I'm not challenging the validity of those facts, but where are the ESA's sources? At least when JT makes a claim, he backs it up with a source, however poorly he understands it.
At this point in time, video games are pretty ubiquitous...most crazed gunmen are going to have played video games...like most of them are going to have watched television...I bet all of them have consumed alcohol...milk. I bet all of them had access to guns.
I mean just because people have something in common doesn't mean it is the cause. Like that weird article that came out last year equating Star Trek with pedophilia because a bunch of the pedophiles the police in Canada arrested also liked Star Trek.
He hears about a tragedy from what one would consider the typical gamer demographic (which is becoming quite large), and he assumes that:
A> The person is a gamer. B> Games caused the tragedy.
Assumption A ends up true most of the time just based on blind statistical luck. Of course we have seen in the Robida case where it was not, and rather than just admitting that, he throws a tantrum, threatens the DA, and ultimately claims that Robida ditched his games, while leaving all his Neo-Nazi stuff around for anyone to find.
But after a while of tracking this, he has, let's say, 20 murderers who also HAPPEN to be gamers, and to someone who doesn't know anything about logic or statistics, that looks like there might be some kind of link (until you bring up ideas like all 20 are also eaters of bread, and things like that).
And of course he has no explanation for the MILLIONS who game and never commit any violent acts, something that shouldn't be possible if games are CAUSING violent acts.
(The comment has been removed)
Reply
I mean just because people have something in common doesn't mean it is the cause. Like that weird article that came out last year equating Star Trek with pedophilia because a bunch of the pedophiles the police in Canada arrested also liked Star Trek.
Commonality does not equal causality.
Reply
He hears about a tragedy from what one would consider the typical gamer demographic (which is becoming quite large), and he assumes that:
A> The person is a gamer.
B> Games caused the tragedy.
Assumption A ends up true most of the time just based on blind statistical luck. Of course we have seen in the Robida case where it was not, and rather than just admitting that, he throws a tantrum, threatens the DA, and ultimately claims that Robida ditched his games, while leaving all his Neo-Nazi stuff around for anyone to find.
But after a while of tracking this, he has, let's say, 20 murderers who also HAPPEN to be gamers, and to someone who doesn't know anything about logic or statistics, that looks like there might be some kind of link (until you bring up ideas like all 20 are also eaters of bread, and things like that).
And of course he has no explanation for the MILLIONS who game and never commit any violent acts, something that shouldn't be possible if games are CAUSING violent acts.
Reply
Reply
We're no longer on LJ. Check out the NEW GamePolitics at:
www.GamePolitics.com
-GP
Reply
Leave a comment