Censorship

Originally posted by BackFire
No, I don't think that's accurate at all.

Perhaps if there was also no violence in the real world I could see this as being true. But, these mentally unstable people who supposedly get their ideas from films/books/music etc still have the news to watch, they still have real life violence to inspire them to do their deeds.

I mean, before violent film and music there were still murders, there were still violence. Violent films didn't create violence, violence created violent film.

What if there was harsher censorship on the news, and few people were exposed to real violence after birth? Then you think there'd be no way they could go and accept the ideas portrayed in these movies as okay?

Canada lets soft porn on TV but not Howard stern. Say some racist stuff its the end of the world up here. A major radio station in Quebec lost its license over that.

Originally posted by manny321
Canada lets soft porn on TV but not Howard stern. Say some racist stuff its the end of the world up here. A major radio station in Quebec lost its license over that.

Soft porn isn't considered a hate crime.

Originally posted by silver_tears
What if there was harsher censorship on the news, and few people were exposed to real violence after birth? Then you think there'd be no way they could go and accept the ideas portrayed in these movies as okay?

People will always find a way to act out what they want. These mediums are just excuses for the "insane" or idiotic.

It's like people who say pornography causes sex. There was sex before pornography. Like there were murders before violence on screen or literature.

There should never be censorship on the news. It's the news.

-AC

Oh no doubt about that, but it just makes you wonder where it all started, like the violence in human nature and such.

And I'm not talking biblical Cain and Abel either.

Your question answers itself.

Violence is a part of basic human nature. Always has been, always will be.

The films that deal with violence are a result of the real world violence, not the other way around.

As AC said, people will always find a reason to kill or hurt people, if you take away ALL form of violence in the media - news, movies, music, books, ect - People will still kill other people. It's unavoidable.

Originally posted by silver_tears
But can you completely avoid them even when previewed on tv during the day when kids are watching?

Not to mention it's not my sanity I'm worried about when discussing and watching these films, it's people who are depraved and might get ideas by watching them, it's not me, it's the other guy ermm

But seriously, I do think that these films can influence peoples' actions.

Originally posted by BackFire
Your question answers itself.

Violence is a part of basic human nature. Always has been, always will be.

The films that deal with violence are a result of the real world violence, not the other way around.

As AC said, people will always find a reason to kill or hurt people, if you take away ALL form of violence in the media - news, movies, music, books, ect - People will still kill other people. It's unavoidable.

How about those who make said films?
They're not affected at all having the imagination to make this up?

Not that I've seen.

Most of the people who make these films are just normal artists trying to make a point (though be it - extreme) about something. Most are supposed to be very nice and down to earth people.

Hmmm, thanks for that input on my questions BF 😄

Originally posted by silver_tears
How about those who make said films?
They're not affected at all having the imagination to make this up?

Clive Barker.

End of story. Anyone who knows about film knows the kind of twisted, horrific, demented things that man comes up with. He perfectly fine. If anything, getting it all out on film has kept him that way.

-AC

Anytime.

Originally posted by KharmaDog
That's just precious.

As for censorship, sometimes I believe it isn't all together a bad thing. What I find odd is what is (or is not) censored. I find it perplexing that I can watch a character on T.V. get his guts blown across the screen with a high powered rifle, but that other people deem viewing a woman's bare breasts as offensive.

i think censorship is a ridiculous notion. america is way to tight about it....That being said, Im a big believer in consumer choice.

personally, i dont want my hard-earned money paying a smut-peddler like Howard Stern a portion of his $100million/year contract. i think he's a despicable and insulting person who profits by offending everyone he can think of.

censorship, no. consumer choice, yes. if a company is gonna support someone like him, well, im not gonna support the company.

Originally posted by edwinian
i think censorship is a ridiculous notion. america is way to tight about it....That being said, Im a big believer in consumer choice.

personally, i dont want my hard-earned money paying a smut-peddler like Howard Stern a portion of his $100million/year contract. i think he's a despicable and insulting person who profits by offending everyone he can think of.

censorship, no. consumer choice, yes. if a company is gonna support someone like him, well, im not gonna support the company.

Why not you support media's like msnbc and fox and the destruction they show on TV is far worse then talking about boobies and such. I think we all will find that there are more people that have sex over the course of their life then that same group of people killing others....

Hmm makes you think about censorship.......death is ok .....sex is BAD

Originally posted by soleran30
Why not you support media's like msnbc and fox and the destruction they show on TV is far worse then talking about boobies and such. I think we all will find that there are more people that have sex over the course of their life then that same group of people killing others....

Hmm makes you think about censorship.......death is ok .....sex is BAD

um, i never said i do support what's on the news, or death and destruction. all i said was that im gonna choose to support who i want and make it matter the only place they can feel it: the wallet. companies i dont support aint gonna see a dime.

Originally posted by edwinian
um, i never said i do support what's on the news, or death and destruction. all i said was that im gonna choose to support who i want and make it matter the only place they can feel it: the wallet. companies i dont support aint gonna see a dime.

no no I realize that I was just trying to illustrate the fact if you pay for cable or a magazine or newspaper you could be funding that which you may not want to. Even if you don't watch TV but pay for it essentially you have supported it.....not a sermon just a thought....our media in USA is so mixed

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
People will always find a way to act out what they want. These mediums are just excuses for the "insane" or idiotic.

It's like people who say pornography causes sex. There was sex before pornography. Like there were murders before violence on screen or literature.

There should never be censorship on the news. It's the news.

-AC

I understand what you mean, however, you seem to be taking it to the other extreme...

Sex may have taken place before pornography..however, images depicting adults engaging in explicit sexual/violent acts, have never been as easily accessible and as widely distributed to individuals desiring it as they have been today.

The Internet, television, video games, etc..excessively market gratuitous violence/sexual media to the public. Usually this type of media is marketed to those who are the least capable of distinguishing fantasy from reality, and are too naive/young to see the harmful repercusions of engaging in such activities.

I believe some censorship is necessary. Particularly when the action being censored infringes upon another individual's rights, and especially when those rights represent those of young children.

censorship is indeed needed, but I don't get why ppl are so uptight (almost everywhere) about porn. I don't see nothing wrong with showing it to kids of 12.

Violence I get (a little cause I was playing doom when I was 8 or 10 and I never turned out that bad)

Originally posted by whobdamandog
The Internet, television, video games, etc..excessively market gratuitous violence/sexual media to the public. Usually this type of media is marketed to those who are the least capable of distinguishing fantasy from reality, and are too naive/young to see the harmful repercusions of engaging in such activities.

I believe some censorship is necessary. Particularly when the action being censored infringes upon another individual's rights, and especially when those rights represent those of young children.

Where did you work that first part out? You can buy porn mags in a regular store here, right off the top shelf. They're made available to everyone old enough to buy. Just because someone unstable is likely to buy one, doesn't mean it's aimed at them.

The way I see it, adults are adults. They don't need people to protect them. They don't need their porn mags to be censored, what's the point in censoring porn mags or videos? If a young kid is not monitored to the point that he/she can download any kind of shit on the net, then it's not the porn's fault.

Why should a normal man be subjected to censored porn purely on the off chance that an impressionable kid might get a hold of it and act it out? The violent acts are mostly on the net anyway, so if parents aren't keeping tabs on what their younger kids are doing online then whatever they see and however it affects them, is their own fault. Not to mention that if a kid sees a man strangling a woman in some internet snuff movie and decides it's "ok", then the parents haven't done a good enough job anyway.

I don't see why I should be stopped watching things I can handle just because there are people out there too irresponsible to control those they are responsible for, or themselves.

-AC