I grew up playing violent video games (without my parents’ knowledge until high school), and the last thing I’d do is go out and try to take out innocent people. I was born in ‘87, so everyone I became friends with in school had played the various versions of DOOM, Quake, Resident Evil, Half Life, Halo, Gears of War, GTA, Call of Duty, Battlefield, and so on. We played them competitively within our own group and online, and still do in spare time. I’m also one of the handful of women in our group while the rest are men, and none of them would do something like this. Several went into the military, with one in particular going into the Marines.
It’s unfair to make such a generalized statement. People who will commit such crimes are drawn to violence wherever it is, no matter the source. One of the many mistakes of correlation versus causation, and it’s one that I grow sick of hearing. Reasonable people don’t see or read of fictional violence and draw a parallel to reality, then deem such violence rational as a result. If you do that, there is some serious underlying issue that needs to be attended to. Sane people don’t do that.
I’m a prime example of the “Columbine Theory” being a failed one, having grown up playing those games and watching action films containing violence, being relentlessly bullied, having no proper friends (until high school) and isolating myself from others. Yet I never would have dreamt of doing such a thing, because I’m psychologically healthy, even if not physically so.
There are too many causes, but mental illness (including an inability to cope) is the primary reason.
Thank you for commenting FRiend and patriot!
Since this discussion would fall under the subject of sociology, please consider that in order for the subject to exist as a science we must deal in generalities. A single counter example, including your self good sir, really does not enter into it.
Of course because of this, some do not consider sociology a true science. Perhaps we can continue the discussion with this understanding. Sociology as a subject does not need the magic word science, we just all have to accept generalities as instructive.
We might discuss this “Columbine Theory” but the personal experiences of fine FReepers will not be instructive. You and others on this thread are unique in this society which is full of brutish animals who kill when they can get away with it.
The society has no significant population of children who are insulated from the violence of movies tv and video games so there can be no test for the theory. It can be established however, that people will look to blame something that they think they can control, and when that fails, they will look for something else.
Thank you for commenting FRiend and patriot!
Since this discussion would fall under the subject of sociology, please consider that in order for the subject to exist as a science we must deal in generalities. A single counter example, including your self good sir, really does not enter into it.
Of course because of this, some do not consider sociology a true science. Perhaps we can continue the discussion with this understanding. Sociology as a subject does not need the magic word science, we just all have to accept generalities as instructive.
We might discuss this “Columbine Theory” but the personal experiences of fine FReepers will not be instructive. You and others on this thread are unique in this society which is full of brutish animals who kill when they can get away with it.
The society has no significant population of children who are insulated from the violence of movies tv and video games so there can be no test for the theory. It can be established however, that people will look to blame something that they think they can control, and when that fails, they will look for something else.