will I be the last. This sort of parenting fosters rebellion, which is one reason why children are so difficult these days.

     If your child wants a game, research it, then sit them down and share that research with them. However, Don't just accept what you read about on the internet. If you have time, and money, go out and play the game yourself. If you don't have time, research multiple sources. Once you have a firm grasp of all that the game includes, give your child an answer. Your child may still be angry that they can't have the game, but at least they'll know that you love them enough to try to protect them from the bad stuff until they can fully understand it. Teach them the difference between right and wrong while they are still able to form those definitions. Teach them how to differentiate between something that is real and something that isn't. Fact from fiction. Explain to them that there are no multiple lives or respawns in real life, that the consequences of death are far more permanent in the real world.

     "But, Adam Lanza wasn't a teenager! He was 20 years old!" I know. In fact, most of the worst shootings in past years have been done by adults: Seung-Hui Cho (23) at Virginia Tech in 2007, Anders Behring Breivik (33) in Norway in 2011, and now Adam Lanza at Sandy Hook in 2012. However, as an adult, they should have already come to a conclusion as to what is right and what is wrong, which means they knew what they were doing and the consequences of their actions. That disturbs me more than anything else.

EXPLAINING THE UNEXPLAINABLE
     What if there's nothing to blame other than the killer? "But, there has to be something to blame!" No, not necessarily. In this case, I'd like to borrow a scene from The Dark Knight. Bruce Wayne is sitting in the temporary batcave watching videos of the Joker over and over again. He's attempting to figure out the Joker's purpose, why he's doing the things he's doing, when Alfred tells him this:

"Well, because he thought it was good sport. Because some men aren't looking for anything logical, like money. They can't be bought, bullied, reasoned, or negotiated with. Some men just want to watch the world burn."

- Alfred  (The Dark Knight, 2008)

     Some people just want to do bad things. The Joker had no reason to do what he was doing. He didn't want money; he didn't want to be remembered. He wanted to "watch the world burn". Not everything can be explained logically, but there are people out there who must have a logical explanation in order to move on. These people won't be satisfied unless they can find something to blame, and, more often than not, video games and the people who play them are the ones to take the fall.

THE STEREOTYPE: STEREOTYPES ARE (NOT) FACT

A typical gamer... or so the stereotype would have you believe....

     "We should just ban all the violent video games!" This is yet another ignorant blanket statement thrown out whenever there's a shooting. In the case of Sandy Hook, Mass Effect 3 was incorrectly blamed for the shooting. Call of Duty was said to be the killer's favorite game, and that he played it for hours on end in a dark basement. In fact, Call of Duty has been blamed for several recent shootings, including the one I talked about in the last video game violence post I wrote (Norway, 2011, Anders Behring Breivik). Yes, both are violent video games, but both are also some of the highest selling games to come out on the market last year.

     Am I to believe that every single one of the over eleven million people who bought these games will be turned into mass-murdering psychopaths? Am I so dense? Consider what I just said: over eleven million copies sold. Unless one rich person is buying up all the copies of Call of Duty, this number means that over eleven million households are in possession of a copy of this game. Millions of people play the game and live perfectly normal lives, yet we choose to define gamers based on the actions of a few who acted out.

     OFF THE RAILS: Let's say for a moment, hypothetically, that we somehow tie the Sandy Hook shooting to violent video games (this is all hypothetical, mind you; I don't want my words twisted around and used against me. The media's good at that sort of thing.). If we do that, then consider this: every day, around 30 people die in drunk-driving related automobile collisions. By these numbers, more people die each day from drunk drivers than the shooting at Sandy hook. Now, I absolutely hate to play the numbers game, because every innocent death is a tragedy. But, by these numbers, alcohol is far more dangerous than violent video games. So then, by the logic above, all alcohol should be banned... right? An average of 100 people die every day from car crashes in general. Should we just ban cars as well? Of course not. This would be unfair to the people who drive safely or can enjoy alcohol responsibly, and so too would banning violent video games. The actions of a few should not be accepted as the norm for the whole.

FINAL THOUGHTS
     In the end, we have to realize that violent video games are not the only form of violence we see on a daily basis. Video games are only one part of a very large entity known as the "entertainment industry". Within that industry are movies, television, music, books, and almost anything else you can think of that people do for fun. You watch football on television; that's violence. You go out and see The Hobbit; that's violence. You read The Hunger Games; that's violence. You watch wrestling, UFC, or boxing on television. Is there a more pointless form of violence? Why do we enjoy this kind of physical violence, yet condemn something that isn't real?

Beating someone senseless on national television? Oh yeah... this is nowhere near as violent as video games...

     We've covered a lot of unpopular subjects in this post, from the illogical minds of shooters, to the failures of modern parenting, and all the way to the deceit-ridden media we fill our minds with. In the end, the conclusion is fairly obvious:

Violent Games ≠ Violence

     Most games don't force a player to be violent towards others, and the ones that do are adequately rated and should only be played by those who are old enough to know when violence is acceptable. Violent video games are not all bad, and even ones as bad as Grand Theft Auto can be used to teach us the consequences of our actions. We tend to focus so intently on the bad, that we completely forget about the good.

     I hope that, in some way, this article may have changed the way some of you view these shootings and violent video games. I hope that the next time something like this happens, you won't flock to your nearest newsstand to fatten the pockets of those who seek to manipulate you. I hope that you will be more focused on feeling empathy for the victims, rather than what gun the killer used or how high the body count was. Finally, I hope you won't be so quick to lay the blame on video games and the gamer culture, because, despite what you may have heard, we aren't all psychopaths out to set the world aflame. Most of us just want to enjoy our games in peace.

     Addendum: I don't mean for this post to come across as callous or unfeeling.While I do enjoy violent video games, I'm not a violent person. The shooting in Connecticut truly is a tragedy, and my prayers go out to everyone affected. Thanks for reading...
     

(I claim no ownership of any of the pictures above, and each can be found through a Google image search (I really need to start keeping track of the sources...). I know the sources may not be the most reliable for some of my statistics, but most of them are the first hits on the front page of the Google search, which means, they're the ones people are reading. Remember: don't believe everything you see on the internet. Except for this... Yeah...)