Post by: Preacherman on December 27, 2006, 05:32:28 PM
From the Telegraph, London (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml;jsessionid=DVM5JUDGJIIY1QFIQMGSFGGAVCBQWIV0?xml=/opinion/2006/12/28/do2801.xml):
Quote
The writing is on the wall computer games rot the brain
By Boris Johnson
Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 28/12/2006
It's the snarl that gives the game away. It's the sobbing and the shrieking and the horrible pleading that's how you know your children are undergoing a sudden narcotic withdrawal. As the strobing colours die away and the screen goes black, you listen to the wail of protest from the offspring and you know that you have just turned off their drug, and you know that, to a greater or lesser extent, they are addicts.
Some children have it bad. Some are miraculously unaffected. But millions of seven- to 15-year-olds are hooked, especially boys, and it is time someone had the guts to stand up, cross the room and just say no to Nintendo. It is time to garrotte the Game Boy and paralyse the PlayStation, and it is about time, as a society, that we admitted the catastrophic effect these blasted gizmos are having on the literacy and the prospects of young males.
It was among the first acts of the Labour Government to institute a universal "literacy" hour in primary schools; and yet, in the six years following 1997, the numbers of young children who said that they didn't like reading rose from 23 per cent to 35 per cent. In spite of all our cash and effort, the surveys increasingly show that children (especially boys) regard reading as a chore, something that needs to be accomplished for the sake of passing tests, not as a joy in itself. It is a disaster, and I refuse to believe that these hypnotic little machines are innocent.
We demand that teachers provide our children with reading skills; we expect the schools to fill them with a love of books; and yet at home we let them slump in front of the consoles. We get on with our hedonistic 21st-century lives while in some other room the nippers are bleeping and zapping in speechless rapture, their passive faces washed in explosions and gore. They sit for so long that their souls seem to have been sucked down the cathode ray tube.
They become like blinking lizards, motionless, absorbed, only the twitching of their hands showing they are still conscious. These machines teach them nothing. They stimulate no ratiocination, discovery or feat of memory though some of them may cunningly pretend to be educational. I have just watched an 11-year-old play a game that looked fairly historical, on the packet. Your average guilt-ridden parent might assume that it taught the child something about the Vikings and medieval siege warfare.
Phooey! The red soldiers robotically slaughtered the white soldiers, and then they did it again, that was it. Everything was programmed, spoon-fed, immediate and endlessly showering the player with undeserved praise, richly congratulating him for his bogus massacres. The more addictive these games are to the male mind, the more difficult it is to persuade boys to read books; and that is why it is no comfort that Britain has more computer games per household than any other EU country, and, even though they are wince-makingly expensive, an amazing 89 per cent of British households with children now boast a games console, with distribution right across the socio-economic groups.
Every child must have one, and what we fail to grasp is that these possessions are not so much an index of wealth as a cause of ignorance and underachievement and, yes, poverty. It hardly matters how much cash we pour into reading in schools if there is no culture of reading at home; and the consequences of this failure to read can be seen throughout the education system.
Huge numbers are still leaving primary school in a state of functional illiteracy, with 44 per cent unable either to read, write or do basic sums. By the age of 14, there are still 40 per cent whose literacy or numeracy is not up to the expected standard, and a large proportion of the effort at Further Education colleges (about 20 per cent) is devoted to remedial reading and writing. Even at university, there are now terrifying numbers of students who cannot express themselves in the kind of clear, logical English required for an essay, and in many important respects if you can't write, you can't think. The Royal Literary Fund has, in the past few years, done a wonderful job of establishing Writing Fellows at our universities, offering therapy for those who can't put their thoughts on paper; and yet the fund admits that the scale of the problem is quite beyond its abilities.
It is a shock, arriving at university, and being asked to compose an essay of a couple of thousand words, and then discovering that you can't do it; and this demoralisation is a major cause of dropping-out. It's not that the students lack the brains; the raw circuitry is better than ever. It's the software that's the problem. They have not been properly programmed, because they have not read enough. The only way to learn to write is to be forced time and again to articulate your own thoughts in your own words, and you haven't a hope of doing this if you haven't read enough to absorb the basic elements of vocabulary, grammar, rhythm, style and structure; and young males in particular won't read enough if we continually capitulate and let them fritter their lives away in front of these drivelling machines.
Gordon Brown proposed in his Pre-Budget Report to spend £2,000 per head on improving the reading of six-year-old boys. That is all well and good, especially when you consider that the cost of remedial English in secondary school soars to £50,000 per head. But it would be cheaper and possibly more effective if we all politicians, parents, whoever had the nerve to crack down on this electronic opiate.
So I say now: stop just lying there in your post-Christmas state of crapulous indifference. Get up off the sofa. Can the DVD of Desperate Housewives, and go to where your children are sitting in auto-lobotomy in front of the console.
Summon up all your strength, all your courage. Steel yourself for the screams and yank out that plug.
And if they still kick up a fuss, then get out the sledgehammer and strike a blow for literacy.
By Boris Johnson
Last Updated: 12:01am GMT 28/12/2006
It's the snarl that gives the game away. It's the sobbing and the shrieking and the horrible pleading that's how you know your children are undergoing a sudden narcotic withdrawal. As the strobing colours die away and the screen goes black, you listen to the wail of protest from the offspring and you know that you have just turned off their drug, and you know that, to a greater or lesser extent, they are addicts.
Some children have it bad. Some are miraculously unaffected. But millions of seven- to 15-year-olds are hooked, especially boys, and it is time someone had the guts to stand up, cross the room and just say no to Nintendo. It is time to garrotte the Game Boy and paralyse the PlayStation, and it is about time, as a society, that we admitted the catastrophic effect these blasted gizmos are having on the literacy and the prospects of young males.
It was among the first acts of the Labour Government to institute a universal "literacy" hour in primary schools; and yet, in the six years following 1997, the numbers of young children who said that they didn't like reading rose from 23 per cent to 35 per cent. In spite of all our cash and effort, the surveys increasingly show that children (especially boys) regard reading as a chore, something that needs to be accomplished for the sake of passing tests, not as a joy in itself. It is a disaster, and I refuse to believe that these hypnotic little machines are innocent.
We demand that teachers provide our children with reading skills; we expect the schools to fill them with a love of books; and yet at home we let them slump in front of the consoles. We get on with our hedonistic 21st-century lives while in some other room the nippers are bleeping and zapping in speechless rapture, their passive faces washed in explosions and gore. They sit for so long that their souls seem to have been sucked down the cathode ray tube.
They become like blinking lizards, motionless, absorbed, only the twitching of their hands showing they are still conscious. These machines teach them nothing. They stimulate no ratiocination, discovery or feat of memory though some of them may cunningly pretend to be educational. I have just watched an 11-year-old play a game that looked fairly historical, on the packet. Your average guilt-ridden parent might assume that it taught the child something about the Vikings and medieval siege warfare.
Phooey! The red soldiers robotically slaughtered the white soldiers, and then they did it again, that was it. Everything was programmed, spoon-fed, immediate and endlessly showering the player with undeserved praise, richly congratulating him for his bogus massacres. The more addictive these games are to the male mind, the more difficult it is to persuade boys to read books; and that is why it is no comfort that Britain has more computer games per household than any other EU country, and, even though they are wince-makingly expensive, an amazing 89 per cent of British households with children now boast a games console, with distribution right across the socio-economic groups.
Every child must have one, and what we fail to grasp is that these possessions are not so much an index of wealth as a cause of ignorance and underachievement and, yes, poverty. It hardly matters how much cash we pour into reading in schools if there is no culture of reading at home; and the consequences of this failure to read can be seen throughout the education system.
Huge numbers are still leaving primary school in a state of functional illiteracy, with 44 per cent unable either to read, write or do basic sums. By the age of 14, there are still 40 per cent whose literacy or numeracy is not up to the expected standard, and a large proportion of the effort at Further Education colleges (about 20 per cent) is devoted to remedial reading and writing. Even at university, there are now terrifying numbers of students who cannot express themselves in the kind of clear, logical English required for an essay, and in many important respects if you can't write, you can't think. The Royal Literary Fund has, in the past few years, done a wonderful job of establishing Writing Fellows at our universities, offering therapy for those who can't put their thoughts on paper; and yet the fund admits that the scale of the problem is quite beyond its abilities.
It is a shock, arriving at university, and being asked to compose an essay of a couple of thousand words, and then discovering that you can't do it; and this demoralisation is a major cause of dropping-out. It's not that the students lack the brains; the raw circuitry is better than ever. It's the software that's the problem. They have not been properly programmed, because they have not read enough. The only way to learn to write is to be forced time and again to articulate your own thoughts in your own words, and you haven't a hope of doing this if you haven't read enough to absorb the basic elements of vocabulary, grammar, rhythm, style and structure; and young males in particular won't read enough if we continually capitulate and let them fritter their lives away in front of these drivelling machines.
Gordon Brown proposed in his Pre-Budget Report to spend £2,000 per head on improving the reading of six-year-old boys. That is all well and good, especially when you consider that the cost of remedial English in secondary school soars to £50,000 per head. But it would be cheaper and possibly more effective if we all politicians, parents, whoever had the nerve to crack down on this electronic opiate.
So I say now: stop just lying there in your post-Christmas state of crapulous indifference. Get up off the sofa. Can the DVD of Desperate Housewives, and go to where your children are sitting in auto-lobotomy in front of the console.
Summon up all your strength, all your courage. Steel yourself for the screams and yank out that plug.
And if they still kick up a fuss, then get out the sledgehammer and strike a blow for literacy.
Post by: Sindawe on December 27, 2006, 05:46:30 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 27, 2006, 06:00:38 PM
Post by: meinbruder on December 27, 2006, 06:12:30 PM
Ya know, it could be true then and still true now. Perhaps? Truth is like that.
Considering the steady decline in kids SAT scores, boys especially, I do think that games should be a reward rather than a baby sitter. Ive played my share of them but study time comes first. Truth is a wiggly critter, it only fits on a case by case basis not a blanket.
Much to my surprise, I seem to be in agreement with fistful.
}:)>
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 27, 2006, 06:14:32 PM
Can anyone source that quotation?
Post by: meinbruder on December 27, 2006, 06:20:56 PM
You grow in wisdom child.
Can anyone source that quotation?
Can anyone source that quotation?
Child? IIRC, I was buying my first handgun when you were drooling over a pan filled with Cheerios. Perhaps you are one of those rare "wise beyond their years" youngster I've heard about.
}:)>
Post by: French G. on December 27, 2006, 06:32:01 PM
Post by: Sindawe on December 27, 2006, 06:35:59 PM
Quote
Perhaps too much TV, certainly too little hard work in school
Fourteen years ago, scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Tests, those college entrance exams taken with dread each year by a million high school students, began to drift downward—after holding steady for decades. The mean score for verbal ability, measured on the SAT'S 200 to 800 scale, dropped gradually from 478 in the 1962-63 academic year into the 430s. The median mathematics score slipped from 502 into the 470s. In 1975, when the combined score plunged eleven points in just one year, alarmed parents and educators demanded to know why. The widespread concern prompted the College Entrance Examination Board and the Educational Testing Service, which sponsor and develop the exam, to commission an independent panel to study the decline.
Fourteen years ago, scores on the Scholastic Aptitude Tests, those college entrance exams taken with dread each year by a million high school students, began to drift downward—after holding steady for decades. The mean score for verbal ability, measured on the SAT'S 200 to 800 scale, dropped gradually from 478 in the 1962-63 academic year into the 430s. The median mathematics score slipped from 502 into the 470s. In 1975, when the combined score plunged eleven points in just one year, alarmed parents and educators demanded to know why. The widespread concern prompted the College Entrance Examination Board and the Educational Testing Service, which sponsor and develop the exam, to commission an independent panel to study the decline.
The except above comes from an article published in Time Magazine in 1977 ( http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,915392,00.html ). The trend started in 1963, LONG before the first arcade game was released in 1971 or the first home video games were released a year later.
Rather, I'd attribute the fall in testing scores to the dumbing down of our public educational system and less emphasis placed on the basics of reading, writing and mathematics in favor of supporting the students self image, place in the world community and promotion of multiculturalism.
Post by: zahc on December 27, 2006, 06:48:47 PM
Also, there are worthwhile videogames, one shouldn't condemn the entire medium as a waste of time; it smacks of either ignorance or closemindedeness. It's especially enlightening to hear '(all) videogames rot your brain' in an article attempting to get people to read more.
Quote
I'd attribute the fall in testing scores to the dumbing down of our public educational system and less emphasis placed on the basics of reading, writing and mathematics in favor of supporting the students self image, place in the world community and promotion of multiculturalism.
Post by: mtnbkr on December 27, 2006, 06:50:02 PM
Ya know, it could be true then and still true now. Perhaps? Truth is like that.
Or maybe it was never true.I had an Atari, Nintendo, then computer games. I only stopped playing computer games regularly about 5 years ago when I got tired of chasing the tech required to play the latest games (Quake III was the last one I bought).
I managed to earn my MBA while in the clutches of a raging Doom II addiction. I earn well over the average for this area. I've earned technical certifications. I own my own home (well, I have a mortgaged home). I have several technical hobbies. I read 1-2 books a month, fiction, non-fiction, and technical reference.
And lest you think I'm an anomaly, I know plenty more gamers with similar lifestyles and achievements.
How about we stop finding excuses for stupid people and just accept that not everyone is cut out for the CEO position. The world needs laborers too you know.
As for "It's the snarl that gives the game away. It's the sobbing and the shrieking and the horrible pleading that's how you know your children are undergoing a sudden narcotic withdrawal", I just went through the exact same thing with my daughter just 10 minutes ago. Did we take away her favorite video game? Nope. We didn't let her sleep in her new shoes. Maybe we should ban shoes next.
Chris
Post by: Sindawe on December 27, 2006, 07:02:11 PM
Quote
Maybe we should ban shoes next.
I think that might be going a bit far. Maybe just banning 'em for females.My experience mirrors mtnbkr's, 'cept for the MBA. If is person is given to scholarly pursuits, they will take that path. If the person is not given to thinking about gene expression and how rotating singularities twist space-time while that person is on the throne, no amount of cajoling from others will induce them down that path.
Post by: meinbruder on December 27, 2006, 07:21:20 PM
Rather, I'd attribute the fall in testing scores to the dumbing down of our public educational system and less emphasis placed on the basics of reading, writing and mathematics in favor of supporting the students self image, place in the world community and promotion of multiculturalism.
Here's a point I can completely agree with! Otherwise I'd say my point was reinforced in the last few posts.
}:)>
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 27, 2006, 07:43:03 PM
Ya know, it could be true then and still true now. Perhaps? Truth is like that.
Or maybe it was never true.Post by: Perd Hapley on December 27, 2006, 07:44:19 PM
You grow in wisdom child.
Can anyone source that quotation?
Can anyone source that quotation?
Child? IIRC, I was buying my first handgun when you were drooling over a pan filled with Cheerios. Perhaps you are one of those rare "wise beyond their years" youngster I've heard about.
}:)>
No, that's cosine over in the wise beyond their years department. I was quoting a line from the classic "Tai Kwon Leap" sketch. Or, Boot to the Head, as it is also known.
Post by: Bogie on December 27, 2006, 07:49:14 PM
Post by: meinbruder on December 27, 2006, 07:55:49 PM
Actually, I _do_ think that the constant media blitz, including video games, what passes for cartoons these days, etc., etc., tends to lead to a shortened attention span... Not to be paranoid or anything, but sheesh - wouldn't it be weird to find out that there's subliminal messages in the things? Junior can watch cartoons or play video games for hours, but needs ritalin to concentrate on See Dick Run for 10 minutes?
I see you've met my wifes nephew.
}:)>
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 27, 2006, 08:05:24 PM
Post by: meinbruder on December 27, 2006, 08:17:16 PM
How many kids with ADD does it take to change a lightbulb?
Five. Tell me why.
}:)>
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 27, 2006, 08:24:58 PM
How many kids with ADD does it take to change a lightbulb?
Wanna ride bikes?
Post by: Bogie on December 28, 2006, 06:33:16 AM
(actually got this once - different brand/packaging...)
Post by: BryanP on December 28, 2006, 07:04:08 AM
I read several books per month. I also play video games. Granted, I'm 38 years old and was reading books before video games became common. I'll grant you probably read less than I used to because I spend more time playing games.
Currently reading: Memory by Lois McMaster Bujold (if you haven't read her you're missing out)
Currently playing: World of Warcraft.
Post by: Silver Bullet on December 28, 2006, 07:21:18 AM
Post by: Cromlech on December 28, 2006, 07:49:34 AM
Just don't push for any kind of legislation restricting videogame sales, or the like. After all, it is not fair for the responsible ones to be punished for the sins of others, just like you guys don't want to be punished for that which criminals do with firearms.
Post by: Strings on December 28, 2006, 08:00:44 AM
Is it a parenting problem? You bet! Are there kids (and adults) that are becoming addicted? You bet: those with addictive personalities. Should there be legal restrictions against them? HELL NO!
Post by: Headless Thompson Gunner on December 28, 2006, 09:23:54 AM
Quote
It was among the first acts of the Labour Government to institute a universal "literacy" hour in primary schools; and yet, in the six years following 1997, the numbers of young children who said that they didn't like reading rose from 23 per cent to 35 per cent. In spite of all our cash and effort, the surveys increasingly show that children (especially boys) regard reading as a chore, something that needs to be accomplished for the sake of passing tests, not as a joy in itself. It is a disaster, and I refuse to believe that these hypnotic little machines are innocent.
Yeah... We can identify the real cause of this issue (more money and more bureacratic rules won't solve problems; turning reading into a chore or assignment won't make it fun for kids). Or we can blame the video games for making our children fail to respond properly to our brainless yet good-intentioned social programs. Quick, someone guess which choice this nanny-stater made! 
The quality of both parenting and teaching have declined dramatically over the past few decades. It's convenient for the parents and schoolteachers to use video games as a scapegoat. When in doubt, blame someone or something else for your shortcomings. Above all, do not accept responsibility for your own failings.
With this sort of intellectual lazines coming from parents and schoolteachers, it's no wonder their children are turning out to be brainless and undereducated.
Post by: Bogie on December 28, 2006, 09:28:59 AM
The crap their teachers (and parents... that's y'all...) give them to read is Good For Them. Which generally means that it isn't fun, or exciting.
They don't get stories anymore. They get lessons disguised as storybooks.
Nobody's writing Tom Swift or Hardy Boys kinda stuff anymore. The closest thing we've had in the past decade or so was Harry Potter, and except for the religious loonies, it got leaped on...
Post by: Vodka7 on December 28, 2006, 11:02:22 AM
Cheating is rampant, especially at the honors level, where most kids are taking the course just to look better on their college aps, regardless of personal interest or ability. One of my favorite memories was in my eighth grade honors course where our teacher gave us a one question quiz on the Odyssey chapter he had assigned for that day. The question he picked was incredibly easy if you actually read the chapter, but it wasn't covered in the Cliff's Notes at all. Over half the class got a zero.
Really, English courses in American high schools are deeply flawed--books assigned fall into four categories: Black Issues, The Odyssey, Shakespeare, and Other. I got through every honors and AP english course offered, half a dozen electives (by senior year I had at least two or three English classes every day) and I still managed to get to college with an incredibly flawed background in non-Shakespearian British Literature (only thing assigned: Tale of Two Cities), American Literature (one each of Hemmingway, Steinbeck, and Faulkner), Russian Literature (I can't even remember any being assigned, but there had to be one in there somewhere, I hope), and French Literature (Camus.) I was assigned and read plenty of contemporary novels and "hot topic" novels, but I came out of high school never having read even *Mark Twain.* There's something seriously wrong with that.
Reading's another form of entertainment, but when we look at the books we make kids read, it's no surprise they're not reading voluntarily outside of school. If the only movie you were allowed to watch for your most formative years was an endless replay of Crash, you would probably not be watching movies in your spare time, either.
Post by: Strings on December 28, 2006, 11:49:56 AM
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 28, 2006, 11:50:30 AM
Post by: Strings on December 28, 2006, 12:07:13 PM
BTW: regarding Harry Potter "growing" with a child. There are things in the later books (really starting with Goblet of Fire) that you don't want younger kids reading. If I had a child under say, 10, I wouldn't let them read the series through right away, regardless of how mature they were. Goblet... has Harry at 14, and even that might be a touch too young. For those who don't know, Rawling kills off a character, and there is absolutely zero sugar coating. He's there, bang, he's not. Might be just a little much for some of the younger readers...
Post by: Sindawe on December 28, 2006, 12:14:39 PM
Quote
There's plenty of Mark Twain and other kids' lit out there. Isn't there?
Tons of the stuff (as we used to say). I cut my literary teeth on Heinlein, Bradbury & Lovecraft. OK, Lovecraft ain't exactly children's lit, but *I* liked it even if it did give me nightmares. But those were fun too. One has not experienced terror until one has seen an Elder Thing coming out of the heating ducts.Part of the problem lays in the fact that reading is often not seen as "cool", and even though such had never motivated me overly much I was aware of its influence on my peers. Only a lesser number of my friends through school would read for pleasure, the rest shunning it as something only nerds did by choice.
Post by: cosine on December 28, 2006, 12:29:28 PM
No, that's cosine over in the wise beyond their years department.
[Gomer Pyle=bashfully]Gosh![/Gomer Pyle]
Post by: 280plus on December 28, 2006, 12:58:18 PM
Post by: Perd Hapley on December 28, 2006, 01:25:02 PM
Some of us might be embarassed if we find any significant amount of video-gaming in your past. 
Post by: cosine on December 28, 2006, 01:50:19 PM
Cosine, I think I'll start a thread to ask, "What's up with you?" On the other hand that could give you a big head, little tyke. Some of us might be embarassed if we find any significant amount of video-gaming in your past.
Some of us might be embarassed if we find any significant amount of video-gaming in your past. I'm waiting.
Post by: K Frame on December 31, 2006, 04:50:56 AM
You're a bad dad!
I've got to concur with what Mtnbkr said... It's not the video games.
I grew up in the heart of the video game revolution -- Space Invaders, Pac Man, Donkey Kong, Nintendo, Colecovision, Tetris, and everything else. I still have exceptionally fond memories of those console games, especially Zaxxon and Xevious.
But, through it all, I managed to graduate with honors from high school, graduated from an excellent college, and parlay that into jobs in journalism, including one for American Rifleman magazine. All the while, I was playing video games.
Something is rotting my brain, that's for certain, but it's not video games, and this chicken little *expletive deleted*it is getting really old.
Post by: gunsmith on December 31, 2006, 05:12:54 AM
I do like area 51 on those few times I'm near an arcade
Post by: grislyatoms on December 31, 2006, 05:36:14 AM
There are a lot of wonderfully crafted games out there that demand logical thinking and the grey matter must be engaged to play them. Sadly, I do believe these types of games are becoming more scarce.
I have been playing computer and console games since the late 70's. I cut my teeth on a Tandy/Radio Shack Model I and then later a TRaSh80 Model III. I had a printed book of BASIC games; you had to type in each line of BASIC (and then debug the program) to play the game. Learned BASIC programming that way which turned out to be the gateway to a successful career.
My interest in computer games also led to an interest in electronics. I have a FCC Commercial Operator license with GMDSS (Global Maritime Distress and Safety System) and a Radar endorsement.
I have worked on projects including the Seawolf submarine and the U2 aircraft. I also worked for AMD making semiconductors.
Not too shabby for a confessed computer game nut.
Post by: HankB on December 31, 2006, 06:34:09 AM
Quote
. . . the surveys increasingly show that children (especially boys) regard reading as a chore, something that needs to be accomplished for the sake of passing tests, not as a joy in itself.
This is easy to understand . . . most teachers are women, and they assign books that THEY remember reading and enjoying when they were young girls. Thus, boring "chick books" like Vanity Fair are assigned, rather than something that might hold a boy's interest and prove educational such as Roosevelt's African Game Trails.Fortunately the only "black studies" book I was assigned to read back around 7th or 8th grade was Uncle Tom's Cabin . . . and I'm sure many of the comments made in class (including those of the teacher!) would have been frowned on by today's politically correct educators.
I was in elementary school when I was introduced by my folks to sci-fi and adventure . . . initially Tom Swift, but later Doc Savage (paperback reprints, not the original pulps . . . I'm not THAT old!) and the science fiction of Edmund Hamilton, E.E. Smith, etc.
So I learned there WAS interesting reading outside of boring school-assigned pap and comic books.
Post by: Spec ops Grunt on January 01, 2007, 05:26:35 PM
Quote
By all means, restrict the amount of TV and videogame time that your kids have, it does them good to revise and go out in the sun.
Just don't push for any kind of legislation restricting videogame sales, or the like. After all, it is not fair for the responsible ones to be punished for the sins of others, just like you guys don't want to be punished for that which criminals do with firearms.
Just don't push for any kind of legislation restricting videogame sales, or the like. After all, it is not fair for the responsible ones to be punished for the sins of others, just like you guys don't want to be punished for that which criminals do with firearms.
Agreed!
Post by: S_O_Laban on January 01, 2007, 09:48:23 PM
Quote
By all means, restrict the amount of TV and videogame time that your kids have, it does them good to revise and go out in the sun.
Just don't push for any kind of legislation restricting videogame sales, or the like. After all, it is not fair for the responsible ones to be punished for the sins of others, just like you guys don't want to be punished for that which criminals do with firearms.
Just don't push for any kind of legislation restricting videogame sales, or the like. After all, it is not fair for the responsible ones to be punished for the sins of others, just like you guys don't want to be punished for that which criminals do with firearms.
Agreed!
I would agree with this sentiment.
I have a 13Y/O son who has logged more game time than is probably healthy for the the average kid.... but the average kid he is not. Most thirteen year olds don't read the whole Bible( OT and all ) cover to cover. (Actualy, very few adults have every read just the OT from start to finish.) I didn't even know he was doing this until I caught him one night.
He is a great kid and holds a GPA in the 3.8 range at a private school. His older brother (diagnosised with ADD) hasn't logged a fraction of the game time that the younger one has. Has a 2.6 GPA and is in some type of trouble on a regular basis. Although he plays some games occasionally, he shows little to no interest in them. It is all about the individual, blanket statements are almost never accurate.