Trump shifts blame to violent video games, movies in gun violence discussion

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

13 hours ago, smilesammich said:

most of those 'gangbangers' are young teens/men who are the same developmentally as the kids who shoot up schools in suburban neighborhoods but 'gangbangers' typically suffer vastly more trauma growing up. it is proven that children who grow up in gang riddled areas suffer ptsd the same as soldiers who've seen active duty. it's also proven that early childhood development is essential in future outcomes - no matter what type of area you live in. mental illness definitely plays a part in chicago's violence but that's most certainly never discussed. 'gangbangers' can be reformed and go on to be be pillars of the community, just like any other criminals. if all the guns disappeared from chicago, there would still be gang violence but not as many people would die. not as many innocent bystanders would die. the cycle of trauma would lessen, and with additional intervention on the early childhood/mental health fronts, progress could be made. 

Yeah sorry those gangbangers aren't school so thus they are not shooting it up. What's worse is that they are shooting the kids walking to school.

[bcking 3,157]

11 hours ago, eieio said:

One of the most frequent common denominators to these schools shooters is that they came from single parent households.  I saw a clip of Ann Coultier saying the main predictor of whether someone was going to end up in prison is if they were raised in a single parent household. Of course…all the feminists promoting single motherhood were up in arms. It is one thing to end up in a divorce…but quite another to get pregnant with the plan of being a single mother. Not good for our society and it does contribute to many of our problems.  I blame the feminists for promoting single motherhood and at the same time blaming men for any perceived problems.

 

Do you know what study/studies Ann Coulter used for that. You said she had the data. Do you know from where?

 

 

I'm mostly interested in the fact that you claim a distinction between a "single mother planning to be a single mother" and a couple that get divorced (or various other reasons to end up a single parent household).

 

Does the data actually separate those, or is that just your opinion? My understanding is the risk factor is a single parent household, it doesn't matter how that comes about. I'm not aware that anyone has ever broken it down like that.

Edited March 9, 2018 by bcking

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, cyberfx1024 said:

Yeah sorry those gangbangers aren't school so thus they are not shooting it up. What's worse is that they are shooting the kids walking to school.

aren't school? not sure what your point is in relation to my comment.

[smilesammich 10,727]

13 minutes ago, bcking said:

Do you know what study/studies Ann Coulter used for that. You said she had the data. Do you know from where?

 

 

I'm mostly interested in the fact that you claim a distinction between a "single mother planning to be a single mother" and a couple that get divorced (or various other reasons to end up a single parent household).

 

Does the data actually separate those, or is that just your opinion? My understanding is the risk factor is a single parent household, it doesn't matter how that comes about. I'm not aware that anyone has ever broken it down like that.

also there are many other factors at play, not just  'single mothers' & 'feminists'. what about single fathers? what about single mothers who have no means of support or safety net compared to those that do? most women who choose to become single mothers do so later in life when they are already financially established. i don't think this is the demographic eieio is getting at with his comment, but i could be wrong.

Edited March 9, 2018 by smilesammich

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

1 minute ago, smilesammich said:

aren't school? not sure what your point is in relation to my comment.

You know what I meant, sorry I have been doing like 3 things at once all morning long so I can leave work early. But what I meant is that those gangbangers are not in school, but  bullying and killing kids that are on their way to or from school.

[smilesammich 10,727]

Just now, cyberfx1024 said:

You know what I meant, sorry I have been doing like 3 things at once all morning long so I can leave work early. But what I meant is that those gangbangers are not in school, but  bullying and killing kids that are on their way to or from school.

i'm still not sure what your point is in relation to my comment. i address shootings of innocent people in my comment (if there were no guns, this problem wouldn't be as severe) and since when have school shootings been perpetrated strictly by those attending the school? since when have kids involved with gangs definitely not attended school? 

[bcking 3,157]

3 minutes ago, smilesammich said:

also there are many other factors at play, not just  'single mothers' & 'feminists'. what about single fathers? what about single mothers who have no means of support or safety net compared to those that do? most women who choose to become single mothers do so later in life when they are already financially established. i don't think this is the demographic eieio is getting at with his comment, but i could be wrong.

My understanding is that follow-up studies have tried to control for other confounding factors (socioeconomic) and found that when those are controlled for the single parent factor is minimal.

 

More likely being in a single parent household increases the risk of having other risk factors (living in poverty for example...having only one potential working parent would likely increase your risk). Those other risk factors all then combine to increase your risk of prison. So it's not really the single parent, but the other risks that build off that.

 

Regardless of that I'm almost entirely positive that the distinction between divorced households and "single mother feminists" is entirely made up hogwash. All of the data I'm aware of looks at single parent households without breaking down why it's a single parent household.

[OriZ 3,157]

IMO it's insane to blame it on video games. People need to be accountable for their own actions and parents need to actually teach their kids how to behave. Sadly these days everyone likes to lay the blame on someone else and take 0 responsibility for their own behaviour. One of my fav games when I was younger was "carmageddon" where the sole purpose is to run as many people over as possible and you get more points for certain people. Well, I'm not trying to go out and run people over in my car. My wife and I play resident evil but we don't go out and look for people to shoot. If you have a mental disease seek help, and if you're too oblivious to your disease your family should intervene. Telling game companies what they should or shouldn't do is far from the answer.

Edited March 9, 2018 by OriZ

[eieio 1,594]

51 minutes ago, bcking said:

Do you know what study/studies Ann Coulter used for that. You said she had the data. Do you know from where?

 

 

I'm mostly interested in the fact that you claim a distinction between a "single mother planning to be a single mother" and a couple that get divorced (or various other reasons to end up a single parent household).

 

Does the data actually separate those, or is that just your opinion? My understanding is the risk factor is a single parent household, it doesn't matter how that comes about. I'm not aware that anyone has ever broken it down like that.

 

[bcking 3,157]

9 minutes ago, OriZ said:

IMO it's insane to blame it on video games. People need to be accountable for their own actions and parents need to actually teach their kids how to behave. Sadly these days everyone likes to lay the blame on someone else and take 0 responsibility for their own behaviour.

It shouldn't be about blame, but that doesn't mean understanding risk factors isn't important.

 

As much as we want to believe as humans that we are entirely independent creatures and have absolute free will, our actions and decisions are heavily influenced by our history, our childhood, our education, and all sorts of other factors.

 

Yes ultimately the person is responsible for their actions, but it can also be enlightening to look at what risk factors in that person's life helped contribute to that ultimate decision.

 

I don't blame video games. I was an avid gamer in my youth and still play games with my wife (less violent games now, but still with violence. Zelda, Mario etc... I used to play Battlefield, Call of Duty etc...). I'm not a violent murderer, nor is anyone else I know that played games. That doesn't mean the games didn't put us at higher risk, it speaks more to the other risk factors that we didn't have (or protective factors that we did have). It's a "multi-hit" issue, like most. There will never be a single thing to blame. It will be a combination of many negative factors, and the lack of other positive ones. 

 

It's completely reasonable to want to understand those risk factors and the protective factors. As a society we could try to promote those factors that are protective, while minimizing (where appropriate) those factors that are risks. Those decisions have to consider each factors scale though. Video games is pretty low on the totem pole in terms of risk factors. They still are, but focusing on them would likely yield very little benefit.

3 minutes ago, eieio said:

 

Sorry I'm sitting in a car dealership waiting for my car to be serviced so I won't be able to watch a video.

 

Does she actually provide a source or a citation? Most people in interviews don't. They just say things, rarely include data and when they do they don't say where it comes from. Usually. As I said I can't listen to it right now.

 

I've tried searching for literature that distinguishes single family households due to divorce from other factors (like women who chose from the beginning to raise a child as a single parent). I've found no such data. You suggested there was a difference. I'm looking for the source for that claim.

Edited March 9, 2018 by bcking

[OriZ 3,157]

2 minutes ago, bcking said:

It shouldn't be about blame, but that doesn't mean understanding risk factors isn't important.

 

As much as we want to believe as humans that we are entirely independent creatures and have absolute free will, our actions and decisions are heavily influenced by our history, our childhood, our education, and all sorts of other factors.

 

Yes ultimately the person is responsible for their actions, but it can also be enlightening to look at what risk factors in that person's life helped contribute to that ultimate decision.

 

I don't blame video games. I was an avid gamer in my youth and still play games with my wife (less violent games now, but still with violence. Zelda, Mario etc... I used to play Battlefield, Call of Duty etc...). I'm not a violent murderer, nor is anyone else I know that played games. That doesn't mean the games didn't put us at higher risk, it speaks more to the other risk factors that we didn't have (or protective factors that we did have). It's a "multi-hit" issue, like most. There will never be a single thing to blame. It will be a combination of many negative factors, and the lack of other positive ones. 

 

It's completely reasonable to want to understand those risk factors and the protective factors. As a society we could try to promote those factors that are protective, while minimizing (where appropriate) those factors that are risks. Those decisions have to consider each factors scale though. Video games is pretty low on the totem pole in terms of risk factors. They still are, but focusing on them would likely yield very little benefit.

Sorry I'm sitting in a car dealership waiting for my car to be serviced so I won't be able to watch a video.

 

Does she actually provide a source or a citation? Most people in interviews don't. They just spout data.

I did update my post to mention a couple of the games I played/play. I don't feel they put me at any higher risk at all. I always knew they are exactly that - a game.

[yuna628 9,682]

12 hours ago, Boiler said:

I would like to remind everyone today is International Women's Day, anybody know when the Mens day is?

It's in November and has been for a very long time, so you'll have to wait a bit. Don't you celebrate it every year?

[bcking 3,157]

1 minute ago, yuna628 said:

It's in November and has been for a very long time, so you'll have to wait a bit. Don't you celebrate it every year?

They'd rather bring it up and focus on it during the one other day of the year about recognising the other 50% of the population, rather than actually celebrate the day that already exists.

 

When the day comes, it matters very little. In reality, most days of the year are "Men's days".

 

Seems pretty selfish to me.

[-Trinity- 513]

5 minutes ago, OriZ said:

IMO it's insane to blame it on video games. People need to be accountable for their own actions and parents need to actually teach their kids how to behave. Sadly these days everyone likes to lay the blame on someone else and take 0 responsibility for their own behaviour.

The parents are responsible in the first place, I don't think anyone is denying that. But when parents are unwilling or not able to provide a safe, and healthy environment to their kids, others factors come into play.

 

Meaning, if the basic needs of kids aren't satisfied for what ever reason, they will look for other places to get that need satisfied.

 

If a kid is neglected, emotionally, mentally and physically it will affect them. Some kids can get through it and end up fine regardless what ever happened in their lives, others end up damaged.

 

People can minimize the effects of stimulants like drugs and videogames, but there is a reason why video game addiction is considered a serious psychological disorder. 

[bcking 3,157]

9 minutes ago, OriZ said:

I did update my post to mention a couple of the games I played/play. I don't feel they put me at any higher risk at all. I always knew they are exactly that - a game.

Absolutely. I'm in the same boat. I loved BF 1942 and the early Call of Duty games. I liked the ones based on historical events. That doesn't mean I grew up wanting to reenact them or something. I don't even own a gun and would never want to.

 

Risk factors aren't about individuals. It's impossible to study for a specific person what has put them at risk or not. In the end you only have one outcome, the one that occurred. So you can't study what kind of "chance" you had to end up a violent murderer since you didn't.

 

Risk factors are about populations. The data is fairly consistent that exposure to violent media (games and other mediums) are a risk factor. That doesn't mean the majority of people exposed will be murderers. But the risk does go up (I already provided a link to a systematic review on the topic from last year).

 

Again it's just like smoking. Most smokers won't get cancer. The numbers are like 10%. For the ones that are cancer free it is easy to think that smoking didn't increase their risk, since in the end they didn't get it. But by looking at a whole population of smokers (compared to those who don't smoke) it's clear the risk goes up substantially.

Edited March 9, 2018 by bcking