Kids having fun while raising funds for tsunami victims? Never!

[WackyComputer]

Students in Puyallup hoped to use a video game tournament to raise money for tsunami victims. Parents signed off on the idea, but the school district suddenly said, "game over!"

http://www.komotv.com/stories/34923.htm

[Synthohol]

:mad2::mad2::mad2:-:mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:ing dirtbag bastard scumbag sons-o-:mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:es shit eating conservitive cheeze off a dogs cock jerk-offs.
ITS JUST A :mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:ING GAME PEOPLE!!
grow the :mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2: up

dont they realize sheltering kids from things makes it more inviting and interesting?
i never tried coke, lsd, opium and weed until i watched miami vice on T.V.
my neighbors 9 year old son when i grew up, buried a couple puppies up to their head in durt and ran their heads over with a lawn mower.
and he only played super breakout. i guess they are right!
yeah right...

[Drake]

The people on TV tell me I'm going to grow up to be a bad person because I play video games :(:(:(

[edit]:dont they realize sheltering kids from things makes it more inviting and interesting?
True. I own an Xbox, but not the first Halo. I've never expressed any interest in Halo or Halo 2, but last Christmas my parents buy it for me. If the game received no bad publicity, I bet I'd not own it.

[Prometheus]

Its typical for people to blame kids for adult behaviors. I grew up with Road Runner, Bugs, all of those cartoons they took off the air for so long because they "said" it promoted violence, and now they've brought em back again? Go figure.

I cant say that all sensorship is all bad, cause if I catch my 4 year old grandson tuned in to some porn on the TV, I'm not going to blame him, I'm going for the bastards that dont care whether they infect my grandson or not by placing it on a network that can be accessed by a child at will.

I think the sensorship needs to start with the media, and make sure they tell the "truth", and not hype. Then on to the folks that like to make rules for everyone else because "they" have decided its the "ethical thing to do".

"Those", we need to sensor for the stupidity that they spill out and infect the young open minds by brainwashing them into thinking thier way is the only way to do things.

Third, sensor companies who allow porn and stuff to be accessable to children by permitting the equipment they own to be used for such things.

Dont get me wrong, I look, but I dont want a person below the age of 13 to be exposed to strong sexual content because those are formative years, and it wouldnt be good to perpetuate the idea that women are objects to be used, instead being treated as equals.

Again, dont misunderstand me, cause I'm a wild child from hell, but theres a time and a place for all things, and when your so young your mind is easaly influenced by things that may not be realistic, you cant tell the difference sometimes, and you end up repeating what you see on TV.

In any case, kids, nor the games are the culprit, its adults with about as much sense as a goose in a hail storm.

The hole things with that school sucks. They could have put an age limit on it to keep things on a somewhat even keel, but no, its all or none, just like you'd expect from a closed minded person(s).

Someones going to say something about my age comment, but heres the deal. When those same seniors age one more year, they can go kill in the name of this country, so why protect them from things they need to know now, and theres very little that can train a person to do combat other than simulations in some of these games.

So I ask, you wont let them play a game today ya buttheads, but tomorrow you wont mind sending them off to some country we have no buisness trying to run in the first place, to give thier lives for "you :mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:in chicken shit losers" who want to do nothing but control other peoples worlds?

Get a life all you narrow minded people, and stop trying to tell parents how to raise thier kids. They dont belong to you!!! Your a temporary nanny is all, not a god!

[Prometheus]

One more comment.


The morality of our species lies on the backs of all of us, not just a chosen few.

Get outa my yard ya pricks, and let my kids alone!!! I TEACH THEM WHATS IMPORTANT ABOUT LIFE, NOT YOU. YOU ONLY GUILD THEM TO THE WATER, ITS "MY" FINAL WORD THAT WILL MAKE THEM DRINK OR NOT, NOT YOURS!!!

[Nut]

Really it all has to do with lawyers. There's always one parent who would go ballistic about a school who let kids play a video game where there is simulated violence and sue the school system because there child was "hurt" by such graphic pictures and will now have to see a shrink five times a week for the rest of their lives. Crap like this makes me sick.

Every day more and more of our rights are being abused and taken away. This used to be a free Country. I remember in grade school that me and all my friends would bring cap guns to school and play at recess with them. Never did we get in trouble. Nowadays kids are being expelled for drawing a picture of a gun. Go figure? I guess they think if someone sees a picture of a gun some kid might faint and hurt themselves and the parents sue the school for letting kids draw pictures. Or maybe seeing a picture of a gun will make the child crazed and a threat to themselves so the parents sue.

I'm gonna go play some CoD:UA and plant a few M-1 rounds through some Germans.
I hope that doesn't make me crazy :)

[Prometheus]

Lawyers are a big contributing factor, but if you dont have someone screaming about how they were hurt by what they saw, then the lawyer wouldnt have a case to start with.


Theres a level of integrity that "people" themselves open the door to that leads to these sort of things, so it starts at the bottom, and works its way into the mainstream via those that would use it for profit, the media, lawyers, etc.

Setting limitations for law suits is something that needs to be done. If we continue on this course, sooner of later people will be in trouble if they look at you, and you didnt want them to.

A good example of how things like this are used by those lawyers let lose, is a story about a woman who had someone attempt to break in, rape her, and kill her.

When she managed to get free and fight back, she stabbed him several times with a long butcher knife. When all was said and done, it ended up "he" sued her for stabbing "him"!

This sort of thing never needs to be recognized as an issue. Once a person crosses a line, they should lose all rights of defence other than insanity, and if thats the case, then they need institutionalized.

We've let those that would restrain us do so, and at the same time, we've kept our mouths shut about what the extreme liberals are doing as well.

WE are the cause, noone else. If "we" dont stand up as a people and state that this sort of thing is unacceptable, then it will continue to happen on a daily basis.

Its a lot like making kids behave really. You wanna let them learn on thier own, but when you see they are getting out of control and about to do something stupid, you put your foot down.

This country has been so laxed in its continuity that it cant happen. We have to act as a whole, and not as individuals in these cases so that rhedoric doesnt take hold and convince the masses that the one who's actually wrong, is right.

Everyone of the people who use these things for profit, is no less than a crooked car salesman, preaching to the masses that its ok to be a prick if you want, and if you "really" want, you can legally be a prick to others, and not have to answere for it.

Devils advocates all. And I dont believe in a god, but I do believe in the evil that people can perpetrate on one another, and this fits the bill quiet well.

[Gregorach]

If you ask me, the really dangerous and damaging media isn't computer games, or violent films, or even porn - it's advertising. Now there's a medium that objectifies and degreades people.

[Player0]

Wow, did this go and get all off-topic? Morals is always one of those funny topics to me since I beleive it to be nothing more than a set of rules someone tries to enforce to make them feel more comfortable with the world around them.

The question about how vulnerable a childs mind is one everyone has an opinion about, but the truth is, there's no solid right or wrong answer to that. What is it about a childs mind that differs from an adult mind? Everyone talks about though theres a difference. I don't beleive there is.

Human knowledge is experienced based. You can tell any person that first relationships almost never work out. Yet, no one beleives that until it happens to them and theyre always devastated. It's knowledge we can easily pass on, yet human minds NEED the experience.

Human minds make decisions based on input. If you shelter human minds from input, they never have an opportunity to judge something as good or bad. Everyone learns this for themselves, and most humans learn that violence is a negative thing, regardless of input.

There have been many many kids who grew up in wars and violent homes, and things 100x worse than a movie or video game. Yet, they grow up fine? Some minds are wired to find violance acceptable. We want to place blame on the social environment. How conceited of humans to think we can have such a dramatic impact on something we know so little about.

No, most people make the decisions just like you and I did. I grew up watching shitty violent movies. I havent hurt anyone yet. I was sheltered from the porno side as most kids are. Im not sure thats necessary either, but this is a big topic ;)

[Prometheus]

Its a proven fact that there are "formative" years for children in the learning process. For instance, a child who is 4, is more likely to take information in, than one who is 12.


My wife is a teacher, so I got to read lots of stuff about the development of children through various age groups, and the evidence is unmistakable that there "are" those formative years that can be used by the adults to teach children behavioral paterns.

Nature is one thing, but nurture is another. A child can be born totally norma chemically, and still have a tramatic childhood that destroys its ability to function on a normal basis.

This is called "Borderline Personality Disorder". It simply means the child did "not" learn basic skills for social behavior, and will usually act on what "they" percieve as the right thing to do, even though it may not be in truth. The problem is that the child was taught at an early age that certain behaviors are acceptable, and once the window of learning decreases, it makes it almost impossible to "re-train" that mind to percieve what they have been taught to be "incorrect".

There are actually about 5 stages of learing levels that children go through before the age of afulthood. The most important ages are between 2, and 8. These are the years that behaviors are "perminantly" implanted in the brain patterns to be used "throughout" life.

I wont bother to post links to this info, because we're all able to use the net, and its readily available to anyone who wants to know about the formative years of child rearing, and how it effects life afterwards.

It starts at home, and needs to be done correctly in order for things like this to be "deemed" as unacceptable in our society. Otherwise, the child grows up believing that "everything" is ok, no matter what the consequences.

[Prometheus]

There have to be laws. The problem is when those same laws adversly effect any individuals rights, then that same law, becomes a crime.


We as individual need to make sure (since "we" are the ones who have the votes, not politicians) that our children dont suffer the ideals of those who would take those rights away, and the only way to do that is to teach our children not to make the same mistakes we did, by allowing others control over things that should be taught at home first, then embelished on when the childs comprehension level increases to the level it can adjust, and make proper decissions based on facts, not opinions.

[Player0]

Its a proven fact that there are "formative" years for children in the learning process. For instance, a child who is 4, is more likely to take information in, than one who is 12.

I understand that there are MANY so called 'facts' about the educational system, but you have to remember that these facts are based on 'givens' that aren't necessarily correct.

For example, you say 'take information in'. Yes, I wouldnt argue that a child absorbs more information at a younger age. And yes, the information a child is given will lead to a different developmental course. But there are genetics at work. Just because you surround a child with nothing but say mathematics doesnt mean that the kid is going to be a mathematical genius. They may be wired for artistic endeavours. I beleive that the basic instincts exist in the mind from birth, and although they CAN be overcome with enough training/time (a math student becoming good at art, or a violent criminal becomign reformed), there has to be a powerful force of influence.

I grew up watching bugs bunny, and lots of violent things. I experienced violence my whole life. Yet, I know what reality is and what concequences are for my actions. I honestly don't beleive that anyone had that much say in to how much my 'root being' developed.

My wife is a teacher, so I got to read lots of stuff about the development of children through various age groups, and the evidence is unmistakable that there "are" those formative years that can be used by the adults to teach children behavioral paterns.

Well, these are just my opinions of course. I've done a lot of study in to child development and the mind because Im fascinated with AI and psychology. I know a lot of doctors like to claim things as fact and scientifically proven without having full proofs. A good example is that I'm missing my tonsils. The general rule for a long time was that doctors knew more about the human body than nature, and decided that tonsils must be unnecessary. Mine kept getting maladies, so they removed them. Leaving me vulnerable to all sorts of colds and strep. They dont do tonselectomys (spelling) as a routine anymore. Some doctors agree, some doctors dont. To me, that just tells me that we're not working off of pure scientific fact, and what we know about the human body and mind is still extremely limited.

ure is one thing, but nurture is another. A child can be born totally norma chemically, and still have a tramatic childhood that destroys its ability to function on a normal basis.

The human mind is able to overcome just about anything. Would porn and violence on TV be classified as a traumatic childhood? Or would war, seeing your family killed, growing up in gang land, being completely poor be much worse?

This is called "Borderline Personality Disorder". It simply means the child did "not" learn basic skills for social behavior, and will usually act on what "they" percieve as the right thing to do, even though it may not be in truth. The problem is that the child was taught at an early age that certain behaviors are acceptable, and once the window of learning decreases, it makes it almost impossible to "re-train" that mind to percieve what they have been taught to be "incorrect".

The child simply needs to be taught the consequences that modern society will impose for doing something that we lovingly consider 'incorrect'. It depensd on the behavior I guess. It makes you wonder just how flexible morals are and how much has been imposed on us. Maybe its impossible to train someone whos older and has an alternate way of life because what we're trying to train them about doesnt make that much sense. Like what, don't hit people to get what you want. Well, hey, it works right? You tell that kid not to do it and he'll never learn. You show him the consequences of getting the shit kicked out of him and he may learn a bit quicker. I guess it depends on the specific moral your talking about.

There are actually about 5 stages of learing levels that children go through before the age of afulthood. The most important ages are between 2, and 8. These are the years that behaviors are "perminantly" implanted in the brain patterns to be used "throughout" life.

Although I would question what those 'right' patterns would be, and I might agree that who we are as humans (our brains physical development) may solidify at around that age, I question what impact the environment can have on that. Have we trained any cold blooded killers as children? Certainly someone has tried at this point. How can you be sure that anyone is going to grow up differently from some experience? Its a very difficult thing to prove. I havent seen that proof yet.

I wont bother to post links to this info, because we're all able to use the net, and its readily available to anyone who wants to know about the formative years of child rearing, and how it effects life afterwards.

There are a lot of things on the net, in books, in colleges and universities and hospitals that may be accepted as truth, but there are many many people who also agree with my side of things. Im not saying that anyones right or wrong or trying to sway opinions, other than to let people know that there ARE other lines of thought out there. As with any subject, there are many sides on the debate, and arguements and data supporting all sides. Just look at the violence in video games debate. Its been raging for 30 years, with 'conclusive' evidence on both sides. Ive followed the video game ones as it affects children for years, and again, theres info on both sides of the fence. What is right? How do you know what is right?

Another example. Tums. Have calcium. Kidney stones, sometimes calcium based. I went looking for information if too many antacids can increase kidney stone production. Know what I found out?

Nothing. There are studies and studies, and no one agrees. Some people think it leads to increased risk, some people dont. Some people think taking them REDUCES your risk. In fact, there are treatments for kidney stones that use calcium suppliments to reduce the problems.

Conclusion? I dont beleive ANYTHING as 100% fact anymore, especially in the medical fields.

[Prometheus]

I agree with the fact that the inconsistencies in humans makes it impossible to make an "exact" science out of psychology, or the mind, but "statistical" evidence has been being gathered for not just the past few centuries, but thousands of years, and some of the results have had such a profound impact on humans and society that it actually altered the course of history many times, as well as in many ways.

The statistics in this particular situation indicate, after hundres of years of "recorded" history, that the curve is there, and just because we dont know, or cant see what triggers it or shuts it off, doesnt mean it doesnt exist.

To be sceptical to the point of thinking we "cant" predict within reason, or take for granted that a thing exists after such a long period of research, would go against my analitical nature.

When research shows a patern over a period of time long enough that the researchers themselves span many generations, I have to believe in what the combined conclussions of "all" of that research shows if I am a to be a "true" sceptic, unitl there is evidence to the contrary.

[Player0]

I agree with the fact that the inconsistencies in humans makes it impossible to make an "exact" science out of psychology, or the mind, but "statistical" evidence has been being gathered for not just the past few centuries, but thousands of years, and some of the results have had such a profound impact on humans and society that it actually altered the course of history many times, as well as in many ways.

Its hard to really have a conversation outside of the specifics like this. I'll be the first to tell you that I agree that human behavior is very predictable and can be measured statistically.

What discovery about human inconsistency has actually altered the course of human society? What impact has been made in our society that differs how it is structured from society 2000 years ago?

The species of homo sapiens that we enjoy today hasnt radically altered in at least 10s of thousands of years. We still follow the same basic instincts, the only thing that has changed is our collective technology. Humans are still needy, greedy, self-centered beings that group in to rigourous societies like ants or bees. If we traveled to Rome 2000 years ago, would we really notice a difference in the human social structure? There are the different classes, the rich, the powerful, and then the working masses, and then slaves or the uberlow classes.

To be sceptical to the point of thinking we "cant" predict within reason, or take for granted that a thing exists after such a long period of research, would go against my analitical nature.

The details are key here and I feel like we've gotten off base. In terms of research, how long has violent media really been a problem? 50? 100 years? For modern thought analasys, what, 200 years? Violent media and the affects on young minds is fairly new. In fact, in depth studies are really only 30-40 years old at most.

Its really my generation that's grown up with more of this stuff, special effects in movies, cable tv, video games with violence. I think we're really just at the prenatal stages of knowing the long term affects of any of this stuff really. Have you ever spoken with anyone dangerous or nutso? I mean, those people are scary irregardless of what theyre doing. Lets not forget that humans love violence in general, and that movies/video games can actually serve as an escape for some of that behavior.

[Prometheus]

Its hard to really have a conversation outside of the specifics like this. I'll be the first to tell you that I agree that human behavior is very predictable and can be measured statistically.

What discovery about human inconsistency has actually altered the course of human society? What impact has been made in our society that differs how it is structured from society 2000 years ago?

I actually termed that wrong I think. Let me clarify what I was saying.

Humans have discovered thier own shortcummings, and have progressively become more aware than they were in times past of how to alter those behaviors.

The changes are evident in todays society, in that we no longer feel as though slavery is proper behavior. We no longer allow the abuse of natural resources as we used to. We control the contaminants we add to our environment.

All these things would go unnoticed and continuied to happen as they did thousands of years ago if we hadnt gotten a grip on some of our worst behaviors. Greed drove those behaviors, and the lack of care for the consequences.

Thousands of years ago man discovered his desire to make his life easier, and found ways to make it happen which altered all our lives, not to mention the way society behaves as a whole in order to gain sastisfaction of that desire.

That behavior spawns from the instinct to survive. Once we found we could not only survive, but have time left over for creative thinking, we began to elaborate on the way we lived.

The species of homo sapiens that we enjoy today hasnt radically altered in at least 10s of thousands of years. We still follow the same basic instincts, the only thing that has changed is our collective technology. Humans are still needy, greedy, self-centered beings that group in to rigourous societies like ants or bees. If we traveled to Rome 2000 years ago, would we really notice a difference in the human social structure? There are the different classes, the rich, the powerful, and then the working masses, and then slaves or the uberlow classes.

I think we would have. I think we would be glad we live today where we dont feed people to lions in the name of entertainment, instead of playing violent simulations of such things as we do now.

The details are key here and I feel like we've gotten off base. In terms of research, how long has violent media really been a problem? 50? 100 years? For modern thought analasys, what, 200 years? Violent media and the affects on young minds is fairly new. In fact, in depth studies are really only 30-40 years old at most.

We are off base, but we are debating the cause of the problem, and I feel this is a possitive, and contructive conversation. It will enlighten a lot of people as to what drives them, and how to better handle it in the future by looking inside themselves for the truth, and not be dependant on what others think is right, or proper. Hopefully anyway. Humans as we both agree, are unpredictable in many ways.

Plato I believe it was made mention is his writings about the effect of violence on children during his stay on earth. His concern I think was the permitance of childrens attendance of executions, and how it seemed to alter the way the child viewed life after that point.

Before they experienced it, they were self assured and confident that things were ok. Afterward, they had doubts about everything because of the finality of the event, and not being able to comprehend the "why" of it.

I know if I were a child and saw and execution, I would be devestated.

To a child, that would be a hard thing to explain in a way they could understand that different crimes call for different levels of punishment. In most cases, a child only see's the surface of a thing, and not the entire chain of events that led to it. If they experience that within the realm of the learning curve, then it will be hard to remove the aprehensive nature of that child for disiplinary situations.

Its really my generation that's grown up with more of this stuff, special effects in movies, cable tv, video games with violence. I think we're really just at the prenatal stages of knowing the long term affects of any of this stuff really. Have you ever spoken with anyone dangerous or nutso? I mean, those people are scary irregardless of what theyre doing. Lets not forget that humans love violence in general, and that movies/video games can actually serve as an escape for some of that behavior.

I have to agree on the generation thing, but our generation saw the advent of "artificial" violence, and subsidized our behavior through that. I believe this actually did our generation good, in that it taught us there were alternatives to acting on instinct in stressfull situations by giving us scenarios we could control, and a way to vent before we act.

Like lion cubs play fight, we practice killing without actually having to perpetrate the act itself in real life via the use of these games. Sounds funky doesnt it? But its true to our "natural instincts to survive".

Its breed into us to compete for territoryfor the purpose of survival, so combat is inevitable in life. If we change that one basic instinct, we lose the very drive that has caused our continued survival for thousands of years.

It cannot be changed, therefore it must be controlled. We lose that control when we allow others to make the decission as to when our children experience violent behavior, but then again, there are parents that arent really parents, and someone has to protect the child in those cases.

The problem comes in when we are all judged for the acts of the few. If we raise our children to be open minded individuals, then we take the power to control them away from those that would otherwise do so out of fear.

Therein lies my analogy on what its going to take to stop the problem of sensorship with our children over trivial things such as violence in simulations.

If they are reading in the library about how to build bombs, then take the information out of the library until they are deemed responcible adults with a job in that field, otherwise, look out If they are studying how to fry the competition with a lightning gun, STFU and let them be, its a game, and a good way to vent and make friends at the same time.

Chances are, if they have just nuked someone in a simulation, they arent going to go out and study how to do it in real life.

The need to be supirior (strut like a rooster to attract a mate, even though the mate isnt paying attention while you nuke this other guy, and could care less about anything but how your hair looks today, or if your going to invite her out to eat something of real value, food) has been met, the desire to conquer (aquire properties from neighbor to feed new mate) has also been subsidized, so wheres the beef?

See, I got back on topic. I just had to evaluate the problem via an excersise in futility...hehe

Nothins gonna change just as you say, but at least we can stur up some thought about the sustance of the problem instead of skating around the real problem, which is parental control being taken away by politics, which is wrong at best, and criminal in reality.

The cure is education of course, and knowing human nature is a good place to start I think in order to get perspective on the issue.

When something of this nature occurs, it does us all a great injustice, in that its just another form of slavery, or impossed ideals by parties that dont have that power to begin with, and use rhedoric as mind control to get it.

The way to stop it is to prove to our children it exists, then teach them to stamp it out when they come in contact with it in the future. Thats why I said it has to start at home. If we teach them "not" to trust blindly, then we teach them to survive essentially in a world that would otherwise eat them for lunch.

Nowhere else is more important in the effort to stop oppression of this kind that the home itself. Our children grow up and put others in the possition of trust, and if they have a better idea of what charactoristics are indicative of being trustworthy, then they stand a better chance than we have of changing the worlds perception of right and wrong.

The future hasnt been written yet. To me, this is how it has to be done in order for us to progress as a species.

No one else has the influence that a parent has on the formative years of a childs development.

It should be put to good use, and not squandered by neglegable acts on the parents part because "they" are ultimatly responcible for the future of those same children. The most important thing we can teach them is how to attain "freedom" if we want "them" to be free to chose what "thier" children learn in life, and "when" they learn it.

[Player0]

The changes are evident in todays society, in that we no longer feel as though slavery is proper behavior. We no longer allow the abuse of natural resources as we used to. We control the contaminants we add to our environment.

The point of evolution is that youve gone beyond something. Just because slavery and resource wasting has been controlled in this country doesnt mean its out of the behavior. In fact, history shows that its likely to occur again. Every generation has always felt superior to previous generations. Yet, humanity has a bad cycle of reverting to those same nasty states. If the USA was no longer a superpower and struggled as a 3rd world country, and there wasnt anyone policing the global world, slavery could very well be reintroduced in this country. Slavery still exists all over the world, humans executing power over another to control their lives for their own good. One could argue that we're all slaves of one form or another. Isn't that the point to the Matrix movies, and why the first one was so popular? People identify with that feeling.

I dont consider this an evolution of the species. I consider it a temporary control based on certain economic and powerful success of the country and western culture. I would likely beleive that further evolution of mankind will not come from homosapiens, but a genetic offshoot with slight changes in how the mind handles societal roles. To think that we're the genetic pinacle of the line of our species is egotistical really. We may literally have to evolve to evolve.

All these things would go unnoticed and continuied to happen as they did thousands of years ago if we hadnt gotten a grip on some of our worst behaviors. Greed drove those behaviors, and the lack of care for the consequences.

There are a great deal of people on this planet a lot better off than they would have been 1-2 thousand years ago for sure. Is it because of some large moral conscious or is it because we have more resources to go around, resources we are burning through quickily to sustain this level of lifestyle. Has religion and moral context brought us to this point, or has technology. I think that technology has played the larger role, which leads me to beleive that the greater ability we have to use our resources has lead to happier well being for most people. This seems to work better on the short term than religion/morality has.

I think we would have. I think we would be glad we live today where we dont feed people to lions in the name of entertainment, instead of playing violent simulations of such things as we do now.

How many sports today are exciting cause they reinact some very violent or dangerous things. Any extreme sport really. Auto racing, Hockey, Football. Not really golf or basketball, baseball..eh. Boxing. There are plenty of sports still. I think that watching these things really is a release. Many humans seek out these violent or sexual forms of entertainment (lesser on the sexual stuff because of Christianity). If you could go rent a video right now of an old Roman theater complete with gladiators and a lion raping & killing a woman finaly, I bet it would be one of the most rented videos ever. Or at least, downloaded in dark corners ;)

We are off base, but we are debating the cause of the problem, and I feel this is a possitive, and contructive conversation.

Yeah, its nice to have an interesting discussion every once in a while. Its all kinda pointless and no one cares im sure. But i got nothin better to do at the moment ;)

Plato I believe it was made mention is his writings about the effect of violence on children during his stay on earth. His concern I think was the permitance of childrens attendance of executions, and how it seemed to alter the way the child viewed life after that point.
Before they experienced it, they were self assured and confident that things were ok. Afterward, they had doubts about everything because of the finality of the event, and not being able to comprehend the "why" of it.

I'd call it a wakeup call. In some ways, its nice to have that blissful ignorance in life, if just for a while. On other ways, you wonder if your distorting the childs view by hiding them from reality. Whether child or adult, wouldnt we all experience the same kind of emotions seeing something like that? Isnt that experience what seperates an adult from a child? The loss of innocence? Isnt that a necessary part of growing up?