What if these children had played the game at a friends house, a friend who was not involved in this killing? What if the children had played the game while their mother was out of the house? How are the parents to stop this?

Parents simply cannot monitor everything their children do/watch/listen to all the time, and even if they could, people are free to do what they want.

The "It's the parents fault" argument automatically assumes that the parents are bad parents, and didn't do anything to try to prevent this behaviour. So, if the parents did everything in their power to prevent this behaviour, and constantly preached to their children that it was wrong, and the kid still killed somebody and blamed Mortal Kombat, how is this the parents fault?

When my sister was 14, she snuck out of the house, stole my parents car, took it for a joyride and ran through somebody's fence. She was then arrested, and while waiting for my parents at the station, she stole $300
while an officer turned his back. Was this my parents fault? Must have been all those years of church or loving family or something.

As i'm typing this, my parents don't know, because they're out of the house. I could be looking at child porn, and even though my parents have always condemned that, I could just do it anyway - because I feel like it. I have the free will to do so, even though I know it fits society's model of what 'wrong' is. Is this my parents fault?
No, it's nobody's fault. It's my decision.

You see, the parents are an obvious place to start, yes, but it isn't their fault as soon as something goes wrong. If they bought the game for their children, didn't bother to teach them what 'right' and 'wrong' were at all, and were never around, then yes, perhaps they might be partially to blame. But was this the case? Who knows. Apparently nobody even cares because it's still their fault regardless of circumstances.

I said it in #mortalkombat a few hours ago, and I'll say it again here: People are so STUPID nowadays.

If you don't know right from wrong, and reality from fiction, then go play Pong or Madden, or something like that, because games like GTA, Doom, and Mortal Kombat are not for you! Only idiots copy what they see in video games and think it's cool. Next thing you know, someone's gonna get smashed to death when he's not even wearing the proper shoulder pads, or get his skull crushed for not wearing the proper helmet, in a game of football, and the killers will turn around and say "we learned that from that new Madden game." It sounds stupid, but if blaming video games for deaths gets far enough, we could be hearing such an accusation.


I'll save this quote for future references!


I don't mean to trail off-topic, but one last thing...last time I checked, Tekken's fighting engine is far superior to MKDA/MKD's, so get your facts straight before you slam another fighting game, please? Thank you.

I agree it's not the parent's fault 100%, It's the kids fault... if u have no self control it's your own responsability.. that's why it makes me mad when they hide behind excuses like vieogames or movies..
seriously.. if u get drunk and beat ur friend to death and throw him into a frozen river... that's no accident..
To someone who said something about gun laws and latvia not punishing these kids.... woot? They get 20 to life if found guilty and there where no guns involved...

You misundertand me. I'm not stating that it's the entire parent's fault for their children's wrong doings. What I'm trying to state is they shouldn't be upset over the contents of a game to which isn't suitable for their children. If a game's rated M (ages 17 & up) and the child is fifteen, then common sense would tell the parents that it's not the right game for their child. Thus, suing a game developer for a fault on the parent's/child's behalf is absurd.


Now, how these children get ahold of these titles without their parent's consent is beyond me. However, it's still the parent's responsibility to monitor their child. Whether the parent needs to lock their child into their own room in the middle of the night to prevent them from sneaking out (if the child is irresponsible) or having neighbors monitor their every moves, it's still the parents responsibility.


It's like this, if your neighbor's dog viciously attacked your pet causing severe damages, who would be held accountable for hospital bills? The dog for it's actions, or the dog's owner?

Lighten up, I'm pretty sure he was just kidding. People won't let this Tekken v.s MK thing die will they? Oppinions are subjective and some preffer their engine to be solid and other aspects of the game to be higher than most other fighters. To each his own.

Now as for the subject at hand, I'm pretty much 100% in agreement with krackerjack. The parents and the media are always the first to be blamed and the kids are always the last. I remember when I was 12-14...I could tell that murder was wrong. It's not something a kid above the age of 6 doesen't understand. So when it's done purposefully with a mentality whcih can tell the difference between right and wrong then there is no reason to point fingers at others.

The article doesn't mention anybody sueing anybody else, or anybody being upset (at least, what was shown in this thread didn't). It simply states a truth: that the children used moves they saw in a MK game. That was the childrens decision, nobodys fault.



Bad example. Dogs cannot reason. People know what rules and consequences are, and can choose to break or ignore them if they wish, knowing that they can potentially be punished severely. Dogs can not, and human rights don't apply to them.

All I have to say is- the scissor neck break was in the movie, not the game- therefore those people are all full of horse shat.

This crap again...geez...yeah give more ammo to the groups who want shut down Video Games, etc. because it cause moral decay.

*smacks forehead and shakes head*

You're not getting the point. Point taken, they're the property of their neighbors, therefor they're held accountable, as to with a parent. Their children our their property (until they reach adult age), therefor the parents are partially aheld responsible for their child's actions. If a child blantantly beats up another child at school for their lunch money & the victim (beaten child) has hospital bills to which need to be paid for, then the parent (of the bully child) would be held accountable for paying the hospital bills. Whatever punishment the school sees fit for the bully's actions are their decisions. If some parents cannot accept the wrongdoings of their children, then perhaps they should'nt even bother having them.

I get what you're saying, I just think it's stupid.
I do see where you're coming from, but I don't see why or what the point is, ultimately.

What is blaming the parents going to actually accomplish? Sure, it gives somebody to blame, but what's the point in that? What does that solve? The kids won't learn anything if you blame the parents, and it just makes life difficult for parents who may not have even had anything to do with the wrong doing (demonstrated by fools in this thread screaming "it's the parents fault!" without considering the actual circumstances, making the parents out to be criminals for no reason but to protect the reputation of their favourite videogame.)

If you take blame out of the equation and recognize that it was the childs decision, then you teach the child about responsibility, and stop all this media hysteria about everything causing people to do shit against their own will.

It is also the WAY the child is brought up that concerns the parents as well. If kids are left to their own devices (which they often are anymore) to figure out what is correct behavior and what is wrong behavior, using only tv to tell them what is right and what is wrong instead of a parental unit, then I am sorry, that is going to be ONE screwed up kid.
The parent arguement is not just "the parent should have been there to stop it". Nobody can watch their kid 24/7. But 9 times out of 10, if a parent brings up a child instead of letting the tv do it, they are going to have a better grasp as to what is right and what is wrong. A parent being there to raise the child, heck, even just being THERE for the child, could make all the difference in the world as to how that child turns out in life. Statistically speaking, most parents anymore just are NOT there for their kids. THAT is where the general statements come from as well. Make sense?
Not to say all parents are good parents. But many are. And most are better teachers than tv and other forms of media could ever be (especially with the screwed up shows and music that are on now).

As for the person saying that MK was not toatally to blame in the article and we were all fuming for nothing, take a look at the headline. Many times, people just read the headline and the very first few paragraphs of a news article to get the gist. It's a common tactic used by the news industry to get attention.
And the title mentioned Mortal Combat moves being simulated.
THAT is what the public is going to walk away with.
THAT was the intent of the article.
THAT is one of the things that ies ticking me off.

No, not pointing the finger on the parents as to blame, but yet protesting that parents need to discipline their children better. It's not a fact of whom's to blame or who's fault it is, but yet how & why the situation occured, what could have prevented it? Who's to blame, the drunk driver or the cars involved in the collision? Who's to blame, the gun or the moron pulling the trigger? Who's to blame, the bank/store/house being robbed or the robbers? These are questions you need to ask yourself.

Just because people know something is wrong, doesn't mean they won't do it.
If that were the case, then nobody would shoplift anything.
I guarantee each of the people involved in this killing knew they had done wrong when they killed the kid - if they didn't they wouldn't have tried to hide the body.



You can discipline the hell out of somebody, but it still doesn't take away their free will. If they feel like killing somebody, they'll kill somebody knowing full well that it's unacceptable. No matter how much of a good parent you are, no amount of good parenting will change that people have a mind of their own, and do what they like.



Nothing will ever prevent things like this, because people will always have a choice. You can pour all the money and effort in the world into trying to stop it - but if somebody feels like killing someone, they're going to do it anyway. Don't believe me? Look in the newspaper. I bet each and every one of those people know that what they were doing was considered to be 'wrong' at the time, but they still did it.



Okay: Who's to blame, the killer or his parents?
I'd go with the killer.

So you can honestly sit here and tell me that if more parents would actually take the time out to sit & decipher the problems of the media (right & wrong) with their children, that it wouldn't reduce these kinds of incidents? Yeah, sure. Maybe if we all lived on some bizarre world where everything was the opposite of what it should be.

A child simply being blamed for a murder to which he/she commits doesn't make their actions justifyable. If that child committed the murder (they knew what they were doing when they pulled the trigger) then they darn sure deserve every bit of blame coming to them, because they're simply guilty, but no. Lets' be conservative & not try to push the guilt on the child, after all, they're still minors and have yet much to learn about life. Lets' not question the authority of the parents within the household, since it makes us look like we're pointing too many fingers (even though these children have the mindframes of adults). Lets not try to find a solution to reduce further instances like this from happening.


If these kinds of analogies expand, then we'll continue to have even more teen-driven (& under teen) murders & homicides like the "Trench Coat Mafia" & the "Virginia Sniper."

Nobody even has to, because everybody knows damn well what right and wrong are, but the point I was making is that they'll commit crimes anyway, knowing that it's wrong, just because they can. Everybody already does it.
Wouldn't make the slightest bit of difference.



I didn't say it did. I just said the child needs to take responibility.



Yup.



I didn't say that either. I said no amount of telling people what's right and wrong is going to stop them from killing each other - you'll never prevent it, but this doesn't mean you shouldn't try. Same concept as world peace.



We'll continue to have them regardless, because people can, and will, do whatever the fuck they want - knowing that it's wrong before they do it.

Alright. Whatever you say. Doesn't make it true, but whatever. I respect your opinion, though I don't agree with it. You believe what you wish.

Oh man, I was 2 seconds away from writing that myself. Right on, SoS. People are frickin' idiots. (Sometimes I feel like I'm a MIB or something, and don't even know about it yet, praying the mothership would come and get me off of this flippin' rock full of retards...)

Good arguement, gents. You all have very valid points. This is simply not a black and white situation (as if anything really is). There are just so many insanely variable factors involved, that placing the blame anywhere is going to light a fire under someone's tookus.

I imagine it like this. Several Latvian families know each other as friends - all party-goers, big drinkers, maybe a little rowdier than your average crew. They all hang out together, and their kids do too (with minimal supervision). Little Franz gets his hands on a copy of MK:D - the parents don't care. The kids sneak into the liquor cabinet, have a zany night, get stupid, kill someone, and decide to point the finger at Midway.

Parents? Some better supervision on their part should have prevented this from happening.
Kids? Some better decision-making on their part would definitely have prevented this from happening.
Midway? Just churning out some pixelated blood to make a buck.



Maybe not, but they have guardians of some sort... and if they don't, I suppose that would sum it up right there. Absolutely no guidance, living in a world where they create their own rules and do whatever they want.

The whole 'age' concept has always thrown me for a loop too. When should kids be tried as adults? 16? 14? How old is old enough to know better? Who in the hell should answer these questions!? It's the same exact arguement when I ask "Why is 21 the 'magic' number at which we can purchase alcohol?" What makes 21 so special? Is there scientific proof that as soon as I wake up on my 21st birthday, I'm suddenly capable of making perfectly logical decisions all the time, instantaneously maturing into an 'adult'? Apparently, I'm not ready to watch porno until I've breathed air for 6,573 days either. Not to say those ages aren't appropriate - it's just odd how we try to classify everyone into groups, when in fact, there are a scholad of 13 and 14 year olds out there who have more common sense than a lot of 20-something'ers.

Blah blah, I'll shut up now.

Krakerjack please re-read what my comment was that you posted. First, I said "9 times out of 10" (which should probably be 8 or 7, now that I realize it). Not "they will always know right from wrong and never do it".
Next I said "they are going to have a better grasp as to what is right and what is wrong", not "they will always know right from wrong and never do wrong in the first place". Of course kids are going to make mistakes. But there is a SLIGHT difference between shoplifting and beating the crap out of a so-called friend and killing him.
Yes of course they hid the body. They at least know "well crap, if we get caught we are in trouble with the law". That's a little different from, say "dude, we really shouldn't do stuff like this in the first place. This is a human life we would be taking".
The mentality there is a WHOLE different animal. It's a clash between a "let's not get caught" mentality and "we shouldn't do something this terrible in the firstplace, it's unthinkable" mentality. And the mentality depends greatly on the upbringing they recieved. It's all about influences. Behavioral scientists have shown this again and again and again.

Heh. It's hard to tell. Some doctors say at age 2 when a kid first says "no" they pretty much know what they are doing. Granted, that doesn't mean a 2 year old knows what they are doing when they chug down a bottle of Daniels, but still lol
It is really difficult to tell. I think it really depends on the person. And that is really hard to nail down a general number that contains the majority of people.

If you're a parent, you will look after your kids. And you should teach them a thjing about video games violence and reality. On the other hand, you cannot monitor them, and you can't be responsible for everything they do.

They should taste the consequences for their crime, and parents should help them anyway they can, but don't try to free them from the senctence.

I cannot believe it...too

i totally agree with yu man its the media and people liek bush n shit makin us look dumb they hear about more war and fighting in iraq that they do in videogames or in entertainment ita also teh way the parents and guardians watch their kids tehy proly lived in a fuked up home or sumthin i dunno but this is bull shit ima be soo pissed if they start makin anti- video games and anti- violent entertainment on this countru tehn we wouldnt be free to make our own decisons and taht what tehse kids did make their own decison by killing thier freind and apparently not caring.

Whoa...

was that in English?

I'm gonna agree with krackerjack on this one. (He's usually right on the money anyway.)

I don't want every grown-up criminal around to say they were a victim of "bad parenting" when they were kids, and by us refusing to point fingers at the parents we can prevent that kind of mentality.

krackerjack, I agree with every single word you have said. Smart and realistic points. You are correct.

As for the article, it did NOT surprise me at all. I still don’t see why so many are upset/surprised about this. We see death, suicides and killings all the time, and we have seen Mk being blamed for this kinds of stuff before.

People are just people. We are all imperfect. Sadly, some have more serious problems then others.

I wont judge anyone because: First, I have no idea how this kinds were and how was the kid that died.

Second: Maybe he “had it coming”, maybe he didn’t. Some might say “no one disserves to kill anyone”, and I agree, but people DON’T react the same way as others do. We are all different in our emotions and reactions.

I am NOT justifying this murder, but I wont judge because I wouldn’t want to be judged neither, not without knowing ALL THE FACTS.

Its no use, it doesnt change anything, its no help.