The Argument That Video Games Spur Mass Shootings Is Losing Steam (bloomberg.com) 170
An anonymous reader shares a report: On the painful occasion of a mass shooting in the US, it has become customary for some politician or pundit to point an accusatory finger at video games. In late May, after two such attacks -- in Buffalo, New York, and Uvalde, Texas, it was Texas Senator Ted Cruz. These tragedies, he said in a speech at a National Rifle Association convention, were a mirror of our culture, and specifically, where our culture is failing. In addition to "broken families" and "declining church attendance," he said, "desensitizing the act of murder in video games" has contributed to the epidemic of mass shootings.
What surprised me wasn't what Cruz said. It was how little traction it received in the mainstream media. A Fox News host asked his guest, Arizona State University criminal justice professor Bernard Zapor, whether violent video games' heightened realism contributed to an increase in mass homicides. Zapor dodged, instead citing the dissolution of community bonds. Most coverage of Cruz's comments (and Fox's interview) were in the service of invalidating the question itself: Decades of research have shown no connection between playing violent video games and committing violent acts. For more than 20 years years, the idea that video games like Doom somehow spurred these heinous shootings held sway in popular culture. In the '90s, "There was really no pushback," said Chris Ferguson, Stetson University's co-chair of psychology, who has studied violent video games' impact on gamers for about 20 years.
What surprised me wasn't what Cruz said. It was how little traction it received in the mainstream media. A Fox News host asked his guest, Arizona State University criminal justice professor Bernard Zapor, whether violent video games' heightened realism contributed to an increase in mass homicides. Zapor dodged, instead citing the dissolution of community bonds. Most coverage of Cruz's comments (and Fox's interview) were in the service of invalidating the question itself: Decades of research have shown no connection between playing violent video games and committing violent acts. For more than 20 years years, the idea that video games like Doom somehow spurred these heinous shootings held sway in popular culture. In the '90s, "There was really no pushback," said Chris Ferguson, Stetson University's co-chair of psychology, who has studied violent video games' impact on gamers for about 20 years.
Why would Steam be promoting this? (Score:2, Funny)
I don't understand, why would Steam be promoting the idea that video games promote mass violence? I would think it would be against their bottom line.
Re: (Score:2)
Gabe plays 4D chess so this is just shoring up an alternate time line where this asshole actually gained traction. [wikipedia.org]
Superman (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Adults are the ones who seem the most prone to confusing fantasy from reality.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I remember concerns that children watching Superman TV series might jump off roofs. It didn't happen - even children know the difference between fantasy and reality.
Quite.
Video games are not a strictly American thing... Lots of other countries have large gaming communities yet don't seem to have the same issues with violence.
Or with nutbars claiming that video games cause violence. That is largely an American thing (there was an Australian who tried to claim it, he was completely ignored).
The US has a serious problem with violence though, the guns are making it far worse than it needs to be. The cause seems to be that US culture endorses violence, glorifies it
Re: (Score:2)
The big question that cannot be answered though is would that child have done something equally as stupid without ever having seen Superman? It is easy to say that watching Superman caused the individual in question to jump from a roof but may be the individual was already predisposed to being reckless and it more a matter of watching Superman correlating with the jumping off the roof rather than Superman causing the jump.
In the same way, is playing violent video games a causation or a correlation to mass s
The industry is too large now (Score:2, Troll)
Part of the reason you're seeing less push-back is because the video game industry is simply too large now. There's a lot of money behind video games, and people don't want to upset their advertisers.
I have to be clear that I'm not saying video games cause violence - it's fairly clear that in the vast majority of people, they do not.
But don't mistake people running from the argument as people disagreeing with it. There's just a lot more money to be made from the industry than there used to be.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd say rather than "large", I'd attributed it to being more "mainstream". That is, videogames are so commonplace that literally everybody knows at least a few people who are gamers who have NOT turned into psychotic mass murderers. There's just far too much counter-evidence to give this theory any real credence at this point.
I think that makes more sense than crediting the turnaround in attitudes to the amount of money the industry makes. Ted Cruz blaming videogames kind of works against that argument,
Re: (Score:3)
School shootings are not a killing spree (Score:2)
When you go on a rampage, where'd you go? Well, where you can have a considerable body count, of course. So ... a shopping mall during Christmas season would be sensible. A school? Please.
More to the point, their school. They don't just go to some random school and shoot it up. They go to their school, often their (former) class, and then they let loose.
This is not a rampage.
This is revenge.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:School shootings are not a killing spree (Score:5, Insightful)
I wouldn't even call it revenge. It's pure terrorism.
Most of the shooters were bullied, everyone knew it, and no one did anything about it. Everyone is complicit. It's revenge against everyone. Of course it's revenge. These kids don't have political goals. They're not shooting up their classes for the proletariat.
Re:School shootings are not a killing spree (Score:5, Insightful)
Kids bully kids in other countries too. Somehow no other first world nation has this problem though...
Re: (Score:2)
That's not what they are debating. The debate is the motive of mass shootings. You could argue that access to guns cause mass shootings but that's as stupid as saying it's video games.
Re: (Score:3)
That's not what they are debating. The debate is the motive of mass shootings.
Yes and I dovetailed an anti mass ownership of firearms comment onto it. Thanks for noticing.
You could argue that access to guns cause mass shootings but that's as stupid as saying it's video games.
No it's not. Unlike with video games there is a very clear correlation between more guns and gun violence. States with more guns have more gun violence https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/26... [cnn.com] . Countries (when all other factors are accounted for) with more guns have more gun violence https://worldpopulationreview.... [worldpopul...review.com] . This isnt rocket science.
Sure you can point out that it's just a correlation but to claim those two clai
Re: (Score:2)
Minor correction: more un-regulated guns is correlated with more gun violence. Switzerland has a high per capita guns but the laws are very strong. Long periods of wait and check. And where you can store your guns. Most owners have to store their guns at the range or clubs etc.
Re: (Score:2)
Fair point.
Don't forget most of them end up with their guns because of their military training (meaning they're likely a hell of a lot more responsible with them) and can easily have them taken away for antisocial behavior.
Re: (Score:3)
No. Access to guns doesn't cause anything. It enables it. That is literally a different argument, although it's obviously part of the same debate.
The access is decreasing but the mass shootings are increasing, why is that? Answer that question and perhaps we can solve the gun problem without taking away the guns. There are examples of nations where they have guns without the mass shootings. I'd rather be among the adults with the safely used guns than the children who have had them taken away.
Re:School shootings are not a killing spree (Score:4, Interesting)
You keep stating access is decreasing in your posts as if I should just accept your word on it, Cite a source because I cant verify your claim at all on a casual internet search.
Everything you've been saying under this slashdot post is based on this completely unsubstantiated claim.
Re: (Score:3)
Yes and I dovetailed an anti mass ownership of firearms comment onto it. Thanks for noticing.
Interesting way to write that you have gone off-topic.
No it's not. Unlike with video games there is a very clear correlation between more guns and gun violence.
And yet again you have veered into another lane. Mass shootings are symptom of people who have been neglected and/or abused by society. Merely restricting firearm access will merely push these people back into the margins where society will continue to ignore their suffering. I'm not implying that we shouldn't restrict firearm access, I'm explaining it's not what drives people to commit mass shootings.
Congrats on being wrong twice.
Re: (Score:2)
The US has more than other first world countries, but they have their own. A quick google search shows that for any country you like.
Re: (Score:2)
Show me the results of this quick google search.
Throughout this entire article I've been assured by many contrary individuals that the data supports their claims but I havent seen a single citation. You all are no better than Trump and his conspiracy nonsense until you can clearly justify your claims.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't even call it revenge. It's pure terrorism.
Most of the shooters were bullied, everyone knew it, and no one did anything about it. Everyone is complicit. It's revenge against everyone. Of course it's revenge. These kids don't have political goals. They're not shooting up their classes for the proletariat.
Kind of, yes and no. I agree with your point but these people aren't the kind of people you typically think of as bullied. I.E. the nerd or geek who was constantly picked on because they were smart, shy and didn't like violence. I'm sure I'm not the only ./er who had a high school life like that. The thing is, when I finished high school, I realised that the way things worked there, the system of social dominance, didn't exist out in the real world. Few people have ever tried to bully me at work, or in the
Re: (Score:2)
I like to imagine that there's a special place in hell for school shooters.
Then you have as much an understanding of their motives as the people who blame video games.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you often daydream about underage kids getting sexually violated, or only occasionally?
Re:School shootings are not a killing spree (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Probably going to be modded down, but you might have noticed they were all brown kids.
But I'm sure that had nothing to do with it. (Spoiler: It did.)
Please, enlighten us how Salvador Ramos, the brown shooter, was motivated to shoot brown kids because of their brownness.
Re: (Score:2)
Ah yes. Different school shooting...
Re: School shootings are not a killing spree (Score:2)
the only people who thought that were (Score:2, Insightful)
Violent videogames almost certainly REDUCE violent crime. So much easier to massacre a school of children virtually. You don't have to get off the couch or stop shoveling cheetos into your mouth.
I'd be willing to bet several paychecks that the number of mass shootings in this country has climbed in direct proportion to the number of assa
Re:the only people who thought that were (Score:5, Informative)
I'd be willing to bet several paychecks that the number of mass shootings in this country has climbed in direct proportion to the number of assaults rifles in circulation. We practically hand them out to every psychotic 18-year old male with daddy issues,
That sounds like a reasonable thing to say if you don't know what an assault rifle is. Or, you know, basically anything about this issue at all.
Fewer kids have [access to] guns now than they used to. The number of households with guns is continually shrinking [npr.org], and guns mostly went from being stored in drawers and cabinets to being stored in lock boxes and safes over the last century.
In short, nobody is handing kids assault rifles (which are very, very expensive) and kids have way less access to guns than they used to, so your theory is predicated upon falsehoods and your opinion can safely be ignored.
Re: (Score:2)
Fewer kids have [access to] guns now than they used to. The number of households with guns is continually shrinking [npr.org], and guns mostly went from being stored in drawers and cabinets to being stored in lock boxes and safes over the last century
That's a very slanted way of looking at things. Fact is the US not only has more guns in civilian's hands than it has people but it also has more guns than any other country on earth including in legitimate war zones. The country next closest to us is that current hell hole Yemen which still only comes in at only 1 gun for every two citizens.
With that many guns floating around they're bound to fall into all sorts of peoples hands including children's. Hence our outrageous (for a first world nation) homicide
Re:the only people who thought that were (Score:5, Insightful)
Fewer kids have [access to] guns now than they used to. The number of households with guns is continually shrinking [npr.org], and guns mostly went from being stored in drawers and cabinets to being stored in lock boxes and safes over the last century
That's a very slanted way of looking at things. Fact is the US not only has more guns in civilian's hands than it has people
If the argument is that an increase in mass shootings is due to an increase in juvenile access to firearms then we have to look at whether that is true or not, and we find that it is not at all true. And that was the argument, and it was very fucking stupid. Now here you are defending it. That is also very fucking stupid. Are you very fucking stupid? Because you're acting like it.
Reducing access to guns might well reduce school shootings, but young people absolutely, definitely, conclusively by the numbers have less access to guns today than they have at any point in American history. So we know absolutely, definitely, conclusively by the numbers that what is increasing the occurrence of these shootings is fundamentally not an increase in access to firearms. Something else is causing it, and by focusing on access to firearms, or even less meaningful bullshit like total number of guns on the country, you are willfully avoiding seeking the real cause in favor of feel-good bullshit. And even if on that bullshit basis you should reduce school shootings by reducing access to firearms, you will still have that problem causing problems. It will simply be different ones. Meanwhile, it will cause problems for people who depend on those firearms, and it will be a boon to those who wish to oppress others en masse.
We do have to solve the gun violence problem. Some so-called "common sense" measures like taking guns away from perpetrators of domestic abuse are not in fact common sense anything, but ideas whose value have been proven by the scientific process. We actually know that those are people who tend to commit violent crimes, with firearms if they have them. We should pursue scientifically supported solutions to gun crime problems, or any problems. The idea that increased access to firearms is causing the school shooting problem is not supported by facts.
Re: (Score:3)
If the argument is that an increase in mass shootings is due to an increase in juvenile access to firearms then we have to look at whether that is true or not, and we find that it is not at all true. And that was the argument, and it was very fucking stupid. Now here you are defending it. That is also very fucking stupid. Are you very fucking stupid? Because you're acting like it.
Name call all you want, you're not addressing any of my points because you cant. We're awash in guns, of course they're going to end up in the hands of kids.
Re: (Score:2)
you're not addressing any of my points because you cant.
I addressed your point, which was wrong.
You failed to recognize that it was wrong, and now you're doubling down on it, which is stupid.
If you want to choose to espouse arguments which are stupid and wrong, that's your prerogative.
Re: (Score:2)
No, you simply wont admit that abundance increases accessibility.
Take alcohol. Kids don't have problems getting it because it's everywhere.
Re: (Score:2)
No, you simply wont admit that abundance increases accessibility.
It literally does not increase kids' access to guns, period. It may increase criminals' access to guns, but these kids are mostly not getting the guns illegally, so that has nothing to do with this.
You clearly do not want a solution because you are not interested in facts, and you can't come up with a working one by thinking or praying that you're doing the right thing. You have to do research, you can't run on imagination.
Re: (Score:3)
It literally does not increase kids' access to guns, period. It may increase criminals' access to guns, but these kids are mostly not getting the guns illegally, so that has nothing to do with this.
What? "Guns can fall into the hands of criminals but they cant possibly fall into the hands of children". How do you not see how completely absurd that statement is?
You clearly do not want a solution because you are not interested in facts, and you can't come up with a working one by thinking or praying that you're doing the right thing. You have to do research, you can't run on imagination.
Hahaha, you get pathetic when you don't have a leg to stand on. Lots of name calling and false characterizations. I can see why the conservatives on Slashdot make fun of you. I mean if you were really making a fact based argument you'd be citing actual facts and sources rather than making vague arguments like "kids have a harder time getting gu
Re: (Score:2)
What? "Guns can fall into the hands of criminals but they cant possibly fall into the hands of children". How do you not see how completely absurd that statement is?
Kids don't have big piles of money to buy illegal guns, so they don't get the guns from the same sources as the criminals. How do you not see that your ideas have to make sense in the real world?
Lots of name calling and false characterizations.
There's nothing false about saying you're not interested in facts when you're proving it by making unsupported assertions which are trivially disproven by factual evidence.
Re: (Score:2)
Kids don't have big piles of money to buy illegal guns, so they don't get the guns from the same sources as the criminals. How do you not see that your ideas have to make sense in the real world?
As if criminals dont get guns by stealing them as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh and by the way, guns are not stored any where near as safely as you're desperately trying to make out.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Re: (Score:2)
Oops, wrong post.
Re: (Score:2)
Oh and by the way, guns are not stored any where near as safely as you're desperately trying to make out.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p [nih.gov]... [nih.gov]
Re: (Score:3)
Here's the proper link. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/p... [nih.gov]
Doing too many things at once here...
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Your second assertion, even if true, does not support your first. That assumes that kids have access to guns primarily through their own household. Has a study been done that actually examines childrens' access to guns? I would argue that it's increased, as the
Re: (Score:2)
Has a study been done that actually examines childrens' access to guns?
That's a good question, and one I don't have an answer for. There have been a lot of studies on the results of children's access to guns, and I would hope that among some of these studies you could find a link to that information. I am not going to look for it at this time, but it is an interesting question. However, we have good reason to believe that juvenile access to firearms is overall decreasing. For example, we know that reducing access to firearms decreases firearm-related injuries [jamanetwork.com] in general. We co
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at averages does not mean there is no problem.
You can walk in a store and get AR-15 or AK 47 in less than 30 mins for a few thousand bucks.
Could 18 year old do that 50 years ago ?
May be the average kid (whatever that means) has less access. But the few outlier individuals are finding it easy.
It is like saying oh the rich are suffering because the average buying power of the population has gone down. You should look for a job at the NRA or some political parties selling logical sounding non-sense
Re: (Score:2)
Looking at averages does not mean there is no problem.
You can walk in a store and get AR-15 or AK 47 in less than 30 mins for a few thousand bucks.
Could 18 year old do that 50 years ago ?
He could get another gun that did the same thing as a semi-auto-only AR- or AK-pattern rifle but didn't look quite as scary, yes, absolutely. Literally no question, in roughly as many states as now that was absolutely possible. Did it have the full pistol grip, and was it black with tacticool multiple mounting rails? Nope. It was definitely not as sexy. But your hypothetical teen absolutely could get a semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine, and the ammunition to go with it.
May be the average kid (whatever that means) has less access. But the few outlier individuals are finding it easy.
From what I understan
Re: (Score:2)
I'd be willing to bet several paychecks that the number of mass shootings in this country has climbed in direct proportion to the number of assaults rifles in circulation. We practically hand them out to every psychotic 18-year old male with daddy issues,
That sounds like a reasonable thing to say if you don't know what an assault rifle is. Or, you know, basically anything about this issue at all.
Fewer kids have [access to] guns now than they used to. The number of households with guns is continually shrinking [npr.org], and guns mostly went from being stored in drawers and cabinets to being stored in lock boxes and safes over the last century.
In short, nobody is handing kids assault rifles (which are very, very expensive) and kids have way less access to guns than they used to, so your theory is predicated upon falsehoods and your opinion can safely be ignored.
I think the "dad's gun" argument is a bit old as well.
The Uvalde shooter used his own guns. He was able to buy two assault rifles (I believe $2000 a piece) with zero checks and over the counter and in all likelihood, with no money down on store credit. He didn't need $4000 in available funds.
The problem isn't that all gun owners in the US are irresponsible (some are, most aren't, like much of the potentially dangerous things we can own in life). It's the US gun industry that is irresponsible. When it
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, really? Can you give me some examples, or were you just making that up to support your claim that the number of assault rifles in circulation is constantly rising. For that matter, do you have any facts to back that up as well?
Re: (Score:2)
Heres one: https://www.rand.org/research/ [rand.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Approximately 84% of Americans believe in mandatory background checks before purchasing guns. At this point, it's hard to believe that 84% of this country can agree on anything. This has been the case for at least a decade, so in a representative democracy how is it possible that our representatives haven't enacted a law that enforces something with such overwhelming support. We all know the answer and i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
You need available guns to have mass shootings, but the root cause of mass shootings is people who need pragmatic mental health care. These people shouldn't be that hard to find in schools and workplaces, and the appropriate counseling, assistance, and if necessary, containment should be used to deal with them, and/or others who may be identified as causes of their problems.
And in dealing with the "others", I mean addressing the causes of bullying, hazing, and other "normal" disrespectful behavior. If the
mass shootings (Score:5, Informative)
Mass shootings are so rare that it's hard to say anything definitive about them, other than something is wrong with their head.
Do most mass shooters play video games? The answer is yes, but most people who play video games don't become mass shooters. The same can be said for drinking water.
We do know there's a link to domestic violence [efsgv.org].
We also know school shooters are frequently suicidal, as they are approaching a massive life-change where suddenly they are unsupported and need to make decisions for themselves. This is a life-change where a lot of people commit suicide, and helping people make that transition could save a lot of people from killing themselves, as well as other people.
Re: (Score:2)
Mass shootings are so rare
Only in Australia where they got sick of them and took action against them. In the USA we may as well just run the numbers along side the stock ticker in the news.
Re: (Score:2)
It's indeed important to distinguish between the types of shooting that are happening. A gang shooting will have a different solution than a murder-suicide.
Rather than speculate (Score:2)
Let's have extensive government funded research into the causes of gun violence and potential mitigations. At least proportionate to the funding for investigation of other public safety issues.
Is it losing steam, though? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
, it was chiefly to point out the hypocrisy of Hollywood on the subject, but it still looked like a strong argument that movies do influence mass shooters.
No, it didn't. It looked like a strong argument that it's reasonable to believe that, though.
A strong argument that something is actually happening is made by presenting evidence, not making shit up.
I actually watch Bill regularly, but I thought that was some ignorant fuckery. But I do think that about what he says from time to time. Other times, I agree with him... but this was not one of those.
People keep trying to prove a link between different types of media and different types of antisocial behavior, a
Re: (Score:2)
Yet there's very little mass shootings in most parts of the world.
Something similar goes for psychotropic medication. And while it's here not billions of people who take them, there's still a large number all over the planet and again, with very little mass shootings in most of those parts.
So if video games and or movies play a role, or psychotropic medication, the other popular scapegoat, then it's not one
Zombies (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Relevant [threepanelsoul.com].
Re: (Score:2)
Dont expect it to go away though (Score:3, Informative)
I wouldnt expect this genuinely dumb claim to go away though. There are elements of our country that will say or do anything to avoid admitting that our mass ownership of guns fuels our gun violence and homicide rates which are 2-5 times as high as any other first world nation.
Not only are all of our guns not making us safer, they're making us substantially less safe but they'll never admit it.
Re: (Score:3)
I think you misunderstand. My own point is that mass owner ship of guns is one of the stupidest experiment our democracy has ever set out on and I think I made an alright of a case of that here.
Gotta wonder about the tool trolling me behind an AC handle though. You must be full of integrity!
Listening to speeches (Score:2)
Back in the 1930s and 40s .. Germans used to listen to speeches .. that directly led to them shoving 8 million people into ovens. Now think about that, the even the glorious Aryan master race figured that murdering 8 million people is cool .. all because they listened to some speeches.
And what about fire making? After doing meticulous research on the amateur level, I have noticed that every culture that got involved with using fire started to own and abuse slaves. I am talking about the Romans, Arabs, Afric
Re: (Score:2)
Back in the 1930s and 40s .. Germans used to listen to speeches .. that directly led to them shoving 8 million people into ovens. Now think about that, the even the glorious Aryan master race figured that murdering 8 million people is cool .. all because they listened to some speeches.
Yeah, the Germans voted for Nazi's because of speeches and not because the conditions of the Treaty of Versailles left Germany so impoverished that they would vote for anybody peddling easy answers.
History is not your play thing to manipulate so you can make a point.
Re: (Score:2)
So if you got a bit poorer than you are now, that excuses your allowing your neighbor to be set to a concentration camp?
Re: (Score:2)
No it does not. What's you point? That if you hear a speech that excuses your allowing your neighbor to be set to a concentration camp?
Re: (Score:2)
Did you research your link between fire and slavery fully though. I think you may find that slavery was actually around before fire (in the sense that some organism forced other members of their species to work for them). So maybe it isn't that fire causes slavery but that slavery was the reason we now have fire.*
*Of course it could just be a matter of correlation and there is no causation either way.
Reminds me of HEAT (Score:2)
Jesus wants violent video games (Score:2)
Since violent video games lead people to become violent. God needs it to find out what people can go to hell or heaven. Without the violent videogame, God would be clueless as to whether someone should be allowed into heaven. I mean, for example, we'd still think Elon Musk was Anakin, not Darth Vader if the fear of losing Tesla because of Covid hadn't happened. He switched from supporting universal health care and UBI to becoming a right-wing extremist Trump/DeSantis supporter.
Anyway, my point is that God n
If Diablo Immortal provokes a bank robbery (Score:2)
will that count?
Why do people care about mass shootings? (Score:2)
The last time I looked up the stats something like a 9/11 worth of successful murder attempts has taken place each and every quarter in the US for decades. Dozens without fail every single day.
What I don't understand is why people seem to care more about concentrated deaths than diffuse deaths? Are people who die in the same place and time as others worth more than places and times where only one person dies?
What is the societal value of the persistent attention to mass deaths while paying less attention
Re: (Score:2)
It seems ... (Score:2)
The Argument That Video Games Spur Mass Shootings Is Losing Steam
Was there a documentary in steam... (Score:2)
... about video games spuring mass shootings?
Is steam discontinuing said documentary?
"declining church attendance" (Score:2)
Are these the same churches that sang pandemic viruses into each other's faces to prove how much they love people? The same places where the pastors that talk summarily executing gay people? Where they glorify the greediest, most unchristlike man who ever lived as the new Cyrus and their savior? Yeah, right, those places are where shooters are born and encouraged. Get out of here with your moralizing until you can prove you have a shred of morality in you.
Social media and the internet. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Idle hands are the Devil's workshop. The Internet/WWW/Web2.0 is a multiplier.
video games cause hemorrhoids (Score:2)
Millions of people are using their smartphone while they poop, and it is causing people to develop hemorrhoids. Seriously, just do your business in there and get out. There is no need for everyone to tie up the restroom at work for an extra 30 minutes. And doctors are concerned how this may be affecting your health.
That guy (Score:2)
Losing Steam? (Score:2)
Does it gain Origin, or Uplay? Does it get an Itch?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Considering the number of people killed in the name of religions, including the ongoing invasion of Ukraine by its Christian neighbor, not to mention the horribly inventive ways people were killed by religious folks because of one reason or another, your comment is on point.
There are even Christians today who say gays should be shot on sight, which of course dovetails neatly with their little book which says do to others as you would have them do to you.
Re: (Score:2)
There are even Christians today who say gays should be shot on sight, which of course dovetails neatly with their little book which says do to others as you would have them do to you.
Yes, but unfortunately we don't get to hold them to their religious beliefs, and do to them whatever they do to others. That's still illegal, which arguably is government restraint of religious beliefs :D
Re: (Score:2)
Considering the number of people killed in the name of religions, including the ongoing invasion of Ukraine by its Christian neighbor
I've heard a great number of shifting excuses for the invasion of Ukraine. Exactly zero of them had squat to do with religion.
https://abcnews.go.com/Interna... [go.com]
In fact as far as I understand it not being religious myself the Russian Orthodox community in particular around the world has responded overwhelmingly negatively to Russian aggression.
There are even Christians today who say gays should be shot on sight, which of course dovetails neatly with their little book which says do to others as you would have them do to you.
Anyone can find people today who are saying whatever fits their preferred narrative. They are all over the Internet and thanks to the miracle of modern technology but
Re: (Score:2)
Russia is a Christian country about as much as it is a democratic country.
Re: (Score:2)
That isn't to say that their Christianity has anything to do with what's going on in Ukraine, but if the grandparent was attempting to point out that Christians are hypocrites, then well, "duh".
Re: If anything more church attendance is bad. (Score:2)
One could just as easily claim Putin invaded on the left wing premise that everybody who disagrees with him is a Nazi.
Although Putin mobilises the religious hierarchy to his service, this isn't a religious war any more than it's about male pattern baldness.
Re: (Score:2)
From a personal perspective I definitely agree but on the other hand it seems deifnitely true that problems are arising because we haven't formed some sort of replacement for it from a community perspective. The thing with religion is it kinda forces you to attend and thereforce socialize somewhat with the people around you. Overall I agree less religion has a lot of positive outcomes but there are some negative ones.
Re: (Score:2)
Religion offers answers without evidence, and insist that belief is an act of obedience that comes with rewards (which you don't get until after you die, so again there is no proof). Maybe people are simply wising-up. I don't know. But at best this is a shaky foundation for a culture of educated people. And, of course, it comes with a price tag.
The family unit is breaking down because it is now all cost and risk with very little (if any) reward. The "divorce revolution" has changed the deal: getting ma
Re: If anything more church attendance is bad. (Score:2)
Sure and for some that's bad, but not all and not even a majority of we if we are being honest.
I definitely prefer a secular society with secular community institutions but we definitely do not have those to the same degree or in the ubiquitous fashion we did with churches. We can't just say they had no positive value in community cohesion, acknowledge it and try to replace that role with something less toxic.
One thing is for sure is that internet is definitely not it.
Re: (Score:2)
The internet is a reflection of us, just like society is. Everything stupid or corrupt in our societies is because we are stupid or corrupt. Unfortunately the tail wags the dog and vice versa. Whether it's politicians picking winners while investing in them (or just insider trading) or it's potholes not getting fixed in your neighborhood or people getting blown up for profit it's because we allow it.
Re: If anything more church attendance is bad. (Score:2)
I'm not saying anything more than church was a strong community builder in societies, especially in large parts of America. As we have become more secular that he's receded with nothing really to replace it. As we ask why people today are feeling more disjointed and cut off from society I think that plays a part. It's far from the only thing but I think it's a factor that must be considered.
I'm an atheist so I don't believe virtuousness comes from that but having strong connections with ones community le
Re: Well... times have changed... (Score:2)