Because violence is good.

We have MUCH more to fear societally from Britney Spears and rampant promiscuity than we do violence. As far as I'm concerned, there's not ENOUGH violence, especially in the USA and Europe. I'm quite worried about the phenomenon I'm seeing of internet nerds thinking that they can handle violence when they haven't felt it in real life, though. Breeds sociopathy.

I'd rather kill sociopaths all day than be a millionaire. Though ideally, I'd become a millionaire getting paid for killing sociopaths all day.

Ice2SeeYou wrote:

Because I'm 28 years old, and don't give a fuck what some stupid cunt of a soccer mom doesn't want her kids to play.

We'd be far better off if we had more cunt soccer moms, honestly. Those are the parents that your argument says every parent should be like.

Apathy is the new American disease.

Ice2SeeYou wrote:

The way I see it, if she was a cunt to her kids by simply not letting them play the games she doesn't like, she'd be less of a cunt to the gaming public. It basically comes down to where the cuntacity is projected.

Well, it would seem logical that if said cunt wanted them banned, she wouldn't let her kids play them, no?

She's not concerned with her own kids, she's worried about others. Not a horrible trait, just very misplaced as pertains to this particular issue. I don't agree with banning violent games, because they're just games. However, I don't feel that the "well, if your kid does something bad, it's you that's the bad parent; ergo, your complaints are bullshit and we should just leave everything be" argument is logically sound. That would work great if you lived in a vacuum. However, we live in a society. What your neighbors do DOES affect you. And visa versa.

I don't agree with laissez-faire, because I know how goddamn stupid people can be. Unfortunately, I can't agree with socialism either, because the government cannot be trusted. Catch-22, like so many others.

Ice2SeeYou wrote:

It's fine to be concerned for your own kids, and if you want to create awareness among other parents on a certain issue, that's fine too. My problem is when these parents try to take the games away from everyone, including adults. That's where it crosses the line. It's my divine right as an adult to play whatever types of games I want. I realize that what you do does affect your neighbor. But we're not talking about running a brothel in your backyard, or fishing with dynamite. We're talking about videogames. You parents can run your own households however you want. But you sure as hell don't run mine.

Do note that I agree with you, I don't think video games should be banned. I think it's a stupid issue, really. I'm simply pondering about the logic and reasoning behind the arguments given about this and other issues.

Ice2SeeYou wrote:

"Ignorantia juris non excusat." Ignorance of the law does not excuse a person for breaking it.

I've always despised that saying. If you didn't know it was a law, how is it your fault if you break it unknowingly? You had no ill intent as far as the law goes. Things like that are why I much prefer common law to statutory. There's more common sense in common law, haha.

Legally of course, it's absolutely true. But morally, ethically?

Quote:

Thus, ignorance of what you're buying for your children doesn't mean it's not your fault as a parent.....especially in the internet age. 10 seconds of googling should be enough to determine if a game is appropriate for your 8-year-old.

True. It all comes back to apathy.