What is Digg?121 Comments
- micyoung, on 11/30/2007, -3/+73maybe it's time for a 'war on violence'!
- solesoul, on 11/30/2007, -1/+67Are you sure fake/simulated violence is the biggest threat? Are you sure its not...ACTUAL violence?
- inactive, on 11/30/2007, -7/+45He's absolutely right, ban all voilent media! Start with the bible and the Qu'ran and work your way up.
- tman84, on 11/30/2007, -0/+24i think irresponsible journalism is the biggest threat to America, followed by uninformed, ignorant people
- toastgodsupreme, on 11/30/2007, -1/+19Terrorists most likely. Somewhere in there has to be terrorists.
- floridiot2, on 11/30/2007, -0/+16First biggest threat: Bears.
- danconia, on 11/30/2007, -0/+15And bad parenting isn't a major threat to society? Sounds to me like this study is a joke.
- MrPapa1, on 11/30/2007, -0/+13and its a threat how?
- beattycoon, on 11/30/2007, -1/+14That's the problem with American TV. Too many guns, not enough *****.
- snapcase, on 11/30/2007, -0/+12So you actually think the average human is more violent today than in the past? Read some history. Please.
The Romans used to watch people battle to the death in unfair fights staged solely for their amusement. Sometimes they'd even watch wild beasts rip people limb from limb, and of course the screams of agony only excited the crowd more. Those people were out their watching REAL violence. And an interesting point in this is that even though they watched all of this, the average Roman citizen wasn't a murderous bloodthirsty scoundrel willing to slit anyone's throat just for the sheer pleasure because he saw it happen the other night in the Colosseum. Do people in Spain go plunking spears into bulls or people because they saw it at a bull fight? How many kids did you know growing up that decided to go and shoot their best friend in the face with a shotgun because Bugs Bunny did it to Daffy Duck on Saturday morning?
Today's society is far less violent than in the past. And our forms of entertainment that involve elements of violence are, by and large, fictional and not even involving real people portraying most of it. Yet you seem to think that somehow shooting a red guy in a round of Halo is going to make someone want to go out and try it in real life. People who become inspired by outside sources to commit a violent act, are already mentally disturbed. Without whatever it was that set them off, it would have simply happened at a later time. Perhaps it could even be a news story that can set such a person off rather than a video game. We had court hearings about kids killing themselves and other people and listened to music before committing the act, so some people got the idea that the music made them do it. How does that make any sense at all. If that were the case it would have happened in mass numbers. If a violent video game is actually causing people to go out and commit violent acts, and the game sells 1.5 million copies then at very least you should see a few thousand people committing violent acts. Instead you see a few, already disturbed individuals, committing violent acts. People that would have done so anyway without the supposed catalyst media.
So please, when you make statements like you have and sit all high and mighty on your soapbox trying to peer down at everyone else because "you get it", try and actually think it through beforehand. A little common sense could go a long way. - spyd3rweb, on 11/30/2007, -1/+13The censorship that will come out of this kind of thinking is the biggest threat to society.
- kushed, on 11/30/2007, -2/+11I think we need a new heavily funded Gov agency to fight the "war on war"
- WiseWeasel, on 11/30/2007, -2/+10Whoever conducted this study deserves a good beating! This is the exact thing our enemies would LIKE us to think...
: P - Beatmiser, on 11/30/2007, -1/+9Apparently someone missed the point. What the poster is trying to impart is that violence is not some new thing. Religious texts often include extreme violence, incest, and indoctrination. If anything the rules of civiliazation are far more profound then they were in 'Ye Olden Days'.
- smacksaw, on 11/30/2007, -3/+11No because fake violence leads to fake killings and assaults while real violence leads to invasions of countries with oil and that's OK. What?
- tehbored, on 11/30/2007, -0/+7Were those two items the only things on the list, are are the people who did this study just stupid? What about crime, war, HIV/AIDS, oil dependence, the Bush Administrations, etc.?
- mudlite, on 11/30/2007, -1/+8I wonder where cancer is on the list. Probably somewhere below global warming.
- HowitZer25, on 11/30/2007, -1/+8I've played tons of violent video games and have never hurt anyone or really wanted to hurt anyone either. I bet a lot of people are like me in that regard on here. All the people who think violence in media causes violence in real life are the ones who get super emotional when they see it and chose to shy away instead of understanding the circumstances around it.
- MerryMortician, on 11/30/2007, -1/+7manbearpig.
- inactive, on 11/30/2007, -3/+9Tolerance is the key.
To what? Massive ignorance? I keep hearing about how tolerance of everything is supposed to be a virtue on it's own. What the ***** does tolerating idiocy help? Aside from keeping the world in a perpetual state of idiocy, what does tolerance do?
These people want my public education system to teach to my kids that it's somehow possible that God made the world in seven days. That's more than regressive, that's going back in time to a time where science didn't exist. - miochza, on 11/30/2007, -0/+6So stabbing my friend after getting beaten in Goldeneye was wrong?
- deckard1, on 11/30/2007, -0/+6Although, it's a ridiculous assertion, since violence has reduced while violent media has increased:
http://voxday.blogspot.com/2007/11/another-day-ano ... - 5urr3al5am, on 11/30/2007, -1/+7wow.. couldn't wait for the paint to dry on that one? huh?
- ZenMojo, on 11/30/2007, -0/+6What is so easily overlooked is that these men have not actually conducted independent research, they have only gone back and looked at previous research over 50 years. What previous research has frequently called aggression is not any sort of violent activity but simply excitability. Our society is actually less violent internally than it was 20 years ago and far more graphically violent in the media. This is a really strange paradox, so it is more appealing to say, "Look, children get 'aggressive' when they watch violent television" than to say the reality, which is, "Um...children get 'excitable' when they watch violent television and play violent videogames but there's a lot less violence because of it."
This is where I usually use the word "*****" to sum up my opinion. - TsuruchiBrian, on 11/30/2007, -0/+6Corrupt politicians selling us out to corporations?
Religious Fundamentalism/Terrorism?
Becoming a police state in response to terrorism?
Nuclear War with Iran/China/North Korea ?
Economic collapse due to the falling value of our currency and even faster property values?
But those things could never happen. Wolfenstein 3D is the real problem. - norman619, on 11/30/2007, -1/+7I grew up in southern California during the 80's. Gang violence was insanely common. Many of my friends were in gangs and as a result I witnessed real life shootings, stabbings, beatings, people being run down by cars, and a few other things on many occasions as did my younger brother. Based on your fantasy view of reality I should be one violent and/or messed up person. I rarely ever had to resort to violence to resolve disputes I had with people. I have never been in trouble with the law. I know right from wrong. Why do you think that is? This may be a shock for your simple mind but my parents raised me to be more than a freaking lemming. They taught us right from wrong. The guys I hung out with who viewed violence as the best way to deal with a problem were the product of broken homes. You are trying to tell me that real life violence witnessed fairly regularly didn't warp me but violent media (simulated violence) would? Wipe the drool from your chin and STFU.
- norman619, on 11/30/2007, -0/+5Don't forget global warming. That is involved somehow as well.
- inactive, on 11/30/2007, -0/+5I agree, its everyone right to be ignorant if they choose.
- mattmy, on 11/30/2007, -0/+5stop trying to look smart it doesn't work for you
- HomerPimpson4, on 12/01/2007, -0/+4Especially fire-breathing bears.
- MattB123, on 11/30/2007, -0/+5I thought it was Janet Jackson's breast!
- converge777, on 11/30/2007, -1/+5I performed a similar study recently: Children in the U.S. spend an average of two hours a day eating food, and tend to eat upwards of three times a day. More distressingly, food is present in nearly 98% of American homes. Studies have shown that the vast majority of violent psychopaths have admitted to eating food, and this is true regardless of gender or race. It is time we stop the cause of violence at its root: write to Congress and tell them you will not support the criminals who let our children eat food.
- inactive, on 11/30/2007, -0/+4Haven't you heard? Everybody's a good parent now. Only people who abuse or assault their children can be considered bad parents now.
Taking your 2 year old child to a bacteria infested cage where he'll be "supervised" for 9 hours by a person who never got a high-school diploma is normal now. Spending an average of three hours a day with your kids: perfectly fine.
That's why the media is so important, it's the new parent. Parents want the violence to leave the television so they'll feel better about abandoning their kids infront of it. Instead of simply taking care of them, they want the world around them to become safe for kids so they won't have to do anything. - GreyICE, on 12/01/2007, -1/+5***** media, and violence in the media are not synonymous. Check out project censored some time. Or the list of censored stories I have below. Many of the items are about violent, horrible acts. The fact that our media doesn't report these, and instead reports non-stories like Britney and Lindsey Lohan, is far more damaging to our nation. Violence in the media? Lets have it! Lets show our weapons murdering wounded. Lets show the pictures of the burned corpses in cars from our bombs. Lets show the people what happens for our actions. Our current STUPIDITY is what is destroying our nation, and its fueled by this sugar-coated, non-violent, think-of-the-children news.
http://www.projectcensored.org/publications/2004/
http://www.metroactive.com/metro/11.08.06/censored ...
http://www.robert-fisk.com/articles399.htm - FellOffACliff, on 11/30/2007, -0/+4The root of the problem is bad parenting, not violent media.
- inactive, on 11/30/2007, -0/+4Meh, just the ones that can be understood as violent without being put into context. I especially like the ones where God tells us he'll kill our children if we don't circumsize them.
- spawnfree, on 11/30/2007, -0/+3Jeffrey Dahmer got his jollies by watching Return of the Jedi, so i guess we have to ban all universal rated movies too by the same bollocks rationality.
Sorry if my tinfoil hat offends, but violence and neglect towards children creates bullies and violent nutters, also brain damage. Not games or movies.
If you get rid of violent media the nutters will not disappear, we will simply start hearing excuses like 'bob the builder told me to do it'.
Games are being scapegoated for some reason, probably because they are too stimulating and encourage thinking/rationalizing. oh yeah, and standing up to and defeating evil entities because your life and freedom depends on it. - SOS84, on 11/30/2007, -0/+3What about neoconservatives and evangelicals? I cannot think of any bigger threat to society than these quasi totalitarian hate groups. Remember, these are the groups advocating starting WWIII as we speak.
- inactive, on 11/30/2007, -2/+5Actually, I can dismiss the possibility of a God. It is impossible for a thinking being to exist before there is something to think about.
But in any case, that's like saying I have to respect people who believe in the easter bunny because I can't demonstrate that there's no such thing empirically. You can't demonstrate non existence. But if you make the argument that something does exist, you are responsible for proving it.
And believing in something that I can't touch, can't see, can't hear that can't talk to me, can't touch me or can't even appear before me is completely unnecessary. It serves no purpose.
I don't want these people to participate in politics. - skellener, on 11/30/2007, -1/+4Bush has done more to ruin society than anything TV has to offer. Fear, violence, hatred...all Bush.
- DucoNihilum, on 11/30/2007, -1/+4Between manbearpig and consumerism.
- norman619, on 11/30/2007, -1/+4Well said. An admirable attempt at enlightening him.
- snapcase, on 11/30/2007, -1/+4"Plus, if the Bible is all crap as you say, then it's just an interesting fairy tale which isn't deserving of a second thought."
Yet if a book, or movie, or video game is admittedly an interesting (or uninteresting for that matter) fairytale then it too shouldn't be given the credence that these people say they deserve, and shouldn't be blamed for real violence. Thanks for proving the entire idea of the jackasses blaming media for violence wrong... even though unintentionally.
Books are a form of media. The bible is a book. Thus the bible is a form of media. It contains violence. It then falls into the category of violent media.
By the way, you don't understand evolution. Please read up on the subject before making claims about it. - LeeSoong, on 11/30/2007, -0/+3I would think Violence IN YOUR @$*!@^ FACE! would be the number one biggest threat...
- inactive, on 11/30/2007, -0/+3No I really do think anyone has the right to be an ignorant hick inbred religious moron, no sarcasm at all.
- snapcase, on 11/30/2007, -3/+6Wow, obviously ElAssoWipo's comment flew right the ***** over your head. It's sarcasm. He's pointing out that two of the largest religious texts (among others) contain a lot of violence, and if we should ban all violent media then they should be banned as well. Then include the fact that the Bible is the most read book worldwide and if I recall, is still the best selling book of all time, and you have a likely place to start with your bans. Use this common sense, and the supporters of the idea that Violent media is the problem may just back off from that line of thinking.
- TsuruchiBrian, on 11/30/2007, -0/+3That probably took them weeks or months to do. Imagine how many people they could have killed if they spent their time working at burger king to make more money for buying guns.
- inactive, on 11/30/2007, -2/+5booohooohooo he said mah book is bad. mah book isnt bad, booohooohooohooo. A book is a media. Just like the newspaper is.
Here's 871 violent quotes from the bible:
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/cruelty/long.htm ... - inactive, on 11/30/2007, -5/+8idiot, atheists aren't telling people what to do but the religious people are, if you just understand that much that's all it takes
-
Show 51 - 100 of 113 discussions
The Digg Toolbar for Firefox lets you Digg, submit content, and keep track of Digg even when you're not on the Digg site. Download the official 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is