Ron Jeremy says violent video games 'worse' than porn


Violent video games have "a much bigger negative influence on kids" than pornography, a leading porn star has claimed.

He said parents should be more worried about the harmful effects of such games.

Mr Jeremy's comments were made at a session called the Great Porn Debate during the Consumer Electronics Show, CES, in Las Vegas.

His comments angered gamers, who accused him of "ignorance".

Mr Jeremy's appearance at CES in Las Vegas caused some raised eyebrows.

see the rest via link man

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/8453043.stm

Views: 166

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

It's not really a subject I'm all that well versed in though. Maybe I'm talking out my ass.

That is what internet forums are for! ;-)
True that. Still, someday I hope to make it into the Big League of BSing: FOX "News". I still have a lot of mental preparation to go. By 'mental preparation' I mean glue sniffing.
Lmao!

The glue sniffing is just to take away the conscious.
If you are going to use Ted Bundy, then I am going to paraphrase the NRA.

Porn doesn't kill people. People kill people.
As someone who is completely against any person owning a gun your clever paraphrase falls on deaf ears Reggie, but I will bite anyway.

The reason the NRA can get away with such an argument is because most murders that are caused using a gun are done by those who consciously go out, get a gun, and perform a crime with it (not talking about accidental shootings). These people, if not for the gun, would arguably just go out with a different weapon the reek havoc.

However with the idea of pornography causing violence in the rare serial killer the same does not apply. According to wikipedia there have been about 145 serial killers in the U.S., documented famous serial killers that is. Going down the list you will notice a large portion of them targeted women and had some sexual aspect to their crimes, or targeted men with a sexual aspect. It may very well be possible that some of these murders would have have occurred if they weren't challenged to fulfill their fantasies that they formed at a young age due to their consumption of certain pornographic material.
A prime example of this is Harvey Glatman. He raped and murdered three women by telling them they were going to pose for bondage photographs.
I was being facetious.

But let me get more serious. The NRA does not get away with that argument, in my opinion. Maybe among the conservative gun nuts, they do. But who's counting them. Not you or I, am sure. As someone who owns several guns, I can tell you that in all my experiences, readings, training courses for conceal and carry, et cetera, is that a lot of firearm violence committed would not have happened if no gun were involved. In other words, if other weapons were available in lieu of a firearm, the liklihood of that weapon being used would be much less. It is the very reason why I choose not to carry my Gloc despite having a permit to do so. The very fact that I have it on me changes everything and it is more likely that I would get shot because of it, rather than it saving my life.

In sum, to say that people would just find some other way to kill is false, IMO.

And blaming pronography for a psychopath's predilection for mixing sex with murder needs some sort of evidence beyond those same killer's words. Human beings are sexual animals and there is an established correlation between sex and violence, testosterone being a driving hormone for both. I won't argue that pornography has no affect on these people, but to blame it in any significant degree would take more evidence for me to seriously consider.

Now, it may seem that I argued both sides of a similar point there....and maybe I did. But the difference I see is that psychopaths without empathy are just as likely to kill with or without porn as an aid or cause. Most firearm violence is not committed by psychopaths.
Doesn't explain the mass murders before media. Like Genghis Kahn, Caligula, etc.
< sarcasm >
I'll also bet they ate breakfast every day. The real problem is that by allowing them breakfast they have to much energy the rest of the day and that results in their being more violent and doing more violent things. If they weren't allowed to eat breakfast, then as we all know, they would not have the energy or motivation to do bad things.

It has been shown that eating breakfast makes you more energetic, why even the government feeds children breakfast in school to keep them going better. Without breakfast the criminals would not be so bad.

So, we must eliminate breakfast!!
<; /sarcasm >
Wheaties. The silent killer.

or

Rice Krispies. The noisy killer.
You know that Raisin Bran is the real culprit.
It's those 2 cups of raisins, it's just too much.
Two scoops = murder weapons.

RSS

Support T|A

Think Atheist is 100% member supported

All proceeds go to keeping Think Atheist online.

Donate with Dogecoin

Members

Forum

Favorite movie or actor/actress.

Started by Devlin Cuite in Small Talk. Last reply by Reg The Fronkey Farmer 40 minutes ago. 11 Replies

Blog Posts

I am tired

Posted by Philip Jarrett on April 18, 2014 at 12:09am 4 Comments

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Into life hacks? Check out LabMinions.com

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service