NP - It's not the video games

[John Bailey]

Meaningless statistical analysis, given that "video game spending per
capita" doesn't tell us anything about what games are being played
where, by whom, in what way, etc. Most surveys now include video games
such as Angry Birds and FarmVille alongside realistic US military
shooters. That said, the argument against any correlation may be
correct. I just wrinkle my nose at the evidence offered.

On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 12:06 PM, Bekah <bekah0176 at sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> Is a comparison of the murder rates when readily available assault rifles  are combined with violent movies and video games valid if the other countries don't have easily available assault rifles (or handguns)?   What if they only have the games and not the guns - how can there be much of a  murder-by-gunshot rate at all?   We have both.
>
> Bekah
>
>
> On Dec 18, 2012, at 9:53 AM, David Morris <fqmorris at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2012/12/17/ten-country-comparison-suggests-theres-little-or-no-link-between-video-games-and-gun-murders/
>>
>> But it turns out that the data just doesn’t support this [video game] connection. Looking at the world’s 10 largest video game markets yields no evident, statistical correlation between video game consumption and gun-related killings.
>>
>> It’s true that Americans spend billions of dollars on video games every year and that the United States has the highest firearm murder rate in the developed world. But other countries where video games are popular have much lower firearm-related murder rates. In fact, countries where video game consumption is highest tend to be some of the safest countries in the world, likely a product of the fact that developed or rich countries, where consumers can afford expensive games, have on average much less violent crime...
>