|
| Thread: We've got hostiles |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 5 6 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
posted May 14, 2009 01:11 PM |
|
|
|
You'd be prepared to bet your life on that statement, Doom?
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 01:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
I'm not sure what you mean when you say that education was a lot more violent in the past.
What aren't you understanding? At home, at school, children were a lot more violated, physically, then today. They got beaten a lot.
Quote:
As for whether or not it means these things should be banned, I really don't think we'll get anywhere since we're approaching this from two completely opposite perspectives. Even if excessively violent video games & movies cause an increase of aggression, that doesn't justify a governmental ban on such materials. What it means is that parents should monitor what their kids do: something that is becoming increasingly rare.
Exactly. But that has reasons as well. It's not the evil parents either who don't care anymore.
However, you give the points I made a wide berth. You'll come to naught if you just do something when you can prove a 100% that something will have the wished-for effect, that doesn't make any sense. It's enough to see what will be the danger of doing something, and if something has no or not much of a negative effect then a ban IS justified, to try it.
It doesn't even matter much whether the effect is there - it's enough if it's an excuse to cut down on the worst excesses of the ever-tightening spiral of violence as entertainment. We don't need to do and allow everything just because it is possible.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 01:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Exactly. But that has reasons as well. It's not the evil parents either who don't care anymore.
I disagree. Parents have the ability and the authority to control what their children can and can't do in their leisure time.
I got kind of lost after this point, but I'll answer what I think you meant:
We don't know 100% if something will have the desired effect. Sociology is inherently inconclusive over the details. There's quite a stretch between showing that violent games like Grand Theft Auto increase aggression and playing paint ball increases aggression. And there is an excuse for doing nothing, because you're taking away peoples freedoms. The quality of life matters just as much as the quantity of life. If you think violent games & movies are a problem in society, then join a movement that dissuades such things, and make sure that your kids don't get involved in such things. You don't need to do nothing, I just oppose you when you make it a State issue and ban all people from doing something just because it might have negative effects. There are literally thousands upon thousands of things that have negative effects, that doesn't mean we go around banning all of them.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 02:13 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
Exactly. But that has reasons as well. It's not the evil parents either who don't care anymore.
I disagree. Parents have the ability and the authority to control what their children can and can't do in their leisure time.
It's a bit more complicated than that. It's basically a matter of discipline (of the parents) and available temptations, simply spoken. What you SHOULD do and what is actually done.
It's like New Year resolutions: You KNOW you should, and you really want to, but being a time into it, IF THE LEVEL OF TEMPTATION IS HIGH ENOUGH compared to the level of discipline, it crumbles. And here we are back at the enterteinment - parents like it as well.
Quote:
We don't know 100% if something will have the desired effect. Sociology is inherently inconclusive over the details. There's quite a stretch between showing that violent games like Grand Theft Auto increase aggression and playing paint ball increases aggression. And there is an excuse for doing nothing, because you're taking away peoples freedoms. The quality of life matters just as much as the quantity of life. If you think violent games & movies are a problem in society, then join a movement that dissuades such things, and make sure that your kids don't get involved in such things. You don't need to do nothing, I just oppose you when you make it a State issue and ban all people from doing something just because it might have negative effects. There are literally thousands upon thousands of things that have negative effects, that doesn't mean we go around banning all of them.
You making a general and principal problem out of it, but it isn't. Everytime something is banned that point comes up. And sure the point comes up that everyone can decide for themselves and so on.
Sure, everyone can decide for themselves whether you watch something or not, play something or not, try something or not.
However, the problem here is, this works all the worse, the less direct the negative effect is. Sure, you don't need to ban jumping from a tower. But what about the things that have no IMMEDIATE ill effect? This is debatable. What drugs can you allow, what do you have to forbid. Obviously, drugs who'd be habit-forming after one try, would HAVE to be banned, because there would be enough sillys who would believe society just wanted to bluff them out of it.
It's debatable.
For violence the only example we have is Rome. Panem et circensis, you know that one, right? Repetitio non placet, is a Roman slogan as well, repetitions are not pleasing.
It is clear that people adapt to violence. The more violence they see, the number they get, that's why there is a spiral. Everything must be ever more spectacular, violent, dangerous, brutal, incredible and so on. It's furthermore clear that this development may lead into something no one wants, as with the climate and the carbondioxide.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 02:30 PM |
|
|
Yes, there is a slippery slope involved in allowing this sort of freedom, with the bottom of it being a return to gladiatorial games and Germany bringing in prisoners to die on live television. That’s not really a valid argument though. Naturally, there’s a slippery slope on your end too, where almost everything becomes banned and we live in a dreary and passionless Borg-like society.
A good method in preventing it from going too far is to ensure that viewers are able to avoid watching such content and to ensure that nobody is being forced to watch or do anything they don’t want to do. You seem to overestimate people's cravings for violence. You have your typical action movies that most people enjoy. Then you have more extreme movies like the SAW movies (I think they're tasteless and repugnant), but they appeal to a smaller audience. It's not like all of society watches that sort of stuff.
Edit: And going back to the original argument: shooting people with paintballs with plastic guns isn't my definition of the foreboding "downward spiral into violence." Paintball has been around for a long time.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 03:01 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Yes, there is a slippery slope involved in allowing this sort of freedom, with the bottom of it being a return to gladiatorial games and Germany bringing in prisoners to die on live television. That’s not really a valid argument though. Naturally, there’s a slippery slope on your end too, where almost everything becomes banned and we live in a dreary and passionless Borg-like society.
Yes, I can see the slope from banning paintball to the Borg society as clearly as that from playing simple paintball to pro-paintball with higher-pressure loads and more danger and more thrill.
Quote:
A good method in preventing it from going too far is to ensure that viewers are able to avoid watching such content and to ensure that nobody is being forced to watch or do anything they don’t want to do. You seem to overestimate people's cravings for violence. You have your typical action movies that most people enjoy. Then you have more extreme movies like the SAW movies (I think they're tasteless and repugnant), but they appeal to a smaller audience. It's not like all of society watches that sort of stuff.
It hasn't got anything to do with CRAVING for violence. It has something to do with getting numb.
There was a time when kids tried suicide as an ultimate call for help. Today you can watch that on the internet - and no one cares, if it's not done in an original way. Society is just getting indifferent - NUMB. 40 years ago you got people crying for bans in masses, just because boys grew their hair a bit longer, and a nation went crazy because a pop star said his band was known to more people than Jesus Christ which would be a bid scary.
And now? Now nothing. Who cares anymore.
For Paintball. Ciry of Bonn in Germany had a Laserdrome hall by court forbidden in 1994. The thing went through all courts including EU and has been acknowledged.
Paintball and Laserdrome have long been planned to forbid in Germany. Reasoning is simple: The games simulate killing IN A REALISTIC WAY.
That's all their is to say about it.
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 03:15 PM |
|
|
|
Alright have fun with that.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 03:32 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 15:33, 14 May 2009.
|
Quote:
Paintball and Laserdrome have long been planned to forbid in Germany. Reasoning is simple: The games simulate killing IN A REALISTIC WAY.
When I was a kid, I lived in a neighborhood with about 10 or so other kids. We used to build giant forts in the woods, divide ourselves into two teams, and then simulate wars, where each team would try to storm the other team's fort. We would carry sticks and wield them like swords; or we would carry plastic guns and pretend we were shooting each other. When I was about 13, I got a laser tag system. I don't know if you remember what this was, but it was a very popular game at the time where you strapped on an IR sensor on your chest, and you had a gun that emitted IR radiation (I'm pretty sure it was IR; anyway..) and when you shot a person's target, it would light up and make noise. Well, this made our war-play even better. So we all got laser tag systems and we had these huge staged battles over our forts, and when your target lit up, you were considered dead and out of action for some period of time. It was pretty realistic "simulated killing".
To my knowledge, none of us ended up as serial killers.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 04:03 PM |
|
|
We took simple water pistols.
Corribus, I've smoked cigarettes for 30 years of my life until nearly a decase ago - and I'm still living. So what.
More important would be the question - what gave us the idea to do all that in the first place?
Isn't that a moot discussion?
I mean, Germany has COMPLETELY different weapon laws than the US. NO ONE here in Germany is missing the US weapon laws. Still, our freedom here is obviously lower than yours there. I'm not sure whether we should be so unhappy about it.
In any case I've always found it strange (putting it mildly) that people, especially in the US get fits when it comes to pull the brake on any kind of violence, but get a heart attack at the suggestion children might see something sex related.
And, no, I don't want to stray off-topic.
|
|
Corribus
Hero of Order
The Abyss Staring Back at You
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 04:13 PM |
|
Edited by Corribus at 16:13, 14 May 2009.
|
Quote:
We took simple water pistols.
Yeah, we did that, too. 
Quote:
Corribus, I've smoked cigarettes for 30 years of my life until nearly a decase ago - and I'm still living. So what.
My point is that you shouldn't outlaw something just because it is bad (or, worse, might be bad) for you. If someone wants to smoke, fine, let them - as long as they're not putting me at risk I could care less whether they kill themselves. If collateral damage is a problem with paint-ball, impose regulations about how paintball competitions are set up. But just because paintball might lead to "violent tendencies" (whatever that means) or is "unnecessary" isn't in itself cause enough to ban something. It makes about as much sense as imposing laws against the sale of high fat foods.
Quote:
In any case I've always found it strange (putting it mildly) that people, especially in the US get fits when it comes to pull the brake on any kind of violence, but get a heart attack at the suggestion children might see something sex related.
Well I certainly agree with you there, and I dedicated a few paragraphs to it on the original post of my love vs. sex thread.
____________
I'm sick of following my dreams. I'm just going to ask them where they're goin', and hook up with them later. -Mitch Hedberg
|
|
blizzardboy
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Nerf Herder
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 04:19 PM |
|
|
Preventing violence doubtfully has anything to do with it. I doubt even the politicians proposing the ban think it will make a difference. There is no conclusive data that paintball = aggressive behavior. The gap between morbid movies like SAW/violent games and paintball is large enough to drive a truck through. The government is making stuff up as it goes.
My speculation for the proposed ban:
1: "Some experts criticized the government's proposal as driven by a political need to look proactive in the wake of the nation's second-worst school shooting."
+
2: "Those who defy the proposed ban could be punished with a fine of euro5,000 ($6,700)."
http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/0509/620907.html
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 04:44 PM |
|
Edited by baklava at 16:50, 14 May 2009.
|
Quote:
Corribus, I've smoked cigarettes for 30 years of my life until nearly a decase ago - and I'm still living.
How old are you exactly? 
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 05:55 PM |
|
|
|
baklava
Honorable
Legendary Hero
Mostly harmless
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 06:32 PM |
|
|
Quote:
51.
Jesus Christ.
____________
"Let me tell you what the blues
is. When you ain't got no
money,
you got the blues."
Howlin Wolf
|
|
Adrius
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Stand and fight!
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 07:11 PM |
|
|
That was... unexpected.
____________
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 08:18 PM |
|
|
What's the matter? 
On topic, it looks like the law will be rechecked.
|
|
xerox
Promising
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 10:32 PM |
|
|
Oh my Elune! 
____________
Over himself, over his own
body and
mind, the individual is
sovereign.
- John Stuart Mill
|
|
TheDeath
Responsible
Undefeatable Hero
with serious business
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 10:43 PM |
|
Edited by TheDeath at 22:45, 14 May 2009.
|
Quote:
But do we really need to see it in superslomo, every sickening detail of it, every fraction of a second, focussed on a body being massacred? How the splinters are lacerating skin, maiming flesh, tattering things, how eyes burst... Do we need that? Is it cool to watch that, not puking, but standing it like a man, unflinching. WOW! Did you see that! Incredible!
The problem is, if you see something often, it numbs. Ask soldiers who actually fought in a war. Or surgeons. Policemen. Whatever. You adapt. A couple of decades ago an exploding car was one hell of action. Nowadays you have to flatten a city to get a reaction. Which is the point. What do you think why soldiers are drilled? Veiolence is something you adapt to - levels raise. It's relative.
I actually agree (though not with banning mind you), and it is interesting to see that you only take it in some respects. This arises from most desires yet you disagreed with me on the other threads. The above is what I would call an addiction as well, though on a different level (especially for video games since it's stimulated "virtually").
What's wrong with showing every detail of it? It will make people know the human anatomy better
And blizzardboy is right with violence being an inner trait. If it weren't for just about any living being we would see animals coexisting peacefully (and not just for food mind you, also fighting over competition, territory or breeding mates or whatever). The reason humans do it "senselessly" in some cases is because we are much more complex, in fact, no serious psychologist will tell you that he did it without any reason -- and that reason, is NOT violence stimulation. That only helps AMPLIFY the problem, but not PREVENT it. Violence EXISTS in everyone -- basic fact of life.
Except plants. Do you want to be a plant?
____________
The above post is subject to SIRIOUSness.
No jokes were harmed during the making of this signature.
|
|
JollyJoker
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 10:55 PM |
|
|
|
Lexxan
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
Unimpressed by your logic
|
|
posted May 14, 2009 11:22 PM |
|
|
A disturbing thought
I somehow get the feeling that JJ is some long-lost relative of my fathers... It's really scary how much they are alike sometimes... :S
But carry on anyway.
____________
Coincidence? I think not!!!!
|
| |
|
|
