Introducing Digg Dialogg!
Check out the first Digg Dialogg with Nancy Pelosi. More guests to be announced soon!
Youth Crime In America DECLINING: Video Games To Blame?
gamerevolution.com — An 11 year decline in youth violence has led the U.S. Department of Justice to proclaim, "the offending rates for 14-17 year olds reached the lowest levels ever recorded." The lowest levels ever recorded. In other words, the PlayStation era has, in fact, produced the most non-violent kids ever. From October 2005, but it needs repeating.
davidlow- 1629 diggs
- digg it
- davidlow, on 10/12/2007, -2/+71Hmm... Kids who grew up with violent video games are less violent. That's pretty significant, I'd say.
- jguy584, on 10/12/2007, -3/+63I dont think the conclusion drawn from this should be "Video games make kids less violent" but rather "Video games dont effect real world decisions"
- sshanafe, on 10/12/2007, -0/+41Maybe humans naturally have a touch of violence and aggression they need to relieve. Video games may be a safe and effective way of doing that. Then we have kids who don't feel the need to take these aggressions out in the real world, and thus crime drops.
- rasterbator, on 10/12/2007, -7/+12Nice unbias source: gamerevolution.com hehe
- Pharaoh777, on 10/12/2007, -0/+15I'm pretty sure the conclusion is: It's better to let kids vent their anger in a violent game, than letting the get violent againts another person. How hard is it to believe that kids (and adults) need to escape sometime?
- Revadarth, on 10/12/2007, -19/+3It's because they're all ***** fatasses. They're too busy eating and watching TV and playing video games than to fight. We're gonna be screwed if we get into a non-nuclear war in ten-twenty years. Blame McDonalds for non-violence, not video games.
- Vouksh, on 10/12/2007, -2/+15I'm 17 years old, have played violent video games all my life (Duke Nukem/Doom FTW!) and I'm one of the more relaxed people. I hate getting in fights, and while I may sometimes act/talk as if I'm violent, most people know i'm messing around. However I do know I would probably be violent if it weren't for an outlet: video games. When I get POed, I just fire up a game, put on god mode, and blast away. A lot better than going around and being violent to everyone.
- Nobi-Wan, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7I blame the decline in youth violence as a result of no good Mortal Kombat games released recently. That, and Van Damme and Arnold haven't been in decent movies for a while, either.
- incubusnb, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12The fact is that Video games give kids an outlet for agression, rather than start a fight at School the kid goes home and has a killing spree in GTA.
Video games also teach cause and effect quite well, you kill someone in GTA, the police chase you, you kill more people, more police chase you, and so on and so forth.
The fact is, if you can do what you want in a Video game, you're less likely to try it in real life because "you've already done it" and have learned the consequences behind it. - Adune0Warrior, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Im have seen this on digg before I even printed it out too. It is such a great story but its just like when they thought that rock n' roll made kids do bad things it will pass..... hopefully.
- Nathan07, on 10/12/2007, -1/+71Quick someone e-mail these stats to Jack Thompson.... Seriously wtf is going on in our government that they are wasting time voting on bills about a non-existent problem when there are serious problems to deal with.
- phpirate, on 10/12/2007, -0/+43He knows this. He ignores it, though. He makes it his job to ignore the facts and go after video games, no matter how stupid his arguments are, people will believe him and thats how he gets money.
- MasterGrief, on 10/12/2007, -5/+19After all, he IS a lawyer.
- GTAcrimelord, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8While you're at it, cc that email to Hilary Clinton with the subject heading: Stick this in your pipe and smoke it!
- CyberSkull, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0I wouldn't, he tried to have a guy arrested there.
- sceebacny, on 10/12/2007, -2/+44Put that in your pipe and smoke it, Jack Thompson.
- keitho, on 10/12/2007, -0/+51you are talking about a guy who would argue his own birth date with his mother.
- drinkGreen, on 10/12/2007, -2/+34yes, video games are to blame. If it weren't video games, I might get mad at someone and actually hit THEM, instead of going home and playing GTA and killing a video game character.
- Kosterfield, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Video games are the way the Playstation generation takes out frustration. We want to kill someone, we boot up GTA and have at it. Want to rob a bank? Same thing. We get a lot of the same emotional release, but we don't hurt anyone real in the process. They are making us less violent, or perhaps rechanneling that violence into another controlled world.
- megamorph, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You're right but video games still do not wholesomely target the actual problem: anger. We still have insidious habits of getting angry. Could we just be peaceful in the first place instead of expending our time "releasing" the anger? (I'm not saying you're wrong, I just want to give a suggestion to those who play video games to channel anger.)
- drinkGreen, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3@megamorph
no.
humans have always been violent and angry. I think trying to force people to just stop getting mad is going to be much harder than simply taking their video games away. Instead, people re-focus their anger to something else. Some go running until they calm down, some hit punching bags, some sleep, and others play games.
Pretty soon, the re-focusing of the anger IS killing the anger. If you play games to burn off anger, after while it becomes natural I think. If something that makes you angry happens, your brain almost immediately calms you down, saying "It's ok, we'll play some video games when we get home"
- kakwakas, on 10/12/2007, -3/+8Finally I have actual statistics I can use for that argument I've been using for years...
Hillary Clinton and Jack Thompson will probably ignore this, of course.- omnithought, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3...and Joe Lieberman. I may lean left, but Hillary will never get my vote simply because of her stance on censorship. Screw her.
- JoeNapalm, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1
The Truth and Politics aren't even passing aquaintances.
I mean, which makes a better sound bite for some publicity-minded Orwellian panic-monger?
-Jn-
PS - I concur...I'm a Leftist, but I'd never vote for one of these people who are trying to drive a stake through the heart of the 1st Amendment. It's first...for a reason! - LiterateWolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1H. Clinton can bite me. Her views on video games is just another attempt to censor Americans. I left the Democrats for the Greens over this and their dedication to free trade religion.
- raitchison, on 10/12/2007, -29/+7As good as this sounds I don't think it's that accurate. I can tell you in the past several years I have seen teenagers causing more and more trouble, everything from vandalism to drive by shootings. Gangs are more prevalent than every.
I think the police aren't concentrating on the same kinds of crimes that they once were, so arrests & convictions are down. Now "Terror" occupies a lot of law enforcement attention and tagging just falls off the radar.- merreborn, on 10/12/2007, -1/+31Woah, stop the presses! raitchison has anecdotal evidence! The Department of Justice must be informed of this new development immediately!
- khalidur2, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5where excactly do you live that you see drive by shootings occuring more? i live in inner london in the south east area known as the "hood", yet honestly i havn't taken part in a single crime (piracy doesn't count) and i am 16!!!
then again i AM on digg most of the time...
BTW o/t but did anyone see the daily show las night where they have tat clip of that senator describing the internet "tubes", anmd also google Santorum like stewart suggested, you will be pleasently surprised by the first link!!!! - cogsprocket, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7@ raitchison
If you look at the charts, however, you'll notice that the decline in violent crime does not begin in 2001. While I'm not saying you don't have a valid point, I will say you cannot take your own personal experience as solid evidence when statistical information shows the exact opposite.
I'll give you an example:
I have a dog. My dog does not attack people. Neither does my neighbors dog or my parents' dog. If, however, there were solid numbers to demonstratet that most dogs attack people would I be justified to say it is innaccurate based on the three dogs I know? - originalcvk, on 10/12/2007, -2/+9@raitchison
Did you not see the part about an 11 year decline? I'm not positive, but if my primitive mathematical skills serve me right, 2001 is not 11 years ago. - POKETNRJSH, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Crime in your area may be up, but overall it could be down
- CyberSkull, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0The government study cited by the article concerned itself with crime overall. Specific areas can easily have increased, but that doesn't make a difference on the whole.
- TheSavageNation, on 10/12/2007, -1/+22Have you guys read the book: "Freakonomics"? It claims that the crime rate has been lowered due to the people that would most likely produce children who would cause crime are having abortions. It can be seen by looking at the declining crime rate in the 90's and the legalization of abortion in the 70's. BTW, i am not making a claim for abortion.
- thedonquixote, on 10/12/2007, -3/+11I claim abortion.
- Quactaur, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7That's a great book!
Back on topic, it's only a matter of time now that they turn from video games = violence, to video games = apathetic society. - olaugh, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9The real lesson from Freakanomics is to be suspicious of explanations from people who have agendas. No one ever made the connection between abortion and crime because nobody stood to gain from it. Freakanomics' chapter on abortion was excellent because it had control groups, since the states had different abortion laws. The Gamerevolution piece is worthless and it doesn't establish causality. Just because most of us agree with the result doesn't mean it's not crap.
Still the simple fact that youth crime is going down and not up is certainly worth noting. - TheSavageNation, on 10/12/2007, -8/+2olaugh, well put. Not many here will agree with you, since they can not think for themselves.
- ja1217, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ donquixote
Just be glad your parents didn't. - AltDelete, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1I'm just glad someone else here has read Freakonomics. And that the crime rate is down. We could go into a quick debate on causality, which, it seems, everyone has, but still it's just nice to know my generation isn't shooting each other up like generations before us. At least not without a mouse and a keyboard.
- thedonquixote, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@ja1217
imagine a quote box here like digg had bbcode
[quote]
thedonquixote: I claim abortion
[quote]
ja1217: Just be glad your parents didn't.
[/quote]
[/quote]
How do you know they didn't? Hmmm?
its sounds alot kewler in my head, cause Homer Simpson is saying it.
(>^.^)> -- Hugs? - Insolent, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Don't believe everything you read, okay?
http://www.isteve.com/abortion.htm
It's another example of the conventional wisdom the book itself preaches against. Abortion sounds like a good explanation, but when you actually look at related data (which is not provided in Freakonomics), it's puzzling to see how those that preached such skeptical thinking came to such a definitive answer from inconclusive data. Psychology has a term for what liberals such as myself do just as badly as conservatives: confirmation bias.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias
Now you know abortion is good because it allows you to kill babies, not because it reduces murder rates! Only kidding. Freedom or death, blah blah.
-Insolent
- Anth741, on 10/12/2007, -0/+36Truth is... bad parents raise bad kids.
- keitho, on 10/12/2007, -8/+5lies! babysitters with the inital T.V. raise bad kids!
- Anth741, on 10/12/2007, -0/+20All seriousness though, I'm 18 and I consider myself to have good parents. They never let me watch violent television when i was young, or play really violent games when i was young. There was never fighting going on around me, I was put in karate and I learned when violence was OK.
That's parenting, choosing what your kid is exposed to, that's your job. Its not MPAA's, its not the governments job its YOUR job. Sure its EASIER to point fingers at the video game industry but who do you think buys these 11 year olds these 50 dollar games on 300 dollar systems? ( Hint hint allowance maxes at around 10 bucks.) - saska, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@Anth741: Although I personally believe kids should be exposed to the realities of the world as long as we parents are willing to actually TALK to them about what they're seeing, you raise a point I keep wondering about myself - namely, what 11 year old kid is running around with $50+ in cash, unsupervised, in a video game retailer? Too many parents claim they don't know what their kids are buying, and yet they either had to pay for the game themselves or give the kids the cash to buy them.
- Anth741, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2@saska
I defiantly agree that kids should be exposed to the realities of the world, but you must remember as young kids, under the age of 5 your mind is very malable. If you constantly watch shows where people are being sawed down, or playing a game where you shoot people, or watch people get shot it WILL be embedded into your brain that its ok. You are right, talking to your kids about the realities of the world is one of the most important parts of parenting, and I'm sure we can agree that one of the big problems facing these kids is that their parents have less time to do that... talk, raise and supervise their kids. - saska, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@Anth741: TV shows where people constantly get shot is not the reality I was referring to. ;-) Other than that, I agree with you.
- jerlensla, on 10/12/2007, -4/+4I don't think it has anything to do with violence. It has more to do with kids sitting on their asses for hours on end and not going outside. No need to punch someone in the face when you're fantasizng about Lara Croft from the comfort of your semi-private bedroom.
- razorsharp, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1SOCIAL INTERACTION DECLINING! Video games to blame?
AVRG PHYSICAL STRENGTH DECLINING! Video games to blame?
AVRG INTELLIGENCE DECLINING! Video games to blame?
There's always some stupid study that finds exactly what the researchers wanted it to. . .- DoctaStooge, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4When you control the experiment, you can make the outcome look however you want.
- Densetsu, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Increase in teen violence! Researchers to blame?
- WeeklyGeek, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6The mainstream media will never accept video games as the cause, anyway. They will throw up their VIDEO GAMES ARE VIOLENT blinders and move on.
- cogsprocket, on 10/12/2007, -2/+4The sad fact is that this information is freely available to the public. Since we live in the RSS age, however, the public doesn't go lookin for this data. The public wants a feed directly to this information and in almost every case the hungriest dog barks loudest.
I actually did a breakdown of the numbers in the initial graph sometime a few months ago. The crimes that seemed to be pinned on video games most often are the ones that have seen a greater decrease in the past 20 years. While it's not proof positive that video games have a cathartic effect and I would never say that they do, it is proof positive that video games do not by their nature create murderers and rapists.
"Let's take a closer examination of this chart and the data on hand. According to the data that feeds this chart total violent crime was at 47.7 per thousand people. Murder was .1 per thousand, rape 2.5 per thousand, robbery 6.7 per thousand, aggravated assault 12.5 per thousand and assault 25.9 per thousand. The most recent results (2004) show violent crme at 21.1 per thousand, murder stands at the same number of .1 per thousand, rape at a mere .4 per thousand, robbery at 2.1, per thousand, aggravated assault at 4.3 per thousand (nearly 1/3 of the opening result) and assault at 14.2 per thousand (nearly half).
If that information isn't amazing enough given our understanding that violent video games are murder simulators there's more data. The trend doesn't even really begin to decline until 1995. 1993 saw the release of the computer game Doom which many anti-video game activists use to prove that video games caused players to have violent tendencies, yet two years later we begin to see an increased trend in the fall of violent crime. In the past decade we have seen a decrease in violent crimes committed while we see a rise in simulated violence in the way of video games. How is this possible when we all know that violent video games breed killers?"
Without the intention to spam, mind you, I'd rather post this in a comment then spam this site with links to my own blog-drivel. - glucoseboy, on 10/12/2007, -3/+6Of course, obesity and diabetes among young people has grown significantly since the introduction of the PlayStation2.
(it's related to the crime drop as well, kids too fat or tired to go out and commit crime.)- missflibbles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Keep villifying videogames and TV and not the parents that allow these things to happen.
- betterth, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4Maybe if the parents stopped buying them bigmacs and hot pockets and got their asses out of work and made a real dinner, these kids wouldn't be the size of an ocean liner at 8. Don't blame the games, blame the parents. Who lets them play the games? Who feeds them? Who allows them to not exercise?
- peacher, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1look...I'm a 13 year old kid. I play video games, but I am far from over weight, or out of shape. I agree it is the parents responsibility to make sure that their child is exercising and eating the right way. My parents make a nice meal every night for dinner, and I'm only allowed so much time to play video games. I think that if kids are over weight, and/or out of shape, its not only their fault, but their parents also.
- Skab, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4send this article to your senators and congressmen.
- RHollister, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1well written and researched article
- Langford, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1The drop in crime at the same time video games arrive doesn't actually prove that video games caused the drop in crime. It does however, establish that video games have-not caused any rise in crime.
- olddirtycr, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1It makes sense, games such as GTA give people who are extremely angry to vent their anger by killing...video game characetrs instead of finding their dads gun and venting it that way...
- mcottier, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Around the time when Columbine happened though, there were a hell of a lot of school shootings. That means the violence rate was up around then, but then dropped I guess now.
Anyways, video games don't kill people, people kill people.- p1mpjuice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Yes because the media is going to tell you about all the school that didn't have shootings. /sarcasm
Columbine was a pretty isolated incident. The media just jumps on the bandwagon and keeps up its sensationalistic stories. Don't believe everything you see,read, and hear.
- p1mpjuice, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Yes because the media is going to tell you about all the school that didn't have shootings. /sarcasm
- elhaf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Videogames? Their violent influence is so last year. Don't you know that myspace is now the root cause of all of society's ills?
- Cander, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3haha. Nice. Digg is pretty popular too. When will it get blamed?
- ja1217, on 10/12/2007, -1/+0I'm pretty sure it already has. There have been several cases of rape and sexual predators involving myspace.
- seibed, on 10/12/2007, -3/+0weird.
this article says otherwise:
http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-07-12-juveniles-inside_x.htm- 2gig, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0This is true. In some cities, violent crime by youth is up, but it's very recent.
- noisician, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0why do people put negative diggs on this? because it points to something that contradicts the article you like?
anyway, both of these can be true. the main article is a few years old. The one talking about increased violence mentions that the increase is only in the past year.
- mikeslemonade, on 10/12/2007, -3/+2So what, kids are more lazy and fatter these days. I rather trade those for vilolence.
- elroy, on 10/12/2007, -8/+1No.
- jamesob5, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3The cause is designer clone stormtrooper babies
- icepick314, on 10/12/2007, -2/+0well...it seems more attentions are paid to the act of violence than the stats saying otherwise...
it's like plane crash....flying is safer than driving but it seems worse because more people die at one time in plane crash than automobile accident... - Hubris, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1If you consider the premise of this article to be true, could it be related to the fact that there is an epidemic of kids sitting at home and playing video games and watching TV - rather than being away from their house...which is largely a requirement for youth crime?
Statistics are both the raw data and how they are analyzed....if the goal is to present the position that youth crime is decreasing, the analysis can be spun in that direction.
Do YOU think there is less crime being committed by young people today? - charbarred, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2I always said that: Give every kid a playstation and no one will ever steal your bike again.
- Aiwanei, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2I guess in some cases this is true, but if you take a city like say Boston, they are having the highest amount of youth violence in 10 years. Boston was a city whose anti-gang program was modeled after by most other cities, but since their crime went down, funding stopped, and violence started up again. So look at Boston to contradict this report.
- CatalystGhost, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1But that's just it: they're funding went down. They let their guard down, and are going to be paying to price for it in the end. You need a constant watch on how things are going. Kids can grow up in 10 years, also causing more crime as a new group -who have less to deal with because of less police funding- comes out to cause problems.
Even with that, you can't necessarily say that Boston can contradict the report. It's not entirely contrary, as it also has the problem of not truly being able to pin the increase on any one thing just as we can't realistically prove that video games have caused a decrease in crime.
- CatalystGhost, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1But that's just it: they're funding went down. They let their guard down, and are going to be paying to price for it in the end. You need a constant watch on how things are going. Kids can grow up in 10 years, also causing more crime as a new group -who have less to deal with because of less police funding- comes out to cause problems.
- mecole21, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1Tell that to the people of Rochester, NY... the crime rate has skyrocketed here...
- o0joshua0o, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Maybe violent video games provide people who have anger issues with a harmless way to release it.
- PowerCow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Videos games relieve stress
not much better than after being stuck in traffic for a while to bust out some NFS most wanted
or even GTA if the boss giving you are hard time.
I dont come away from games more aggressive, desiring more violence.
actually the opposite I become more calmer, less stressed and finally bored with the violence and mayhem i was causing in the games. - myFriendDerrik, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6Of course video games are to blame:
Johnny: Hey Billy, wanna go commit some youth crimes?
Billy: What? You mean go OUTSIDE?! HELL NO! - davidlow, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Here's a related upcoming Digg link: DECLINE In Rape Caused By Increase In Porn:
http://digg.com/politics/85_decline_in_rape_caused_by_increase_in_porn - Cander, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Hello Mr Thompson? You out there? Maybe you should go back to blaming music and TV.
Poor poor Jack. - slumbuzzle, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3"The most peaceful generation of Americans in recorded history is being shoved through metal detectors, having their civil rights violated on a daily basis, are the victims of unreasonable search and seizure, and are treated with constant suspicion."
Sounds like we need to be more aggressive, not less so.- Pharaoh777, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Aggression against oppressors is never a bad thing.
- ja1217, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0of course you realize that the government would say that it is the most peaceful generation because of all of the metal detectors and the like.
- mlvassallo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1LOL. Gotta did this just for my homeboys at GR.
Anyhow, this stat has been swept under the rug for years and will continue to be as long as the blame can be placed anywhere but the parents. - slaystench, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2Video games are another way to get out frustrations. This shouldn't be that surprising considering the popularity of video games.
- geekee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1This wouldn't surprise me if true. Most 11 to 17 yr olds don't commit crime because they need to. So if you give them something else to entertain them, like sitting around playing video games, they're less likely to be causing trouble with their friends.
- theOster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0nevermind.
- JesseJ, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1@jguy584
>I dont think the conclusion drawn from this should be "Video games make kids less violent" but rather "Video games dont effect real world decisions"
I think video games DO affect real-life desicions. You know that the bad guy always dies in the end or get caught. Always.
So what you do is NOT steal a car, because you know you have the popos at your heels in a second and they'll shoot you. You will learn that also by watching Cops on TV.
I think it's a no-brainer. - arnthorsnaer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Increased computer (game / net) usage may be one of the causes and lower crime rates may be one of the effects, the bigger picture reveals a radical change in social dynamic taking place with the advent of online gaming and socializing
Are kids more or less socially interactive today, than before ?
More social online than physically ?
Can kids commit crimes online ?
Does software filter/lessen kids need/tendency to commit crimes or are they more invisible when they are online ?
Hope that wasn't too much of a brain-fart. - Squeeself, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0An observational study such as this does NOT make any assertions on causality. In other words, this study does not say that video games make kids less violent. It simply shows a trend, and a possible route for further studies (although, it would be difficult to prove causality in this case...)
That said, I do think that video games lower violence by relieving aggression. I just think that too many here seem to be taking this as proof of that position. As always happens with all these studies, and why you get so many conflicting studies. The only thing this study proves, is that violence is down, which goes in the face of the media's "violence epidemic" as the article states. - Neoanarchist, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It has been scientifically proved that violent situations (to a reasonable degree) in which the "good guy" wins, or is at least fighting "evil", is healthy for males young and old alike. It stimulates our brains in a healthy fashion and instills a sense of right and wrong on a fundamental level. Now games like Grand Theft Auto I don't think can be applied to this but if parents would stop blaming everything/one but themselves, grow up, and raise a child correctly any kid could play any game and be fine. It all starts with the parents, not the game companies, not the retail stores selling it, not the kids who buy it, but the parents who allow it or miss it.
America has gone from the land of the free to the land of the freedom of responsibility. If you ***** up, you sue someone because it's their fault you're a dumb piece of ***** and don't know hot coffee is HOT or that if you don't ***** raise your kid right there's a chance he'll go be a ***** Dahmer.
In conclusion: If parents take responsibility for their ***** off spring (no pun intended) and instill a concrete idea of right and wrong, and real and not real in their children at an early age, we'll all be better off.- LiterateWolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1What is with the bitching about coffee being hot? Seems like a lame strawman.
- Stromboul, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1In related news, it has been proven that the automated vacuum cleaner, out in 1993, has reduced the crime in youth! As you can see, the reduction of crime starting the exact same day than our vacuum cleaner is of course the cause of the reduction in crime and homicides!!
Thats how you make statistics lie... - dcowboy, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1if you honestly believe that youth crime in america is declining, i'd like to invite you to come visit Washington, DC sometime. we'll go for a walk at night on the Mall, or perhaps stroll around the quiet streets of Georgetown.
- LiterateWolf, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2It's a national trend, not a local one. Think first.
- chking, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1I sent this to my wife who believes that game make you violent.
- ChileanGoD, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1That's why I say there should be one mini lan party center in every park in america. With 30 or so computers in place and a free membership management. So street gangs instead of killing eachother with real guns they do it insead with CouterStrike source :).
- hfilby, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2In "Freakonomics", author and economist Steven D. Levitt comes up with a VERY different reason for the dropping crime levels. http://www.freakonomics.com/thebook.php
For those of you who want a summary of his argument:
Q. What happened in the early 1990s to cause such a drastic fall in the violent crime rate?
A. It didn't happen in the 1990s. Think about it. Who is most likely to commit a violent crime?
Q. In general, teenagers who are born to poor, uneducated, single, teenage mothers.
A. So go back 18 or 19 years earlier when the teenagers of the 1990s were being born. Or not.
Q. The 1970s?
A. 1973.
Q. Roe vs Wade? What does legalized abortion have to do with crime?
A. For the first time poor, uneducated, single, teenage mothers-to-be who didn't want a child, didn't have to have one.
Q. So the children they might have had, who would have likely gone on to a life of crime, were never born?
A. Precisely.
Q. How many children are we talking about?
A. As of 2004, 37 million.
Q. But how can you claim that there's a connection? Might it just be a coincidence?
A. It might. Let's look at the crime rates from the five states who legalized abortion before Roe vs Wade.
Q. Why?
A. If legalized abortion caused the decline in violent crime, similar declines would show up in those five states, just a little earlier. And it does.
Q. Is there any other corroborating evidence?
A. States with the highest abortion rates following 1973 had the greatest decline in violent crime. Similar studies in Canada and Australia have also established a link between legalized abortion and crime.
Q. But some people consider abortion itself to be a violent crime. This is shocking!
A. In the words of Steven D. Levitt, "...one need not oppose abortion on moral or religious grounds to feel shaken by the notion of a private sadness being converted into a public good." - KevinIsANoob, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1The rate will continue to drop because the losers of the world are now removed from society. These gaymers willingly isolate themselves with their games, which dramatically lowers their chances of going on a homicidal rampage, or interacting with over weight females and reproducing. The results will be nothing less than marvelous. With their defective genes removed from the gene pool, the world will be a happier, place in just a few decades. Who said evolution was dead?
- missflibbles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Allow me a moment to shield my eyes from the backlash that's going to result from your comment.
Anyway, it will truly be a good thing when only physically fit people reproduce. Only physically fit people have anything to contribute to society.
/sarcasm - KevinIsANoob, on 10/12/2007, -2/+1No one really likes nerdy gametards or fat chicks. The world will be a better place without them, and they will not be missed.
- Farodek, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1yup, can't wait for a world full of jocks and frat boys with a combined iq of 70. what a wonderful world, so full of testosterone, (which coincidentally is produced more in conjunction to working out, and also increases anger and aggressivness).
i think that in the end, everyone will be a happy medium, like me, who will play games for 5 days with no sleep, yet won't even think twice about getting up the next morning at 5am to wrestle till your hair is worn out.
- missflibbles, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Allow me a moment to shield my eyes from the backlash that's going to result from your comment.
- daridave, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0Makes sense. There's no denying that while Mario games rule, it is more satisfying (in a sick way, I do admit) to headshot someone than to stomp a goomba. While I do am 23 and not a kid anymore, when I used to play GTA it was to decompress. I killed a lot in that game. But it doesn't have to be violence against beings -- I smashed a lot of cars, too. It was fun, it was relaxing and very satisying... but only because there is no real life at stake and the cars cost nothing. Using such methods to let our frustrations out can indeed prevent many people from doing something stupid in real life, where there is no reset button. Good stuff, I hope they keep 'em coming, because... it sure works for me. With all that said, however, I still believe the M-rating should be inforced and young kids should keep stomping goombas and smashing turtle shells instead.
- wirelesshnic, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Please should stop blaming the things around them for there problems and deal with them. It is so much easyer to point the finger and sue than it is to sit down and have a talk with junior. Just like any other normal human being kids have choices and a brain that can eater think for themselves or jump on the bandwagon. Your job as a parent is to get them to think for themselves and teach them about the things they are exposed to. When you see a bees nest you tell your kid not to mess with it becouse they sting and it could hurt. You don't sue the bees for being on your property and endangering your kids health! Same with video games, teen pregnancy etc... You explain what is going on and learn to adapt and change.
"People are always afraid of what they do not understand"- wirelesshnic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1People should*
(stupid digg spellcheck)
- wirelesshnic, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1People should*
-
Show 51 - 62 of 62 discussions
Digg is coming to a city (and computer) near you! Check out all the details on our 
© Digg Inc. 2008 —
Content posted by