Originally Posted by msxyz
Youth crime rate is going down (at least in the US); this would prove that evergrowing market of videogames has not affected at all the crime rate among minors.
As much as I agree that the videogame market hasn't changed crime much, that's not necessarily causal. Sure, there's a correlation, but you could easily assert (and have no real evidence to the contrary) that without the video game market, crime would've gone down even faster. I should stress - I agree that video games have stuff-all to do with crime. At the end of the day, people need to take responsibility for their own actions (in my opinion), but figures such as this don't necessarily make a logical attack on the oppositions arguments - they merely weaken their plausibility.
EDIT: Admittedly, that attack on plausibility is pretty significant. They can't have it both ways on this front. If they want to claim that video games have a huge impact on the temperament of those who play them, and if there's been a negative correlation between video game production and crime, they'd have to assert that there was some causal link. If they claim that video games have no impact on the decreasing crime rate, how can they make a valid claim that video games are such a negative influence at all?