Do violent video games create killers?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Do violent video games create killers?". Your opponent's style: Shroud

Yes 100% it does. Super bad. It makes people crazy

Nah dude, that's straight up backwards thinking. You know what actually makes people "crazy"? Poverty, abuse, mental health issues that go untreated - real problems that gaming actually helps people escape from.Look man, the data completely destroys your argument. For every 1% increase in violent video game sales, crime actually drops by 0.03% [1]. That's the opposite of what you're claiming. Kids grinding Fortnite at home aren't out on the streets causing problems - they're literally too busy playing to commit crimes. The most dangerous age for young men is 18-19, exactly when they're most likely to be gaming instead of getting into real trouble. Gaming keeps potential troublemakers occupied and off the streets where actual violence happens. Your whole theory falls apart when you look at Japan - they consume games at the same rate as Americans but have almost zero violent crime. If games created killers, Tokyo would be a war zone.

You're pulling numbers out of thin air while completely ignoring the real pattern here. Only 26 of the 136 mass shooters since 1992 played violent video games - that's under 20% [1]. But here's what you don't want to talk about: the Columbine shooters were "avid players of weapon-based combat games Wolfenstein 3D and Doom" [1]. Your Japan comparison is garbage because they have completely different access to guns. I can't walk into a Walmart in Tokyo and buy an AR-15. But guess what happens when someone obsessed with violent games DOES get their hands on real weapons? The Virginia Tech shooter was immediately blamed on Counter-Strike by experts on Fox News [1] - that's the first thing people think of because the connection is obvious. You say gaming keeps kids occupied? Tell that to the families of Sandy Hook victims where CBS reported the shooter "was motivated by violent video games and a strong desire to kill more people than another infamous mass murderer" [1]. These aren't kids grinding Fortnite - these are disturbed individuals training their minds for mass murder through repetitive virtual killing.

Dude, you're cherry-picking random incidents while ignoring the actual neuroscience. The latest research completely destroys your argument - scientists had people play Grand Theft Auto V for weeks and found "no negative effect on human empathy for pain and emotional reactivity to violence" [1]. They literally measured brain activity while people watched others get hurt - the games changed nothing. Your Columbine example proves my point perfectly. Those shooters had access to military-grade weapons, were severely bullied, and had documented mental health issues. Blaming Doom is like blaming their breakfast cereal. The real question is why two disturbed kids could get their hands on guns, not what games they played. And that Sandy Hook claim? Pure media speculation with zero evidence. Meanwhile, 85% of U.S. teens play video games, including violent ones, yet youth violence has plummeted for decades. If games created killers, we'd have millions of them by now. Your whole theory collapses when you realize the most gaming-obsessed generation in history is also the least violent. The connection you're desperately trying to make just isn't there in the data.

Your neuroscience study is cherry-picked garbage - and here's why your whole argument falls apart. Over half of mass shooters demonstrated interest in violence through movies, video games, books and other media [1]. That's not breakfast cereal - that's a pattern of violent media consumption feeding violent fantasies. But let me destroy your "correlation isn't causation" nonsense with actual research. The Christchurch shooter and seven copycats were similar in demographics, ideology, social isolation, and video game influences on their radicalization and attacks - their social needs appeared to be a major driving factor, but their attacks didn't occur until after gaming and online extremism failed to satisfy them [1]. These killers literally used gaming as training wheels for mass murder. Your "least violent generation" claim is a joke when 648 people died in mass shootings in 2022 - the second-highest annual tally ever recorded, with gun violence continuing at a rate averaging at least one mass shooting per day [1]. We're not getting less violent - we're getting better at mass killing, and these games are teaching the methodology. Stop pretending this is about breakfast cereal when disturbed minds are literally gamifying murder.

Your whole argument crumbles when you look at the actual timeline. While you're freaking out about gaming "training wheels," youth violence has plummeted 70% since the 1990s - exactly when violent games exploded [1]. That's not correlation, that's your theory getting destroyed by reality. Your mass shooting stats are cherry-picked panic. The Oxford Internet Institute studied thousands of British teens using official violence ratings and parent reports - not media speculation. They found "no relationship between aggressive behaviour in teenagers and the amount of time spent playing violent video games" [8]. This wasn't some lab experiment - it was real kids, real parents, real data. And here's what kills your "training wheels" nonsense: if games taught killing, we'd see it everywhere. Japan consumes the same violent games but has virtually zero gun violence. South Korea has the most intense gaming culture on Earth - where are their mass shooters? Your theory only works if you ignore the entire rest of the world. The real pattern isn't gaming - it's access to weapons, untreated mental illness, and social isolation. Games are what keep troubled kids inside grinding achievements instead of outside causing actual problems.