I came across this article today and wanted to share it after our discussion of public opinion last week and parties this week. Thoughts about this question and / or the results?
Poll: 67 Percent Of Republicans Think Video Games Are Bigger Threat Than Guns
Question: What do you think is a bigger safety threat in America: guns or violent video games?
Guns 14%
Video games 67%
Not sure 19%
While there is probably not a better way to word this question, it in a way supports the idea of boiling down a very complex issue, such as gun violence, to one very specific cause. That is how public opinion polls often work, especially since the general public is unlikely to sit around for long periods answering question after question in order to for the researcher to gain a better view of the subtleties of each participant's views. There has been plenty of research on the effects of violent video games, each with varying outcomes. While researching gun control laws is more challenging, it has been done and individuals will usually pay attention to the research or point of view that they already support.
John Sides' video on the blog touches on the idea that an individual will more readily identify with thoughts and opinions of a representative who identifies with that individual's political party. Unfortunately, it seems Democrats could spout out facts about gun control all day, but Republicans will likely ignore those facts in order to protect their rights as they see them.
As a side note, I thought this was interesting article-http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2013/jan/18/mark-shields/pbs-commentator-mark-shields-says-more-killed-guns/
I definitely think the question can be worded differently. I think saying "violent video games" is leading since it associates violence to video games and leaves gun neutral. Furthermore, many people view guns positively because of the safety it assures them through their ability to protect themselves so even using the phrase "safety threat" may be problematic.
It's really interesting the comparisons being made in defense of guns. As Joe Nocera aptly pointed out in his New York Times column (see link below) people have been saying bath tubs kill more people or cars kill more people, attempting to demonstrate that violence or deaths cannot be solely attributed to guns. But as he pointed out, these are by design not created to be lethal.
That being said, given the saliency of the issue of gun violence, while the question is problematic, the answer is not surprising. Republicans will have similar views possibly because of their party ideology and their insistence on smaller government interference in their constitutional rights.
http://nocera.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/07/the-gun-report-february-7-2013/
While I could have predicted that conservative voters would blame video games more than guns, I was surprised to find such a dramatic gap between the two. The video game angle seems like such a tired (and largely unfounded) premise, and we can add these video games to the following list of things ailing society at some point: 2 Live Crew, Marilyn Manson, The Catcher in the Rye, jazz music, etc.
I do not mean to suggest that guns are an otherwise supreme safety threat, but without fail we've always run to scapegoats to shape or view of problems.
That being said, someone looking to argue guns do not present a major safety threat, or that they in fact bolster safety, might use this poll to say that American public doesn't want gun control. Given his analysis of counterterrorism policy from last week, I suspect such use would be much to Ben Freidman's chagrin.
Coming from a person who has never been too into video games, I'll simply offer my opinion on this.
I wholeheartdily agree that a shift to video games works in favor of the gun advocates of the world. Its a cop-out in a way, but whats funny is those who are turning their attention to this question. bring up great questions about the American culture of guns, and what they mean to us. When I was a teenager, I took a gun safety class that emphasized respect for firearms, and their raw destructive power. The relatively few violent video games I've played cast a hero who uses weapons and violence in a conflict. Most people I've talked to feel guns are the last defense against tyranny or chaos. If this is the case, then the question is how can policy respect Americans belief in defense and continue to make the country safer? The definition of "assault weapon" is one way to start. The phrase itself is problematic, and has been overused by those who don't believe in guns as much as video games get blamed for a culture that clings to them. I like to say there is a policy that would satisfy everyone, but that is just naive. There will be winners and losers in any new policy, but there will also be a group of gun users who respect their power enough to realize that a policy designed to curtail internal proliferation has little to do with their sport, or their livelihood.
It seems that the issue with violent video games comes up all the time yet games keep getting more violent. With the repeated issues relating to how violent games cause gun violence people will start to believe it. Having conducted the research so closer to the recent shooting at Sandy Brook, people are going to look for blame and the easiest target would be violent games. By diverting the issue to violent games as the source of gun violence and still being able to have guns rights has it really solved anything. In addition to what Michael had stated as “list of things ailing society” where does Hollywood play in this? Hollywood just like videos games has been pushing the limits of violence.
While I think that guns can provide and do provide safety to individuals, they are still available and if anyone wanted to access guns it is not too difficult. A few years back I was asked to help an individual purchase a gun since they needed interpretation and I was surprised at how easy it was for someone to obtain a gun. The individual was told that they were approved once they ran a background check, which was a week or so. Even with the background check I thought that the process would have been longer, considering that the individual had only lived in the US for a few years. While I don’t think there will ever be a gun ban I feel that tougher gun laws would definitely reduce gun violence.