I appluad the kid for not blaming it on video games, but simply choosing not to play them. Not that I think he's right, I disagree with it, but still, there's nothing wrong with it. He never said that video games were the cause, just that he can't stand playing them anymore because of it. Now, if I were living there, I'd probably go around there and do a little dumpster diving for some games. I mean, if they don't want them, why shouldn't anyone else be able to take them?
People with half a brain knows that videogames had nothing to do with this.
Yes, but we're talking about America. Most of us can't find Canadia on the map.
America is anti-intellectual, anti-reason, and anti-critical thinking. We want quick solutions, even if they don't solve anything.
I think the only thing stopping this sort of campaign is that we tend to also lack the moral fortitude to actually give up the things we criticise.
I can certainly see why 12 year old Max wouldn't want to play a violent video game where you kill people considering what's happened around him recently, and he's perfectly entitled to start a group, I mean people don't have to join it, so I really don't see any harm in this. Sure I don't think violent video games cause real life violence, you could even argue they help relieve real life frustration and pent up anger, but that's his view and this is my view. I think that pretty much settles the issue although I really don't think he'll be that successful, but good luck to the kid anyway.
Why the hell is a 12-year-old playing Call of Duty in the first place? And why do his friends (who I suspect to be in the same age group) do the same?
The first damn thought that ran through my head too.
I understand and respect his standpoint. After something like that, it would be difficult to enjoy a shpoting game. His logic for his campaigning against shooters on principal is wrong,make a bin for guns, without which massacres cant happen
Good for the kid.
While I disagree that violent games cause people to be violent. This child believes it strong enough that he's putting himself out there to support what he believes in. Not like politicians that are doing it for a shameless vote grab.
Yeah, and if he were old enough he'd be voting for those idiots.
I suddenly feel the urge to go out and buy a ton of violent videogames... It's funny how that works.
Max was a regular Call of Duty player with the approval of his parents, who "gradually succumbed" to his desire for the game.
See, this is where I have a problem. How much do you want to bet they bought the game for him, sight unseen, and allowed him to play whenever he wanted? My (understandably limited) experience with the recent CoD multiplayer had me turning off the mic to mute kids who were swearing and hacking. If online accounts are any indication, every multiplayer lobby is filled with 10-12 year olds being 'tryhard' players who don't understand what they're doing and just play it because it looks cool.
Instead of telling people to throw out violent video games, he should have been advocating education programs/advertising campaigns to teach parents about the potential pitfalls of giving violent games to impressionable young kids who don't know any better. It shouldn't take a friend passing away to realize there's a larger problem than "violent video games bad, me smart".
Yup lets all happily pad bandages on healthy parts while we leave the real wounds to rot and fester.
This one kid isnt particularly wrong, hes understandably put off by violence in general and not of voting age, but people with similar attitudes will vote for politicians who favour useless placebo solutions, because those are much much easier than adressing the real problems of mental healthcare and gun control not existing to any meaningful degree.
This kind of stuff is the proverbial sticking ones head in the sand. Its not only useless, its destructive.
To be fair to his parents they might know their kid well enough not to worry about him playing Call of Duty. His heart is clearly in the right place at least.
Fucking... HE'S 12. WHY IS HE PLAYING CALL OF DUTY.
Oh, wait guys, it's fine, he has the approval of his parents, they're totally doing a good job.
There is a problem with violent videogames and THIS is it. Violence in media isn't going to go away, so yeah, you can't mollycoddle your kids and keep their delicate little eyes from seeing it forever. But you have a responsibility to make sure that your fucking twelve year old's aren't playing something as violent as Call of Duty, which is easily as violent as any top shelf gritty action film these days.
Kids need to be eased into this stuff, and parents need to have a better understanding of this stuff. I personally don't know if exposure to violent media at a young age will have a negative effect on said child's mental health later in life but jesus, I wouldn't want my hypothetical progeny seeing half the shit that goes on in the games I play.
And no, parenting isn't the only issue here. There's a hell of a lot of issues. But this annoys me so much.
In the wake of the tragic mass murder at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, 12-year-old Max Goldstein has pledged to throw out his violent videogames and is calling on his peers to do the same. Prior to the massacre, Max was a regular Call of Duty player with the approval of his parents, who "gradually succumbed" to his desire for the game. But at the funeral of his friend's brother, Goldstein said he came to realize "how real this was," and decided that he no longer wanted to kill, even within the fantasy confines of videogames.
isnt the point of having parents to have an older person with higher experience "guide" you through life and not succumb to any spastic desires the unexperienced younger person has until he is old enough to comprehend why he could not have thing x or do thing y when he was younger?
anyways, it is bad that this kid had to experience this situation and it is suprising that he has come to such a realisation. even when violence in video games play a minor role or no role at all.
i think that this event happened due paranoia (end of the world; stockj on items and weapons)and a twisted "dog eat dog" mentality that i think is common in america.
why twisted? because people are more likely to help each other out in emergency situations:
Crowd Psychology in an Emergency
Altruistic behaviour in crowd emergencies:
Once again I see an article that has one massive root of the problem contained within and it conventiently misses it by a mile - parenting. This kid is TWELVE and yet his parents (eventually) allowed him violent video games that are clearly marked "mature" - why are they not panning them?
Also, some people I appreciate have mental issues and that can blur the line between fantasy and reality, which is a scary thought. However, without wishing to bash on people with such issues, why should the vast majority of us for which the line is clear and bright, have to get rid of or stop playing such games because of a tiny minority of people? I'd say that for many of us, these games are catharsis - we get out our agression and stresses with games and movies so we are more relaxed and less likely to go batshit and rampage through a school with a shotgun.
I would also like to make it absolutely clear that I am not ridiculing Max Goldstein in any way, shape or form. Right or wrong, his heart is in the right place at least and if this helps him and others cope with such a traumatic event then all power to him. Whether it works or not he has good intentions and, dare I say it, a good heart and we certainly do need more of that in the world. If it doesn't work, at least Max can say he at least tried to do something rather than many who will do absolutely nothing.
it should be noted that rage is actually a book about a school shooting however that one case simultaneously places blame on internet pornography, gaming, movies and books all of which are things i enjoy in my downtime of not killing ppl (like most do i assume)