Forums | MacLife

I'd rather take my chances that the kid walking down the street toward me is a killer than have the government say that I can't play violent video games.

I'd rather take my chances that the kid walking down the street toward me is a killer than have the government say that I can't play violent video games.

I'd rather have the world go to hell than have the government say I can't play violent video games...

but that's just me. 

"If you had paid any attention," you'd notice I didn't even disagree with you.  At least, not if our posts are to be read literally.

yackity shmackity, blah blah bahbliddy blah ...

You talk pretty.

The Sims taught me to flush the toilet after taking a dump.

The Civilization series taught me that genocide is fun (and nuclear terrorism is good for a few laughs)

I love UT and GTA3. Yet I have never killed anyone. Go figure.

Yeah and what did we do back then... well guess what, we can't do it now... so please, get a clue yourself... your Nazi ramblings and your outdated sources are about as helpful as a case of Hemorrhoids.

I think we need a Max emoticon with a dunce cap to properly respond to posts like this.

Yup, and your first in line for it.

Cyberpawz

To a post that merely restates something already said which was of little merit the first time it was disseminated.

Poor Neutron, unable to comprehend simple analogies.


wait, what?

I demonstrated, via good examples, that the idea that parents are not necessarily the omnipotent omnipresent moral guides that many posters here think they are. (This is all repetition, since some obviously can't comprehend things unless they're repeated several times. Pay attention.)

In those examples, parents clearly acted amorally. Not only are some parents capable of acting amorally and allowing such action to socialize their children, entire societies can be dominated by amoral behavior. The question, then, where are the parents? is quite ironic.

How can anyone fail to grasp the fact that when parents are capable of gathering with children to watch a "town" lynching that we can't rely solely on the idea of parents as being the moral authority which will socialize children to the degree in which they will be healthy and moral?

As I already said, the question boils down to government management of behavior vs. private management of behavior. I have demonstrated that sometimes the government needs to take over. A good example, which I already provided, is that lynching behavior. Further, it required governments, not parents, to stop the Nazis and the Taliban.

I could go on repeating myself, but I shall not. Continue to spin this discussion in circles if you wish.

Did you miss a quote tag or something there?

I know parents are not all knowing and not always perfect moral compasses. Honestly, I'm not able to discuss this right now. So I'll just say that I think that parents have much more responsibility in raising a child than the government, and then shut up for a bit.

note that 4 of the 6 people involved in this crime spree are 20 and older.  where does parental guidance end?

should every parent be checking on their 26 year old daughter or son to see if they are planning on going on a large shooting spree?

your whole country has a massive problem with availabilty of weapons, and that is partly due to the gun lovers stubboness regarding any sort of legislation to make things harder for people to get guns.

Yes, note, that 4 of the kids were older than 20...

Where were these parents during their upbringing? Oh let me guess, too busy with the rat race to take care of a child they brought into the world.  They let TV, and violent video games "pacify" the kids, and turn them into hideous monsters in which the parents had no control over...right?

Give me a break.

Cyberpawz

note that 4 of the 6 people involved in this crime spree are 20 and older.  where does parental guidance end?

should every parent be checking on their 26 year old daughter or son to see if they are planning on going on a large shooting spree?

your whole country has a massive problem with availabilty of weapons, and that is partly due to the gun lovers stubboness regarding any sort of legislation to make things harder for people to get guns.

Yes, note, that 4 of the kids were older than 20...

Where were these parents during their upbringing? Oh let me guess, too busy with the rat race to take care of a child they brought into the world.  They let TV, and violent video games "pacify" the kids, and turn them into hideous monsters in which the parents had no control over...right?

Give me a break.

Cyberpawz

wait, john malvo is an adult at 17 but these people in their 20s are 'kids'?

I'm using the word "kids" here loosely...

And what I meant by the post above was pretty much, that from the time they were born to the age of 18, the parents had a very good chance to mold the child to understand what right from wrong is...

The parents failed miserably...

There are questions you ask your kid every single time they go out, and when they come in.

Going out.

Who are they going with?
Where will they be?
When will they be back?
They remember Curfew right? (set a time)
Is there a phone number I can reach you at?
(this day and age it's a given for this next question)
Do you have your Cell Phone with you?
And is it turned on and charged?
Call me if plans change ok?

Coming in.

How was (the place they went to)
What did you do there?
(if movies)  What part did you like about it, and why?
Where did you go after?
(if a place to eat)
What did you have?
(if they went someplace they didn't say they were going to)
Why didn't you call me?
(if they say the phone died)
I  thought you told me the phone was charged when you left?

From there, you have a choice if you think they are lying...*heaven for bid* punish them.

Another thing you can do, and yes it's your right as a parent... Go through their rooms, go through their pocketbooks, and wallets... go through their clothes if they are lying around in the room (easy excuse is doing laundry)

Kids until they move out of the house, have no rights unless they pay rent. Your roof, your rules.

If parents had more balls instead of wanting to "be the kids friends" they can deal with a lot less stress that way.

You still can be the kids friends, but don't let them walk all over you...

Do you think these rules are harsh?  Guess what? They aren't this is parenting... just be thankful you didn't have my father... you did anything wrong you would get a belt across the arse...there was no negotiations, it was his house, his rules, and if I didn't like it I would move.

I did, after he backed me up into a wall (more or less threw and pinned me), and wound up to punch me in the face.

Cyberpawz

How many people use heroin responsibly?

"then the claim that these awful products kill is substantially weakened."

We are all the products of genetics and socialization. Violence in our culture socializes us. It plays an important role in forming our very personality.

That role is not to be dismissed with hyperbole.

The Nazi children's books that portrayed Jews as evil mushroom people (and so forth) didn't get up an kill Jews. But, their influence is not to be underestimated.

There is a reason why we don't have Faces of Death on cable TV on Saturday mornings for kids to watch. Yet, many might actually argue that that wouldn't be a bad thing, which is appalling.

Poor Neutron, unable to comprehend simple analogies.




wait, what?

I demonstrated, via good examples, that the idea that parents are not necessarily the omnipotent omnipresent moral guides that many posters here think they are. (This is all repetition, since some obviously can't comprehend things unless they're repeated several times. Pay attention.)

In those examples, parents clearly acted amorally. Not only are some parents capable of acting amorally and allowing such action to socialize their children, entire societies can be dominated by amoral behavior. The question, then, where are the parents? is quite ironic.

How can anyone fail to grasp the fact that when parents are capable of gathering with children to watch a "town" lynching that we can't rely solely on the idea of parents as being the moral authority which will socialize children to the degree in which they will be healthy and moral?

As I already said, the question boils down to government management of behavior vs. private management of behavior. I have demonstrated that sometimes the government needs to take over. A good example, which I already provided, is that lynching behavior. Further, it required governments, not parents, to stop the Nazis and the Taliban.

I could go on repeating myself, but I shall not. Continue to spin this discussion in circles if you wish.

no, no you didnt