Another day, another crackpot blaming violence on video games.
17-year old Daniel Petric was recently found guilty of shooting his parents over Halo 3 – and no, the dispute wasn’t over who stuck the best plasma grenade. I don’t really care too much about Daniel, as anyone who could shoot a gun at his parents is sick and twisted (his mom died, for frak’s sake!), but I do care about Judge James Burge’s idiot comments (transcript courtesy of gamepolitics.com):
This Court’s opinion is that we don’t know enough about these video games. In this particular case, not so much the violence of the game because I believe in the Halo 3, what it amounts to is a contest to see who can shoot the most aliens who attack.
It’s my firm belief that after a while the same physiological responses occur that occur in the ingestion of some drugs. And I believe that an addiction to these games can do the same thing. The dopamine surge, the stimulation of the nucleus accumbens – the same as an addiction. Such that when you stop, your brain won’t stand for it.
The other dangerous thing about these games, in my opinion, is that when these changes occur, they occur in an environment that is delusional. Because you can shoot these aliens, and they’re there again the next day. You have to shoot them again. And I firmly believe that Daniel Petric had no idea, at the time he hatched this plot, that if he killed his parents, they would be dead forever.
What really catapults this into the crackpotopshere is the notion that the body reacts to video games the way it reacts to drugs.
Uh WHAT?! I wish!
You want to have a conversation about video games causing violence? OK. Bring movies, music, and TV to the table, too, and I’d be glad to tell you why you’re wrong. Until then I’m just going to scoff and be snarky at you.
via IGN