I Bet WE Get Blamed For This...

It's happened again.

Another psychopath decided to go on a shooting rampage, killing 32 people, including himself at Virginia tech.

It won't be long before they go to the gunman's house, find an Xbox and a copy of Halo or GTA, and the Jack Thompson's of the world will start blaming the shooting on video games. Of course, the fact that the majority of American households have some form of gaming console or computer won't factor into it. The politicians will use this to 'prove' one point. Games kill people. Then they'll ride the wave of moral panic to makes sure they get lots of votes and TV time.

[Edit - I just looked through Digg. Jack Thompson has already blamed the shootings on video games. Isn't it amazing that he knows games are responsible despite the gunman's identity hasn't even been released yet? That shmuck must scour the news every day just hoping for a shooting]

This is an argument that's been voiced over and over, so I'll try to keep it brief.

Let's just say that is actually was a violent video-game that set this guy off. Does that prove video games are a direct cause of violence?

No. It doesn't. What this proves is that this guy was obviously mentally disturbed, and if it wasn't a video game that set him off, a movie or a book or someone looking at him the wrong way would have done the same thing.

It's time for some sledgehammer math.

GTA : San Andreas has sold well over 14 million copies. In US history there have been around 13 cases of extreme (read - lethal) violence in the USA that have been linked to video games. (Just to be clear, by 'linked' we mean the perpetrator owned a gaming console...not actual solid evidence).

So despite all the media furor over GTA, the figures show that fewer than one in a million gamers, that's one thousandth of one percent, have played GTA and gone on to commit a violent act...and this is one game!

So, if we forget about GTA for a second, and divide the number of violent incidents (around 13) by the total number of violent games sold(millions and millions), we see that there is absolutely no causal effect between violence and violent video games.

Long story short, when you make a judgment based on evidence rather than by listening to some idiot trying to get on TV by making outlandish and unproven comments, the chances of a video game making someone go on a shooting rampage is literally a one in a billion chance.

In other words, blaming games for a shooting is as statistically plausible as blaming cheese for reckless driving...after all, a huge percentage of people who have been arrested for reckless driving had also eaten cheese at some point in their life. See, direct correlation! Let's ban cheese!

It's absurd. The fact that someone who went on a shooting rampage also owned a games console is not evidence. Why not look at their movie collection? The fact they also collected stamps? Made aircraft models? Liked photography?

All these shootings prove is that there is a tiny percentage of psychotic individuals in the USA, who through emotional or mental problems will go on a rampage for no good reason. There's no major moral panic or causal factor that people can blame, other than the fact that some people just aren't right in the head.

The funniest thing about all this is that history constantly repeats itself.

In the 1930's Jazz music was going to be the downfall of society. In the 40's it was pulp comic books. In the 50's and 60's it was rock and roll. In the 70's it was Acid house and rave music. 80's it was home video and the 90's Hip-hop and rap. In the 2000's, it's video games.

In conclusion, let me tell you a quick story.

A few years ago, in the UK, there was a storyline on a popular soap opera (Coronation Street, to be exact), where Gail Tinsley's boyfriend locked her and her children in a car, locked the doors and tried to drive the car into a river.

Less than a week later, the Mirror newspaper ran a story about a guy who tried to do exactly the same thing to his girlfriend and her kids.

The funniest thing? Absolutely no-one made a connection. Why? Because Coronation Street does not fall into so-called 'Youth Culture'. Yet when someone shoots up a school or college, it seems the fact that he may have played a video game at some point in the past automatically counts as solid proof that video games are responsible.

Video games are simply the latest moral scapegoat. It's far easier to blame an absolute tragedy like the Virginia Tech shootings on gaming than to ask some questions and maybe accept personal responsibility.

A teenager shoots up a school and the world blames gaming. They don't ask the more difficult questions like "How did a kid get his hands on a pair of pistols?" "Why didn't his parents notice something?"

Yep, it's far easier to say "Video Games turned my child into a killer." Than. "I absolutely suck as a parent and was far too busy watching TV to notice my kid had some major emotional problems."

If you think video games are evil, don't play them. Stop your kids from playing them, or at least make sure they only play games that are age appropriate. It is not the gaming industry's responsibility to raise your kids. That's your job. So accept responsibility for it.