Originally Posted by Kestryll
I've played video games for a few decades now and I'll tell you for a FACT as each new generation of game comes out they are more violent, more graphic, the game play rewards more and more amoral actions and the people who say it has no influence are full of crap up to their brown eyes.
The industry responds to what the market wants and as kids grow up 'stabbing the hooker to death so I don't have to pay her', and getting bonus points for it, they start looking for something 'edgier' because stabbing the hooker is just the norm.
Yes there is more glorification of violence in the form of video games but kids don't take that violence as a role model anymore seriously than our generation took westerns and war movies. I shot a heck of a lot of my friends with a cap gun and they shot me just as much after watching John Wayne kill a hundred or so Apaches or half the Japanese army and none of use turned into antisocial killers
. I don't even believe that gangsta rap by itself has much if any effect. What has had a very-very-very serious effect is the drug law
fueled and financed explosive growth of gangs and their effect on the culture. The same 'crime is cool because the bad guys have best clothes and cars and the hottest women' attitude we saw during alcohol prohibition but made worse by the 90 year duration and the amount of money involved. That's what's driving inner city violence problem and an inner city culture that embraces violence and the armies of prison hardened 20, 30, 40 somethings pulling their strings.
The other thing that's changed is that we emptied the contents of hundreds of insane asylums on to the streets and I'm not sure what we can do about that without opening a new civil rights can of worms.
Originally Posted by bwiese
It's a mixed bag.
- Gura is, as usual, right from a civil rights issue (w/accompanying free speech matters - in fact, Leland
Yee's 'evil games bill' was overturned on those grounds). Consistence of civil rights across the board
helps all rights - and it helps gunrights falls into that pool of 'must be tolerated' in judicial mindset.
- Wayne didn't get that wise counsel from staff preparation, perhaps (likely) due to generational issues.
It would be interesting to see what a top-notch professional external marketing consultant would have
offered, given they're 'outside' and not in a proverbial 'echo chamber'.
One looming issue is the 'graying' of NRA membermship. We need to recruit far younger - and this doesn't
mean just getting nonrenewed gunshow membership.
Recruiting from the 20-40 age group is esp. harder when you start blaming 'violent' video games many
perfectly fine people have grown up with: I'd bet 70% of EBR buyers in CA have played Call of Duty, etc.
- and they're gonna say "Que?" to leadership of an org telling them they're doing 'bad things'.
- From pure political practicality: it occupied airtime/discussion time and displaced attacks on guns. It gave
something for politicians to substitute into argument frameworks instead of having to purely 'justify' guns.
I already notice House members talking about this and these sentiments being echoed by ordinary non-gun
folks in newspaper comment forums around the country.
This alone may be useful in spite of the above items. It may have secured the House some.
Very well put!