Definitely not pork - or is it?
|
Re: Definitely not pork - or is it?
Originally Posted by Kix
(Post 10314430)
|
Re: Definitely not pork - or is it?
Originally Posted by Kix
(Post 10314430)
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ideo-game.html |
Re: Definitely not pork - or is it?
Originally Posted by Bahtatboy
(Post 10317902)
Does that mean rational, sane adults should be deprived? No. :( |
Re: Definitely not pork - or is it?
Originally Posted by auzdafluff
(Post 10317919)
I'm not defending their actions, but they sound like sadistic little ****s, with or without playing the game. Anything could provide inspiration to their sick little minds – could have been a film, a tv show, a video game, or even a story they read.
Does that mean rational, sane adults should be deprived? No. :( |
Re: Definitely not pork - or is it?
Originally Posted by auzdafluff
(Post 10317919)
I'm not defending their actions, but they sound like sadistic little ****s, with or without playing the game. Anything could provide inspiration to their sick little minds – could have been a film, a tv show, a video game, or even a story they read.
Does that mean rational, sane adults should be deprived? No. :( |
Re: Definitely not pork - or is it?
Originally Posted by Bahtatboy
(Post 10317938)
Yeah, basically I agree with you. Not seen or played the game in question. In principle I'm against censorship, but perhaps that's based on a view from my youth when really poisonous stuff was neither really that bad nor as pervasive or easily-accessible as it is today. Should media which have no socially-redeeming attributes and may be seen by many to be glorifying violence be allowed? From an abstract viewpoint, yes (freedom of choice to make, freedom of choice to view/use), but from a societal viewpoint the thought process needs to be different.
|
Re: Definitely not pork - or is it?
Originally Posted by Beaverstate
(Post 10317946)
Agree with you completely, yet my point (weak?) still stands. Don't give these ahh losers too much attention.
And you're right Bahtatboy. It does have a age restriction and I'm hugely for them. |
Re: Definitely not pork - or is it?
Originally Posted by Bahtatboy
(Post 10317938)
Should media which have no socially-redeeming attributes and may be seen by many to be glorifying violence be allowed? From an abstract viewpoint, yes (freedom of choice to make, freedom of choice to view/use), but from a societal viewpoint the thought process needs to be different.
I recall having a similar debate about banning violent video games with an older lady who clearly wasn't a games player. In her case it was GTA IV she objected to. But why stop at video games? Got to do movies too. But then what about books? I can think of a couple of pretty old books that contain incitement to commit murder, genocide, descriptions of executions and so on. I recall one particularly nasty incident in which the main protagonist is nailed up to a cross until he dies. I am pretty sure over the past 2000 years there have been more violent evil acts by people influenced by *that* book, or others from the same author than by video games :( |
Re: Definitely not pork - or is it?
Originally Posted by captainflack
(Post 10323261)
I can think of a couple of pretty old books that contain incitement to commit murder, genocide, descriptions of executions and so on. I recall one particularly nasty incident in which the main protagonist is nailed up to a cross until he dies.
( |
All times are GMT. The time now is 1:33 am. |
Powered by vBulletin: ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.