Murder Inspired by Violent Video Game: Article Inspired by Stupid Media 
<a href=http://apocalypse-nwo.cf>http://apocalypse-nwo.cf</a> 
If you think the greater reactionary aspects of the media then you will understand that video gaming are responsible for all sorts of violent behavior and many much talked about murders. Why do these so-called journalists ignore other factors? Why are video games this easy target? 
The latest lurid headlines to hit the newsstands blaming game titles for violence concern the situation of Ryan Donovan. This Royal Navy sailor shot a police officer dead and experimented with kill three more crew mates. He used an SA80 rifle that they was issued with for sentry duty. The prosecutor claimed Donovan was drunk when he volunteered for sentry duty after having a two day drinking binge and which he was resentful after being admonished for disobeying orders to completely clean area of the submarine he was serving on. Apparently he discussed killing people before as well as told another crewmate that he would definitely kill someone when he returned for duty. 
So we have a disgruntled, mentally unstable man beneath the results of alcohol issued using a gun. Naturally the tabloids reported it as a 'Grand Theft Auto Massacre". This tenuous link was made because he discussed GTA kill sprees in the past also it opened this issue up to the media to drag out their usual unfounded claims about GTA inciting violence. 
The multi-million selling Grand Theft Auto series is a huge prime target for people planning to lay the blame for violence and murder in the feet of video games. The attorney, Jack Thompson, has led a crusade against GTA and been involved in several lawsuits seeking damages from your makers and marketers in the games. He loves to describe GTA as being a 'murder simulator". He also loves to exploit the grief of victim's families to drum up hatred of violent games. Despite his efforts to make out that GTA and also other violent video gaming are responsible for killings he's got yet to win some of these frivolous suits. 
Even the recent London riots had some papers claiming the looting and violence was inspired by GTA. The Evening Standard stood a blurb stating "Children as little as ten, inspired by gaming, one of many looters" but later retracted it after outrage within the games media. 
This phenomenon is not new -- video gaming are simply the most recent target. Rock 'n roll music was once blamed for promiscuity and violence. Comic books were blamed for juvenile delinquency. Violent films tend to be blamed for murders. In fact violent films and rap music still get blamed for inciting violence quite often though the hottest target nowadays is definitely game titles. 
Usually individuals who're so quick the culprit a motion picture or video game for some violent act are unfamiliar with the items in it. Their ignorance finds loud and clear in the ridiculous claims they create. The fact that thousands of people enjoy these mediums without ever committing violence is very ignored. 
If something awful happens it's a natural human response to seek a contributing factor, to locate something or someone the culprit. It is obviously more palatable for many people at fault a computer game than to ask queries about the mental health of the aggressor and society's failure to realize or treat it. Parenting and childhood, entry to and training with guns, alcohol and drug problems, bullying and also the prevalence of violence inside real world might be happily overlooked if we can just blame the whole lot on Call of Duty. 
Ultimately it always is dependant on the person. There are invariably many root causes contributing to people committing violent acts. The specific form of that violent act may be influenced by something they saw inside a game or a movie or even something they read or heard. The proven fact that these were perfectly normal or healthy, played a game after which became a rampant murderer is beyond ridiculous. Does anyone really believe? 
The most evocative media links between violence and video gaming always involve children. They are potentially more susceptible to influence and may not need this kind of strong knowledge of right and wrong. Overlooking the belief that this discredits children's intelligence we do offer an age rating system in position. Unless we wish a global where the only entertainment available is deemed suitable for children only then do we can't blame developers for making a sport for adults which may possess a negative affect on kids. It is as much as retailers and, moreover, parents to make sure that children don't get their hands on adult game titles. 
Unless we wish to introduce more censorship and begin banning something that offends some part of society we have to defend free expression. 
The proven fact that kids aren't exposed to violence is very false anyway. TV is rife with violence. The same media that hysterically condemns games will happily report the lurid information every violent act that hits their radar. Whether we like it or otherwise not violence can be a section of human life and seeking to hide it from kids as if it does not exist won't help their development. Video games actually allow children to try out violence in a very safe environment. 
It is interesting to make note of that particular part of video gaming that does appear to increase aggression is competition. It is not the violent content. People of every age group can fly into a rage if they're beaten at a game title, be it football, monopoly or perhaps a first-person shooter. Competitive sports cause a lot of violence and there has been a huge debate raging by what age it is okay for the kids to compete at and perhaps the competitive nature of numerous sports is negative. 
Of course it can be best to remain cautious with studies involving relatively small numbers of gamers. There have been various studies on the possible outcomes of gaming, the hyperlink with violence, the thought of gaming addiction and in many cases the idea that games blur real-life boundaries. It doesn't actually appear they report as the media agenda for many was already set and they also simply extract the info that supports their argument and disregard the rest. 
The bastion of reactionary stupidity that it really is the Daily Mail was quick to suggest that games prompt violent methods to real-life situations following a recent set of 'Games Transfer Phenomenon". The Metro took a similar line. As reported on Spong, Professor Griffiths, the co-author of the report was quick to deny the claims and explained that some of the media had misrepresented the information. 
"The Metro, they obviously had plans - because all <the>reporter] said was that he simply wanted to learn about the negative stuff. I told him that the paper was primarily positive, or at least neutral. He said 'I don't want to know about that, I want to know the negative stuff.' So I just underwent what we did, might know about found and what we should are doing next." 
It must be obvious to everyone that games don't kill people, people kill people. The idea that games are responsible for your fall of our youth is often a recurring generational indisputable fact that is stamped on new types of entertainment by those who don't understand them or parts of society who want to ban everything that offends them. The negative reporting on games is simply a cheap way to create an attention-grabbing headline with an excuse for more with the slavering scare-mongering that some sections in the media appear to be focused on.