This just in, most parents are terrible judges of what things are likely to harm their children.
Most parents seem less interest in parenting and more interested in the world making it easier for them. They’re still convinced that random acts of violence are going to harm their kid when usually its a lot closer to home and preventable.
Yeah, I bring this up constantly when people get overly alarmist about really low-risk incidents while ignoring far more common causes of fatalities. You’re worried about elementary school shootings but you don’t have a fence and locked gate preventing access to your pool? Seriously?
I have been playing violent video games for most of my life, yet I have not done what I seen in the video games. Human nature and parenting is the real problem.
If they’re so worried, why don’t they get their potty mouth kids off Xbox Live?
Are there any studies on this subject that aren’t total shit?
Yes, but they’re boring.
For that matter, for the industry take on this, Playing Columbine is pretty good.
Hey, like Stalin said: one school shooting is a tragedy; a million accidents is a statistic. Doesn’t help that the media feeds into the hysteria fueled by the former, yet largely ignores the latter.
I’d also say that the fact that “fences around pools” is an issue you can take care of pretty easily makes it less controversial than “nutjob runs into a school and kills kids.” Despite that fact that statistics say a child is more likely to die in a pool accident, people automatically assume it to be less of an emergency because the onus is on the parent to buy a fence. The solution is clear, effective, and relatively easy to implement. On the other hand, random gunmen are a mystery. We don’t even know why they happen.
I’m astounded by the results of that poll, mainly because my experience in selling both violent games and movies is that most parents either a) don’t care about violence in them and/or b) are totally clueless about what the ratings mean anyway. There is a huge disconnect between their actions and views, apparently.
Sure, but I’ve talked to parents of school-aged children who are terrified of school shootings (to the point of pulling their kids out of school and home schooling them) but don’t fence their pools. They take action to fight the millions-to-one chance and do nothing to stop a far more likely tragedy. It’s completely illogical.
Sure, it’s a moral panic.
No different from Stranger Danger. Kids being killed by strangers is rare, but there are verified cases every year of kids avoiding would-be rescuers because they’ve been trained…
Parents aren’t logical when it comes to their kids’ safety. News at 11.
I don’t want to come across as dismissive, but the fact that people get bent out of shape over a seemingly uncontrollable random act of violence, but don’t get upset over a completely curable issue shouldn’t be surprising. It’s human nature.
By the way, this is interesting: http://www.theatlanticwire.com/national/2013/01/nra-iphone-game/60973/
One month ago today, 20 first graders were killed at their elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut. Ever since, the National Rifle Association has blamed old-school video games and years-old Hollywood movies for the shootings, and the gaming industry is very much trying to defend itself. Well the NRA may have put itself back on its lobbying heels, because they introduced a crude new first-person shooter of their own for the iPhone and iPad last night, which the NRA’s mobile developers — and Apple — say is appropriate for children ages four and up. The reaction has been as swift and loud as the gameplay, which includes virtual assault rifles for purchase within the app.
72% say violence in video games make it harder to shield their child from violence? What? How about you just don’t buy violent video games for your child?
I hear these “parents” complain that they can’t keep up with the latest games so don’t know what content is in them…well, that’s just because they are stupid and lazy. Learn about the game before you buy it for your child. Seems simple to me, but apparently I’m smarter than the average bear.
I didn’t let my kids play shooters until recently. That didn’t stop them from being exposed to it constantly. School, commericals, etc. “Don’t buy them the games” is great advice that I agree with, but that’s not a great shield from glamorizing gun violence.
I’d label it stupidity, myself, which is admittedly part of human nature. If their motive is truly that they care for their kids, then parents should behave as logically as they can to protect them. That logic includes dispassionate analysis of the threat hierarchy and then taking appropriate action on that basis. Anything else subverts their stated purpose.
The same is true with almost everything. When your kids are little, elementary school, you try to shield them from inappropriate language, violence, sex etc…then you discover they already are aware of all that stuff from someone at school, or some neighbor.
You can control what comes into your own house, but there is a big wide world out there that you cannot control.
I’m not disagreeing with that. I’m pointing out that biosc1’s solution was a throwaway response to a question that wasn’t actually asked.
If the question was “Do you think your kids play too many violent games?” or “Do you wish your kids would play less video games?” his answer would be a lot more applicable.
For each of the following items, please tell us whether or not it makes shielding your children from violence difficult:
Violence in video games.
72% Makes Shielding Difficult