So I was going through gamepolitics.com, my number 1 source for anti-gaming lies coming from anti-gamers (my term for anyone who spreads misinformation on the violent games “issue”, whether they be lawyers, teachers,etc) when I found several articles, including this one, looking for obviously biased and idiotic comments from the commenters who I assumed would be posting lies about violent video games…. And Lo and behold look what I found.

I Quote:

“Why are minors banned from R-rated movies but allowed access to violent video games? Why is it considered a First-Amendment right to allow minors to “rape and pee on women and children” in a video game? How is rape not pornographic? I’m a liberal – but this is unreal!”

Yet another idiot who thinks that most violent games allow the player to quote unquote “rape and pee on women and children”…. A complete BS statement. There are no Violent games marketed since 1989(!) that even feature a controllable rape scene, and only 1 Game  (postal 2) had the ability to pee on “women and children”. More BS. It seems the lies from the group who gave CA that Amicus Brief I debunked so well are actually being believed by people!

Other idiotic comments include this one…

“Mr. Scalia, your opinions lacks acute reasoning or logic as did the decision on selling health data.

To compare a video with a photo makes me believe your court has an agenda that needs challenged. How does a photo depict or teach acts of violence, a video is repetitive and it includes human interaction that users must complete. No photo imposes or creates human interaction or rewards those actions with accolades.

The constitution was created to protect our right, thus as a women please explain why selling violent videos to children helps to secure and protect women’s rights.

Lastly, I find it fascinating that you protect men and women form violence by limiting their access to military combat; however you will not protect children from the same rage. Cigarettes, pornography, and alcohol cannot be sold to children; however violence can, unbelievable.”

Notice how the commenter seems to try to say that not banning games to children somehow infringes on Womens rights…  One has nothing in common on the other. It might infringe on shitty parents ‘rights’ to allow their kids to be babysitted by the TV, internet, video game system while they refuse to watch them… Like so many parents I know do…. So she is bringing up how anything that fails to do her ‘dirty job’ of  parenting is somehow discriminating against women,  Like the Constitution, in it’s whole must protect Womens rights…. GET REAL.

“limiting their access to military combat”? Last time I checked their wasn’t a draft… So no way are kids being forced into the military when adults ‘arent’. And there is NO WAY IN HELL… Military combat and violent games are remotely similar! Violent games, the most realistic ones aren’t even a 100% depiction of what real combat is like. 1) Violent games rarely even come close to the simulation needed to simulate real combat, where being shot kill you 100% of the time.  Good gameplay, is defined either as semi realistic gameplay where there is always some way to heal you, but the damages to you are severe, or completely unrealistic gameplay like in Doom or duke3d where getting shot barely effects you and health is everywhere. There are so many things violent games get wrong in the ‘simming of real life combat’ that I cannot mention them here.  But basically, it boils down to being superhuman and having the chance to restore your health, which in real life is highly unlikely. No matter how realistic the game is, they have to make it fair… Balanced. Something real life combat isn’t. There is no quick key to heal you on a real battlefield… I’ve debunked the claim that the military uses violent games to break down this inhibition, in the Amicus Brief Debunking here.. There is no way being good at POORLY done simulated combat (and in some cases macho action movie combat where getting shot is like being tickled, no damage done, when in real life it could kill.), will make you a good soldier. So whoever made the commenter believe  this nonsense wants people to think this lie is a fact.

Now on to the comment that the court allows “minors” to buy violence but not Porn, Cigarettes, alcohol, etc…

Last time I checked REAL PORNOGRAPHY (no not kissing, nudity, etc), Cigarettes, alcohol, are PROVEN to harm ADULTS not just the ‘children’ that are always stereotyped as the sole victim in many things. There is NO proof that violent games make people violent. Just “130” Biased engineered studies (obviously engineered like this article proves) seems to prove they make kids aggressive and the idiot morons in the media and  “watchdog” groups are making it look like Proof of aggression = “proof” of violence. It’s appalling to see just how many brainless  sheep are out there who listen to these people without questioning what they say. Comments to These articles prove it.  NO WAY in hell are there 130 unbiased studies that prove this.

Advertisements

Comments are closed.