Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in

Obama Calls on Congress to Fund Research on Effects of Violent Videogames

By - Source: Venturebeat | B 111 comments
Tags :

Obama calls on Congress to fund research on the effects of violent media.

While Joe Biden's meeting with the videogame industry went as well as one could hope, as the vice president seemed to conclude that violent videogames were not to blame for events like the one at Sandy Hook, President Obama wants to look further into the effects of violent videogames on children.

One of the 23 executive orders he signed recently calls for the CDC to do further research on violent behavior, which includes looking into violent media.

Obama isn't pointing the finger of blame at anyone. “We don’t benefit from ignorance. We don’t benefit from not knowing the science of this epidemic of violence," said the President. “Congress should fund research into the effects violent video games have on young minds.”

Despite signing the executive orders, Obama reminded the American people that in order for these actions to truly be carried out, he would need Congress's help. "“As important as these steps are, they are in no way a substitute for action from Congress,” Obama said.

The president wants to allocate $10 million of the nation's budget on the study on the effects of violent media and called for a bill to require background checks on firearm purchases, limit assault weapons, and maintain a 10-round maximum on ammo magazines. No doubt the president's call for such a bill angered many gun-rights supporters.

Whatever the case, it seems like Biden's reassurance to the videogames industry that there was no "silver bullet" for the issue holds true for the POTUS as well. Gamers can take a step back and sigh in relief that the government won't be levying bills against violent videogames just yet.


 

Contact Us for News Tips, Corrections and Feedback

Display 111 Comments.
This thread is closed for comments
Top Comments
  • 27 Hide
    wanderer11 , January 17, 2013 12:06 PM
    Violent video games are M rated meaning you have to be 17+ years old to buy it. This is equivalent to children watching R rated movies. All they are doing is testing the effects of a product on an age group it isn't intended for in the first place.
  • 20 Hide
    Antimatter79 , January 17, 2013 12:14 PM
    wanderer11Violent video games are M rated meaning you have to be 17+ years old to buy it. This is equivalent to children watching R rated movies. All they are doing is testing the effects of a product on an age group it isn't intended for in the first place.


    +1. I wish I could give you 19 more thumbs up. Also, I'm curious what they'd even use as a control group b/c the shooters are usually not of sound mind to begin with.
  • 20 Hide
    Anonymous , January 17, 2013 12:16 PM
    Here's how to prevent what happened at Sandy Hook: mothers of medically-documented, emotionally challenged individuals should not let their sons have access to guns. You'd think that this is obvious.

    Doctor: "Ma'am, your son cannot comprehend the feelings of other people."
    Mother: "I know how to deal with this, I'LL TEACH MY SON HOW TO SHOOT GUNS!"
    And then later, mother and son and dozens of others are dead. Great job, mom!

    The primary culprit in this is the shooter, followed closely by the mother who made the crazy choice above. Video games, the gun industry, "violent culture" or whatever are at best third- or fourth-degree culprits.
Other Comments
  • 27 Hide
    wanderer11 , January 17, 2013 12:06 PM
    Violent video games are M rated meaning you have to be 17+ years old to buy it. This is equivalent to children watching R rated movies. All they are doing is testing the effects of a product on an age group it isn't intended for in the first place.
  • 14 Hide
    fnh , January 17, 2013 12:13 PM
    Seems like a waste of a cool $10 million.

    Like Chris Rock's character in the movie 'Head of State': "How do we limit violent material? Turn it off."
  • 20 Hide
    Antimatter79 , January 17, 2013 12:14 PM
    wanderer11Violent video games are M rated meaning you have to be 17+ years old to buy it. This is equivalent to children watching R rated movies. All they are doing is testing the effects of a product on an age group it isn't intended for in the first place.


    +1. I wish I could give you 19 more thumbs up. Also, I'm curious what they'd even use as a control group b/c the shooters are usually not of sound mind to begin with.
  • 20 Hide
    Anonymous , January 17, 2013 12:16 PM
    Here's how to prevent what happened at Sandy Hook: mothers of medically-documented, emotionally challenged individuals should not let their sons have access to guns. You'd think that this is obvious.

    Doctor: "Ma'am, your son cannot comprehend the feelings of other people."
    Mother: "I know how to deal with this, I'LL TEACH MY SON HOW TO SHOOT GUNS!"
    And then later, mother and son and dozens of others are dead. Great job, mom!

    The primary culprit in this is the shooter, followed closely by the mother who made the crazy choice above. Video games, the gun industry, "violent culture" or whatever are at best third- or fourth-degree culprits.
  • 3 Hide
    master9716 , January 17, 2013 12:16 PM
    Obama is just doing what he needs to. In reality he knows that its a dumb concept
  • 13 Hide
    santiagoanders , January 17, 2013 12:18 PM
    A waste of 10 million in tax dollars doesn't make me sigh in relief.
  • 20 Hide
    house70 , January 17, 2013 12:21 PM
    wanderer11Violent video games are M rated meaning you have to be 17+ years old to buy it. This is equivalent to children watching R rated movies. All they are doing is testing the effects of a product on an age group it isn't intended for in the first place.

    Spot on. The results of this study will be useless. Furthermore, it can not be used against videogames manufacturers, because it will be invalidated.
    Just another waste of taxpayer money.
  • -7 Hide
    sa1nt , January 17, 2013 12:27 PM
    santiagoandersA waste of 10 million in tax dollars doesn't make me sigh in relief.

    Compared to other projects wasting 10 million per project is bloody genius.
  • 14 Hide
    happyballz , January 17, 2013 12:29 PM
    I really disliked Romney for being an obvious crook... but this guy lately is just acting beyond dumb. Major waste of money to make himself look good and say the typical" Look I did something for the children".
  • 11 Hide
    merikafyeah , January 17, 2013 12:30 PM
    This is a good thing. Now they can finally put to rest any notion of a correlation between violent video games and violent behavior. Spoiler alert: It's been done before.
  • 9 Hide
    matt_b , January 17, 2013 12:33 PM
    Here's some first-hand research that's free, won't cost taxpayers 10 million dollars, and where it should stop:
    It doesn't matter if I play COD, Halo, Far Cry, AC, Battlefield, GTA, or watch movies that have a body count in the hundreds, because even though I can act like an absolute baddass in these games or watch those that act like it in films - it's not the reality we live in. I, as a sane individual, can distinguish easily reality from the "fairy-tales" created within this violent media that I/we play or watch. The people that clearly are disturbed, on the edge, present themselves as very extreme in one form or another, or however you wish to title them, these are the people that have very high tendencies to snap or act out within due time whether it's out of frustration or attention.
    I don't really blame any of the "violent media" because those that don't have a hard time understanding what's legal and what isn't, what's reality and what's not, and what is morally right or wrong - these are the people that's will not act out and the rest of society will have a problem with. There are those that cannot distinguish these differences, do not care, or long for the immortality that a massive event may bring to their name. This is your target group for these incidents, and restrictions can be as numerous as legislators wish to impose on all of the public, but it doesn't offer the solutions to the real problems that these select individuals face within themselves.
  • -3 Hide
    bustapr , January 17, 2013 12:36 PM
    this may seem like a dumb thing to you guys, but indeed its a very necessary thing to do. this will likely confirm that violent videogames arent to blame for shootings. and all this would also serve as another weapon against those asshats that blame games for everything.

    when people are blaming these massacres on games everywhere, what do we do? we try to prove them wrong. so, I dont really see this as a waste of money.
  • 19 Hide
    wysir , January 17, 2013 12:36 PM
    10 mil to do a study that has already been done multiple times... More retarded spending.
  • -6 Hide
    fuzzion , January 17, 2013 12:47 PM
    Obama is looking less cool each month. But still better than mitt romney by a mile
  • -1 Hide
    DjEaZy , January 17, 2013 12:47 PM
    ... spent one weekend to play Modern Warfare 1;2;3 back to back... and after the game i DON'T WANNA TO GO TO WAR...
    ...so... let's ban romantic movies... why?... let's say, that a boy haz seen a romantic movie about a boy and a girl, and a romantic candlelight evening... in a school, in that the boy goes, there is a beautiful girl... but the thing is... the girl do not wanna any romantic things with the boy, who haz seen the romantic movie... so... the boy in the sick mind thinks: 'the girl will be mine and i will have the romantic evening!!!'... so the boy kidnaps the girl, ties to a something in a basement and, let's say, rapes her... so... do we ban or censor romantic movies because of some sick mind?
  • 4 Hide
    d_kuhn , January 17, 2013 1:02 PM
    If they're going to do this they should also be researching violent TV programming and Movies... if children can be negatively influenced by games then they're also likely impacted by media.

    Of course the power of 'media' in the US will insure that politicians don't do that ... instead they'll scapegoat an industry that doesn't have the clout to fight back.
  • -4 Hide
    davemaster84 , January 17, 2013 1:06 PM
    I don't think the problem is in the video games at all, or otherwise they would have to take a look into the whole movie industry as well, with all my respect to my American fellas I think the problem is on how easy you can get whatever gun is available in the market (although I'd love to have the same policy here) , so maybe if they keep the permits only to small firearms it should be difficult to see those Rambos around.
  • 2 Hide
    JAYDEEJOHN , January 17, 2013 1:16 PM
    wanderer11Violent video games are M rated meaning you have to be 17+ years old to buy it. This is equivalent to children watching R rated movies. All they are doing is testing the effects of a product on an age group it isn't intended for in the first place.

    Maybe law abiding people should just be left alone?
    Gun toting or not, game playing or not.

    It used to be, the good huy always won, and there was reward for being good.
    This focus has changed considerably as well in media, games etc.
    Weve always had violence in the past, but for good reason before, not so much today
  • 0 Hide
    bunz_of_steel , January 17, 2013 1:21 PM
    A Godless society will act as such I think. Sugar makes people fat..... lets ban it.
  • 2 Hide
    Soda-88 , January 17, 2013 1:23 PM
    It's sad how money is being thrown away on some pseudo-research that will, not in a million years, yield consistent results.
    It's pretty much the same as doing a research on what effect drinking water and eating bread has on crime rates.
    We have a saying here in Croatia, '100 ljudi, 100 ćudi' which is basically saying that every human being has a unique personality/temper.
Display more comments