WHAT! Impossible I say! We all know Vidjya Games make normal every day people in axe weilding, paint spraying, foaming at the mouth monsters! Monsters who could be anywhere! Even right next door! So you have to keep an eye out for them, and if you suspect someone report it to the government NOW.
Oh wait... That was communism....

Just wait until GTA IV comes out... If it comes out.

It's the butler who did it, agent, sir, not me.

Duh. The criminals were all inside training on violent games for next year's armageddon. Obviously.

There is a decline...

...in crime rate. Dr. Wright (SimCity on the SNES) should be here rewarding us with that new special police station

I suspect it is just a matter of time before someone comes along and says:

"Gamers spent the first half of the year playing games in an effort to practice for the violent rampages they exercised in the second half of the year.

Being inside practicing kept gamers off the street. Once practice time was done, they went out and commenced to perpetrating."

This type of news can always be spun the way some ass-monkey wants to spin it.

To me, and everyone here, it is great news! Decreased trend is always a welcome fact in the land of violence.

Causation does not equal correlation (or, in this case, its inverse). So whether or not crime rates go up or down in any given year has potentially nothing to do with the issue of the effects of video game violence. For instance, one could argue that, yes, crime rates are low, but if violent video games were banned then the rates would be even lower. Or one could argue the opposite. The point is, if you make EITHER argument (based on the data cited above) you're talking out of your ass, because without more data you can't tie video game violence to crime statistics in any meaningful way.

@Father Time:

We really can't. A decrease in crime rate is such a macroscopic event that it's nearly impossible to link it to anything specific. It could be the case that violent games are causing an increase but there are other chilling factors that counter it.

What we can say about it is that the crime rate going down means it's *not* going up, so when people rant about violent crime increasing we know they're making it up.

According to some (self-declared) "experts", the reason youth crime rates have been down the past 10+ years is that fewer people are reporting crimes and that medical treatment is reducing fatalities. The geriatrics have already made up their mind, so reports like this are irrelevant.

"GP: Perhaps Bully, Counter-strike, GTA and the other usual gaming suspects aren’t leading to the decline of Western Civilization after all?"

You can say that all you want to Wacko Jacko, but of course he won't listen and it'll cost him his career.

@sleepy

Here is a correlation....
http://img140.imageshack.us/my.php?image=4548aa4a2b64e21892c524bhm3.jpg

Violent people are atracted to violent games, games keep people of streets so it's only natural that games would lower crime rate in the short term and while it may raise it in the long term the chart above is one of the many fun little facts that somewhat undermine that theory.... though not fully...

you can look at it this way:

why doesn't the news report every day that a plane doesn't crash? because it's not newsworthy.

likewise, while sensational crimes are reported, you don't actually hear anything about all the non-crime that happens. of course the likes of Thompson only believe what they see on Faux News, so they can suck it.

[...] Source: FBI: Crime Rates Down in 2007 Bookmark it: [...]

When sales of hot chocolate go up, violent crime rates go down.

We can't say that hot chocolate makes people less violent, because correlation isn't causation.

What we can say about it, is that hot chocolate is delicious, especially with whipped cream.

@aspeaker

Friends (the TV show) debuted in 1994 and ran until 2004. The number of crime victims (in the chart you posted) has an almost linear relation to the number of Friends episodes available within that time period (which is, arguably, a stronger correlation than the one you suggested). Does this mean that this is strong evidence that criminals decided to stay home to watch reruns of Friends instead of robbing and killing people? Does this mean that Jennifer Aniston is a crime-fighting national hero?

No, it doesn't. Correlation does not equal causation. Unless you control for other factors, a correlation drawn between two variables is meaningless. (This principle, in fact, is fundamental to scientific research, and is the primary motivation for the controlled experiment. Of course, there are some situations in which it's not practical or possible to conduct a controlled experiment. In such cases there are statistical and methodological techniques to help account for factors in an uncontrolled setting.)

So your suggestion that violent games keep violent people off the streets might be right, but it might be wrong. It seems logical, so I wouldn't be surprised if it were true. However, the FBI crime data doesn't support it either way, so at this point it's just speculation; it's an untested hypothesis. (At least, as far as I know. Maybe someone has done a study. If anyone knows of one I'd be interested in reading it.)

Crime among citizens went down, treason among politicians went up.

@Lost Question:

FBI crime stats that show a decline in violent crime are not proof that videogames are beneficial -- unless you graduated from the Thompson School of Statistical Analysis.

Hmm, I think that the correlation in the chart is interesting, but like so many others have mentioned, there are many more factors contributing to a decline in violence, however I think that given the fact that Thompson and his ilk have no real respect for actual facts, we may be able to use this bit of data (the holy statistic) and see what his response is, I mean lets face it, if he denounces it as lies then we can ask him what his statistics are and the like, it would be great just to see what happens!

I think we have earned a bit of free anti Thompson statistic use

@ Sean

You've been reading pointlesswasteoftime.com's article on '5 Reason Why Jack Thompson Is Right (And Wrong)' haven't you?

@Internet Hate Machine

No it was an article about how there was no epidemic of youth violence, they used a different chart though.

I don't remember, it was just something I ran across while researching.

Jack Thompson and the Florida Bar-B-Q Update:

Jack let slip in a recent posting to the ABA's dotcom Law Journal that the Florida Bar's proposing a 3-year suspension of his license. Of course, because it comes from the keypad of Mr. Thompson, there's the assumption that it isn't credible, so I share the info for what it's worth. But, if true, it does shed light on the recommendations that will be contained in Judge Tunis' Report (due April 21), as it is, in my observations, unlikely that she will deviate too much either way (up or down) from the sanctions that the Bar proposes to her.

Ed.: It's not disbarment, but a 3-year time-out in the box ain't a slap on the wrist, either.

Yes, I'd bend an elbow for a 3-year suspension, too.

And, once suspended, reinstatement isn't atuomatic just because the 3 years have passed. There's hoops to jump through. And Jack ain't good a jumping through hoops.

I like pizza...



Alot.
=)