Homestar Runner Wiki Forum

So we all know about Jack Thompson, the loony who believes that video games are the root of the violence probelms in the world. Well, they recently had a debate on the G4 show Attack of the Show which saw Jack and Adam Sessler get into a rather heated debate about the topic. In my opinion, Sessler did quite wel, and I'm fairly certain he won.

Here is the link.

Thoughts? I personally think Jack finally got what was coming to him.

(I didn't know where this should have gone, so Dormar suggested R&P. Don't kill me!)

_________________

I watched that on Aots. Adam took it to Jack, even if he did studder a lot.

_________________

I don't think either side got owned there. It seemed like the only guy that came out of that not looking like a jerk is the Friedler.

It seemed to me that Adam Sessler was skating really close to strawman (in his "the schools suck, the healthcare sucks" thing).

Just remember, when you're watching this, Hillary Clinton and Jack Thompson are on the same side of this debate.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.

Yeah, I didn't see clear pwnage in this vid, but it opens up a good topic for debate, even if the debaters themselves weren't that professional (talking over each other so much and whatnot).

Here's my spin on video game violence: I like video games that have violence. I get a kick out of F.E.A.R., Half-Life, GTA San Andreas, and other such games. What I really enjoy are big crashes and explosions and such--they're fun and funny to me to watch on the screen. But therein lies the rub--on the screen. I'm not so stupid that I can't disassociate reality from video games or TV/Film violence. When I see violence on the screen, I know I can laugh at it and enjoy it because I know that IT'S NOT REAL (well, not counting stuff on TV like COPS or documentaries on wars and such). Even when playing RollerCoaster Tycoon, I like to build coasters that purposefully crash. It's a way I can let loose, vent some steam if I need to. But that doesn't mean I'm going to go out with an uzi and start shooting up real people in real locations in real life. I know better than that.

And ultimately, I think 99.9% of other kids understand that difference, too. We know that it's totally fictional when something blows up in a game, just as we understand the severity and impact of something blowing up for real (like the London bombings last year). Consider this: If millions of kids play a violent video game, and only a tiny handful actually go out and shoot up their schools, can you REALLY link that violent behavior to the video game?

_________________
The meaning of life is 'bucket.'

FOR PONY!!!

*watching right now*

On the topic: Didn't Jack get fired from Flordia Bar anyways?

_________________

No, he didn't. The Bar was investigating him, but it didn't have much if anything to do with the video game controversy.

I have to agree with Mark Frieldler.

It's the parent's job, and no one else may have it.

After all, a product can exist, but that doesn't mean you have to buy it.

Ugh, I'm not gonna even stray near this.

But I will throw a grenade and say that I agree with Alec. Don't buy it when it says "M" on the front, parents. It's there for a reason.

_________________

I can't escape the feeling that Jack Thompson cares very little about protecting the children of America, but cares very much about lining the pockets of Jack Thompson.

Mike

_________________
Logical fallacies ahoy! I'd also like to say: graaaaagh!

My feeling is he wants to put Rockstar Games on his mantlepiece. If there's money to be made, well to him it's probably icing. The facts speak for themsevles though: violent crime has gone down in America over the past decade or so, and this is with games like Mortal Kombat, all 5 GTA games, Soldier of Fortune 1&2 (they were pretty gratuitous) and most notably, DOOM. While there's no telling whether or not it's the videogames themselves that are causing the decline, they certainly aren't causing a massive spike.

_________________

wait wait, so its not legit to shoot cops? damn. i guess ill put the tank back where i found it. <complete sarcasm here folks. i love policepersons>

_________________
hallo da' peeps!

He didn't really get defeated, embarressed, or anything. They both made a few good points.

_________________

The socialist in me says that parents can't be trusted to police the media that their children come across.
The whole "Don't buy 'M-rated' games for your kids" only works on parents who actually care. The kids of most of those parents aren't the ones who would cause problems anyway.

Something that neither side bothered to address was a thought I had the other day regarding this whole "violence in media breeds violence in people" thing. Could the studies that "prove" that violent video games cause violence be making their correlation in reverse? Could it be that people who are violent like to play violent video games?

I'm not taking a side in this debate, frankly, I don't really care. I do think games are going too far in portraying violence against authority figures and innocents, but, if something bothers me, I have enough sense to turn it off.

_________________
If you can't fix it with a hammer, you have an electrical problem.