[Cherie]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

Yeah, but if a kid is misbehaving to such an extent then there's obviously something seriously wrong and the problem won't lie with what games they're playing.

Blaming games is a scapegoat and by doing it people are ignoring the real issues at hand.

No its not scapegoating, its been well documented that some children are heavily influenced by what they watch or play Jamie Bulger's killers being a case in point, if it saves one child from his fate I don't see the issue really.

[lily.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

No its not scapegoating, its been well documented that some children are heavily influenced by what they watch or play Jamie Bulger's killers being a case in point, if it saves one child from his fate I don't see the issue really.

I think there might have been more to the Jamie Bulger murderers than videogames. You do realise the type of home they lived in, right? There was a pattern of child neglect. Videogames were not the big problem.

[Kazanne]

Originally Posted by lily.

I think there might have been more to the Jamie Bulger murderers than videogames. You do realise the type of home they lived in, right? There was a pattern of child neglect. Videogames were not the big problem.

There may have been more to James murder,but,a certain video game played a part that is fact,as for their home lives ,they were no different than thousands of other children,the one came from a broken home,the ones father liked a drink,I know what kids see influences them,I've seen it with my own eyes.I can see nothing wrong with schools pointing out the dangers of some videos.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

There may have been more to James murder,but,a certain video game played a part that is fact,as for their home lives ,they were no different than thousands of other children,the one came from a broken home,the ones father liked a drink,I know what kids see influences them,I've seen it with my own eyes.I can see nothing wrong with schools pointing out the dangers of some videos.

At best games can be a trigger but ANYTHING can be a trigger. Blaming games is just moronic. A smell or a colour or a certain sight could trigger a killer to kill. Do you just want to ban everything just in case and hope that the absence of a trigger isn't in itself a trigger?

[Mystic Mock]

Originally Posted by Kazanne

There may have been more to James murder,but,a certain video game played a part that is fact,as for their home lives ,they were no different than thousands of other children,the one came from a broken home,the ones father liked a drink,I know what kids see influences them,I've seen it with my own eyes.I can see nothing wrong with schools pointing out the dangers of some videos.

I bet that even if you asked them seriously on who messed them up they would say it was the parents.

Video Games can make you more immune to violence, but it does not make you a killer, otherwise when I played GTA at age 7 I would've become a killer by now.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Cherie

No its not scapegoating, its been well documented that some children are heavily influenced by what they watch or play Jamie Bulger's killers being a case in point, if it saves one child from his fate I don't see the issue really.

No, it's absolving someone of their guilt.

'Oh it's not their fault they killed someone, the game made them do it'

**** that **** and **** anyone who believes it. the killers are to blame for Jamie Bulger's death, nothing else.

Blaming games is just an excuse for parents not to do any actual parenting.

[Ramsay]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

No, it's absolving someone of their guilt.

'Oh it's not their fault they killed someone, the game made them do it'

**** that **** and **** anyone who believes it. the killers are to blame for Jamie Bulger's death, nothing else.

Blaming games is just an excuse for parents not to do any actual parenting.

Yes, yes and yes! so much truth

[Cherie]

Originally Posted by lily.

I think there might have been more to the Jamie Bulger murderers than videogames. You do realise the type of home they lived in, right? There was a pattern of child neglect. Videogames were not the big problem.

Originally Posted by Dezzy

No, it's absolving someone of their guilt.

'Oh it's not their fault they killed someone, the game made them do it'

**** that **** and **** anyone who believes it. the killers are to blame for Jamie Bulger's death, nothing else.

Blaming games is just an excuse for parents not to do any actual parenting.

The games are a side issue it will focus the attention on the parents and what is going on at home which again I think is a good thing. If as you say most kids can separate fact from fiction that is great but for the small minority who can't and who display inappropriate behaviour and whose parents do not want to take responsibility for their upbringing I see no issue.

[lily.]

Originally Posted by Cherie

The games are a side issue it will focus the attention on the parents and what is going on at home which again I think is a good thing. If as you say most kids can separate fact from fiction that is great but for the small minority who can't and who display inappropriate behaviour and whose parents do not want to take responsibility for their upbringing I see no issue.

The issue is this:

"'Primary school headteachers have warned parents who allow their children to play video games such as Call Of Duty and Grand Theft Auto will be reported to police and social services for neglect."

All parents will be reported for neglect, regardless of any other factors. Lumping good parents in with bad, instead of focusing on those who need intervention.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by lily.

The issue is this:

"'Primary school headteachers have warned parents who allow their children to play video games such as Call Of Duty and Grand Theft Auto will be reported to police and social services for neglect."

All parents will be reported for neglect, regardless of any other factors. Lumping good parents in with bad, instead of focusing on those who need intervention.

There is no 'good' and 'bad' in this instance.

If you allow your child to play the game then by definition that is against their policy in the eyes of the school.

[Tom4784]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

There is no 'good' and 'bad' in this instance.

If you allow your child to play the game then by definition that is against their policy in the eyes of the school.

It's no ****ing business of the school's what a kid gets up to in their own time.

What's next, are they going to insist on dictating what the pupils have for meals at home? What activities they get up to on Holidays and weekends? Should they just insist on moving a teacher into every household to take over parenting duties? Let parents be ****ing parents.

It's micromanaging when they have no business doing so. The Schools should only intervene if there's something seriously wrong, not just because they don't like that kids play video games.

[RichardG]

Originally Posted by Dezzy

No, it's absolving someone of their guilt.

'Oh it's not their fault they killed someone, the game made them do it'

**** that **** and **** anyone who believes it. the killers are to blame for Jamie Bulger's death, nothing else.

Blaming games is just an excuse for parents not to do any actual parenting.

If you remove the video games then it becomes the fault of that movie they watched or that tv show they love. Aggressive people existed before technology and aggressive people continue to exist today, now they just have an excuse!

[Crimson Dynamo]

Originally Posted by Cherie

No its not scapegoating, its been well documented that some children are heavily influenced by what they watch or play Jamie Bulger's killers being a case in point, if it saves one child from his fate I don't see the issue really.

locking a;ll children in jails will reduce cases like Bulger and will drastically reduce the number of children killed outside by cars, rivers etc