Korean Supreme Court Says Man Isn’t Anti-Violence As He Plays Video Games
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 лют 2024
- This video takes a look at the Korean Supreme Court jailing a man - in part due to him playing the video game PUBG: Battlegrounds.
Comments & Business Enquiries: dandan.censoredgaming (at) gmail .com
Censored Gaming creates content on how media is changed around the world. Subscribe to learn about all of the different types of changes made to video games and other media.
---------------------------------------------------
Tip Jar
---------------------------------------------------
The monthly Patreon:
/ censoredgaming
The per-creation Patreon:
/ censoredgamingcreation
Ko-fi:
ko-fi.com/censoredgaming
If you want to remain anonymous or go by a different name, just send an email or leave a note with your tip.
Due to the delayed billing for specifically the "per-creation" Patreon, the video shoutouts and credits will be right after the billing date. However, you'll be able to access the other Patreon features straight away.
---------------------------------------------------
Censored Gaming Links
---------------------------------------------------
Twitter:
/ censoredgaming_
Facebook:
/ censoredgaming
---------------------------------------------------
The Korea Herald article:
www.koreaherald.com/view.php?... - Ігри
"What do you mean you're against cannibalism? According to imdb's records, you gave The Silence of the Lambs a 10/10! This court questions your sincerity and chooses to believe you crave human flesh. To the dungeon with you!"
That is cherry-picking.
A more poignant example would be Spec Ops: The Line. Maybe that's why they took it offline 😆
Remember everyone. Video games are always used as an excuse regardless of being left or right leaning
tale as old as time (or as old as Mortal Kombat lol)
Why I tend to keep my gaming hobby to myself...
That's why I hate politics so much.
@@NetBattler pretty sure that's "Wrong think" lol
Video games are made out to be the most facist thing since that austrian guy.
Probably the same geniuses who would call you a "PDF-file" for looking at cartoon women 🤬🤬🤬
Anyone equating cartoons with real life shouldn't be a judge.
"But this character that looks and acts like nothing that exists in this world is under 18 as decided by some person. Therefore you are evil if you feel any attraction to said character. Why? Because we said so."
You are if they are drawn to resemble a child.
@@munchwad This ain't Cuties.
@@munchwadYou have a Persona 5 profile pic and most likely play it you have no right to speak.
"Man"
I can't help but remember Arkham Asylum subreddit.
Same, so that title was throwing me off, that subreddit has altered my brain at a fundamental level.
@@AlexDown1 Me too, man
Am I stupid?
A man has fallen in the river of Lego city?
Why did Jonker become a judge? Is he stupid?
I guess people who enjoy playing GTA must all be criminal then.
Oh-Ho!!! You hit the Bullseye, bud!! Heh-heh!
I've been recently playing the Phoenix Wright games, in these morons' logic, that officially makes me an attorney then.
I guess people who are playing Megaman battle network are hackers then..
@@NetBattler I've hacked the world with my Navi. I am now an Emperor of the Net🤣...
Missing the point? It's not that playing violent video games is a crime, but trying to escape mandatory military service without a legitimate excuse.
That's like saying playing Tekken makes you a pro street fighter.
No what they are saying is that your ANTI VIOLENCE but your playing a video game about violence. You can't be anti something but still enjoy or consume something that is the very message your against. But this guy was saying it because he didn't want to be drafted and made to fight in war like a wuss while his other fellow countrymen do. So he is saying he is antiviolence and against his beliefs yet he still plays games for enjoyment that contradict that message. So no your example is wrong because your not thinking about it right. Its more like he is playing Tekken games but he says the sight of violence triggers his PTSD or is completely turned off by the sight of it. This man just wants an excuse to get out of obligations.
@@Fate862Fiction isn't reality... People can enjoy fictional content in games, movies, and books. While being disgusted and against real-life versions of said reality. Let's take your view to the ultimate conclusion. Enjoy violent media that is fictional? Well, you must enjoy the horrors in that media, like if it was real!...
One can enjoy fictional violence because nobody is actually getting hurt... To assume otherwise is maddening. It's clear that fiction isn't reality, and the Korean Supreme Court just decided fiction can be counted as reality in this instance. Do you not recognize the slope of where this could lead and has set bad precedent?
@@Fate862 Okay slaver
@Fate862 So you're telling me there isn't a single piece of media you enjoy that depicts something you wouldn't actually want to happen in real life?
Yeah ok sure buddy sure.
@@Fate862 when you end someone life in a video game they all ways come back
Only people who have never been in a fistfight can believe that violent video games exist. Once you get a bloody nose and dirt in your face, notions such as these are easily dismissed. I am not advocating violence against silly people, just that they are silly and shouldn't be taken seriously.
True.
@@bajocontinuo3Wait, what did the french do to their silly people ages ago...?
@@bajocontinuo3 I'd be more worried about how such people got into those positions of power rather. By their own logic, watching movies means committing crimes.
@@nobodyinparticular9640 exchange them for other silly people (Napoleon may or may not count himself depending on your views but he came along shortly after that)
That said very true comment, it seems there's no politicians on either side that don't have arguably old fashioned opinions on gaming.
Methinks you haven't watched the video and censorship gaming is dishonest here, he is meant to go to mandatory military service and he's trying to dodge it by a half-hearted excuse saying I oppose all war and violence in his form. So they took him to court over his half-hearted excuse and said have you done any service in oppose war like join and volunteer for a group like red cross etc,which he didn't and then found out he was playing PUBG all the time instead, so you know what he was going to do with that free time. Verdict would have been the same for movies, it's because of his motivation just to lounge around and do stuff he likes rather than mandatory military service, that was a pointless line to add in the end.
What people often forget about when discussing legality and court is that there is a (not uncommon) degree of "anything goes" as long as the judge is willing.
It shouldn't have been accepted as an argument 🤦♀
I to am Anti-Violent but i also enjoy reading books about war and violent things
One could argue that a normal person without clinically psychotic tendencies, when exposed to a demonstration of violent act, might develop aversion to acting upon it to avoid messy consequences, especially when there's a simulated outlet readily available for releasing any instinctual urges.
PUBG is nothing more like a means to justify the court's decision to punish him for "not having enough evidence"
Saying it as someone who lived in a country with similar laws on mandatory military service
Yeah that sounds like it's going to be a continuing developing bit of Law and will possibly be challenged
@@VolkColopatrion Lol, it's not going to be challenged. Welcome to how conscription works.
He was going to be punished whether he played PUBG or not, he's dodging mandatory military service but I looked the law up and they have amended the law where they can hassle you till 30 from Kpop groups, so he was screwed either way.
Correct. It was just one piece of the puzzle. Other evidence is that he wasn't extremely vocal in trying to spread his supposed anti violence beliefs. Sorry, but this guy does sound like he was faking his claims of not wanting to join the military on moral or ethical grounds.
@@Videogamer-555 but that's terrible because using playing a video game shouldn't be an indication of one's commitment to non-violence. Going out in the streets and all that is not a requirement to be a conscientious objector. There is other evidence that could have been used if that's the case. Playing video games is not an indication of whether someone is anti-violence or not
bruh, that's like saying that you're not vegetarian if you eat animals inside the virtual world 😂
Well, there's no reason if there are other ways to heal yourself in a video game.
If you enjoy eating animals in a virtual world it is likely you aren't vegetarian.
Virtual animals are not real animals, as npcs on a game are not real people. That's the same as saying that because you killed a guard in Metal Gear Solid now you're a killer.
@@FelOld Killing a guard in Metal Gear Solid (which is the non-canon route; Solid Snake is canonically a pacifist who completes missions without intentionally killing anyone) shows that you enjoy the act of killing someone (but may not like the consequences, such as them dying). Most vegetarians do not eat animals because they find the act disgusting, so if you do not feel this disgust, you are probably not a vegetarian.
They were grasping at straws for prosecution. Videogames were just one of the straws.
"You can't be vegan! You ate that meat in the video game!"
You joke but there's a creature in the comments literally using that argument.
South Korea's military service has been wasting 2 years of it's young men's lives for decades. The pay is poor and it's almost entirely mindless guard duty. It's main objective however is to grind down any idea of being different to the governments' whims. So making an authoritarian example out of someone who plays video games now sets legal precedence and strike fear into the entire nation, that anyone can now be equated to a violent person for simply playing a video game.
Korean here, can confirm our supreme court is a bunch of those that should have retired decades ago
Knowing your nation's Big Corpo bankrolling the statesmen
To be fair, the guy was probably trying to bullshit his way out of the army and it just didn't work 😅
Lmao, they just wanted a scapegoat. By punishing him, they force others to do their mandatory military service without using the same words to avoid it.
Videogames are always an excuse for these people.
If only there was something he could have done to prove he was a conscious objector, such as joining one of the peace organisations the courts mentioned.
@@uanime1 So to dodge forced conscription, he must do forced labor.
That's a good serf.
@@wrongthinker843
"So to dodge forced conscription, he must do forced labor."
Welcome to South Korea.
The korea conscription has regular incidents where recruits lob grenad3s into barracks with sleeping "soldiers"... i guess thats what they want from the draft.
This is bloody madness.
I mean, what would the courts decision have been if he HAD worked at Anti-violence NGOs, or Peace Corp, etc. But ALSO played PUBG? Would that have been enough to take his claims seriously? I understand the argument theyre trying to make but if we dont know whether or not that would have seriously influenced their decision in the case its hard to take their thoughts on him playing violent videogames as an honest lens through which to judge his claims as something to consider.
First off, the court will not easily excuse mandatory military service. Because if it were so, many people will just get off service, and they would have trouble with recruitment. Therefore, you will need to have a very strong case. Anything that will cast the slightest doubt (as in this case) WILL be used against you.
Every time someone plays a video game, they are engaging in an expressly non-violent act. A pretty ridiculous reason for a court to argue that someone isn’t genuine in their conscientious objection. As you rightly point out, if he liked a movie or a book that contained violence, would they be saying the same thing? Unlikely.
I have no problem with the court's ruling. They didn't say playing games means he is violent. They just said it demonstrated he didn't have a strong enough aversion to violence to qualify as a conscientious objector.
"The defendant plays Minecraft, therefore he must enjoy punching trees"
The separation of fiction and reality MUST be respected
Maybe the dude is not a genuine conscientious objector, maybe he is. Based off the cited reason alone, though, he deserves his freedom. GTA players aren't going around committing mass shootings and drifting down the streets of LA in-spite of having extreme ease and accessibility to do so (in the US)
But when something like this does happen, they do blame GTA (please ignore all cases prior to videogame existence)
"Based off the cited reason alone, though, he deserves his freedom."
Conscription is mandatory in South Korea, so if want to avoid it you need to prove you're a conscious objector.
@@uanime1 "You need to prove you're a free man and not a slave by performing slave labor"
@@uanime1 I hear what you're saying, but the issue isn't if he is or isn't an objector, it's the way they supposedly decided how he wasn't. Playing a video games that has guns has little to no correlation to real world opinions pertaining to guns.
@@wrongthinker843
Someone doesn't understand what mandatory conscription is.
The court: If you're really anti-drowning. Why are still drinking water?
War in real life =/= War in games. You can enjoy a thing in a game or a movie or a book while hating that very thing in real life.
Fantasy is anti-violence since fantasy has no effect on reality.
Well, to push a little back. The already insane or mentally unwell can be influenced to a degree, but it still wouldn't be the fault of video games, movies, books, music, and all other scapegoat media by governments and societal failings. It is in those cases still an individual case and those who either care for that individual to a degree.
@@VanTesla Source: please ignore literally everything prior to invention of video-games
@@wrongthinker843 My point is that a mentally unwell individual can find reason in a medium to do something terrible. While governments/politicians use scapegoats of whatever. Before video games, these same kinds of people would blame movies/T.V., comics, music, etc. Video Games is the modern scapegoat for politicians for societal issues.
We had books banned temporarily or in some nations permanently due to being dangerous and using rare examples to do so, like a mentally off person deleting an innocent person.
I wonder, due to this Korean Supreme Court decision how this can open Pandora's box of issues not just for video games but all entertainment media. It's obvious the result is to instill fear into the South Korean population to take the mandatory military even if you state being a conscious objector... As we have people even on here defending this ruling given, the guy didn't take/do anything as "evidence," he lied while playing a fictional game...
Crazy that people can support government changing on fly definitions to imprison someone just because they play games and don't do anything publicly. As if they had never heard of modern-day hermits or introverts before. Sure, the guy could be lying, but if the only evidence is that he doesn't participate in anything and plays FPS games. That doesn't mean the guy is lying in my view.
So, to me, the Korean Supreme Court used the game excuse to make a public example to instill fear of trying to back out of the military and be one lying or telling the truth of being a consciousness objector.
My point to OP was that there are rare instances of the unwell people who are in part influenced by fantasy due to them being unable to fully comprehend the difference. The issue I later brought up that this is older than video games by mentioning other media/hobbies that were used as scapegoats in the past. I'm drunk atm so if I misunderstood your reply to me, I apologize 😅
Truly Orwellian.
Awesome video
I like a little of the old...Ultra Violence
*doom music plays*
crazy times we live in, first it was books, nobody cared that much about movies apart from a few parents, and parents in governments, but as soon as games were a thing, these people had the Strawman on lockdown.
Why do people think like this? It makes no sense!
South Korea is slowly turning into North Korea I see
Wtf are you talking about? Dude was trying to find a reason why he doesn't want to do military service, gave a shitty one and then the courts called him out on it.
@@heroicxidiot And forced conscription (slave soldiers) isn't authoritarian? xD
@@wrongthinker843 forced? Not every Korean is forced into it. If there is any reason or condition where they cannot serve, they won't force them. Forcing them means it doesn't matter what conditions or reason they have.
@@heroicxidiot "It's not forced, we just put you in jail for not doing it"
@@wrongthinker843 you've completely ignored what I said
"The video game is different from reality. But..."
has the same energy as
"I'm not racist, but..."
Here's a thought: maybe mandatory military service is a dumb idea?
Dumb and totalitarian
It's easy for you to say living in a country with friendly neighbor countries that have no intention to invade. Countries like Israel, Greece, South Korea and many others is crucial to their survival to have their citizens with some minimal military knowledge and know how use a rifle or military equipment, than having none experience at all and trying how to figure out how fire a gun while the enemy shoots at them.
@@gamingforpizza5142 Yeah, and jailing someone for refusing "experience" makes total sense.
@@wrongthinker843 He is jailed for not following the law and tried to use bs excuse. It's called mandatory for a reason.
Now I understand why I have become too passive and lazy in recent years. Because my computer became too old and I started playing games less. Also, I always knew that people who like risque porn, political thrillers and science fiction about aliens are hiding something.
This is why consoles will always be superior.
@@otaking3582 You realise you have to upgrade those more frequently right?
@@otaking3582 ...because they do a worse job at playing games so you'll get less addicted?
@@otaking3582Why are you always on every comment section being wrong about something?
@@mechadeka Are you sure that I'M the one that's wrong?
Also, the fact that you keep running into me is probably just a coincidence.
This is geniuenly insane.
Quite funny since videogames are one of the main pacificators of the modern era
Without videogames as a tool to vent, modern gaslighting dystopia would have to deal with a lot more insurgency
Is that a bad thing?
@@wrongthinker843 Depends on your point of view. Angry men have the power to change the world.
What you say is correct, but is irrelevant to the case shown in this video. There is evidence that, at the population level, the availability of violent video games is associated with lower crime rates. On the other hand, at the individual level, more hours spent playing violent video games is associated with a higher likelihood of engaging in violent behavior and committing violent crimes. Overall, this suggests that people play violent video games as an outlet for real life violence, and the people who play them the most are the ones who are more violent to begin with.
In other news, I just passed the bar after finishing the Phoenix Wright: Ace Attorney Trilogy remaster.
Ah shit, here we go again. Going by that court's logic I am a serial killer and mass murderer. Seriously, is it that hard to distinguish real life and fiction?
Virtual violence equals real violence apparently
Ridiculous
Jack Thompson would be proud 😂
Yeah......Korea taking an L for this one.
Granted I was turned down for military service, they lifted the blanket ban on autistic people serving in the regular military and the territorials never had it anyway.
However this does seem a strange ruling from a scientific point of view, given the evidence showing no link between video game violence and real world violence but I'd have to see the ruling in detail and be more familiar with the South Korean legal system to know the exact reasoning for saying that playing PUBG means you can't have a pacifist belief strong enough to prevent you from military service.
There is evidence that, at the population level, the availability of violent video games is associated with lower crime rates. On the other hand, at the individual level, more hours spent playing violent video games is associated with a higher likelihood of engaging in violent behavior and committing violent crimes. Overall, this suggests that people play violent video games as an outlet for real life violence, and the people who play them the most are the ones who are more violent to begin with.
@@DroppedBass Interesting, kind of like how venues such as boxing clubs have been shown to reduce crime in their locality. A sort of vent for pent up aggression, and people beating each other up in San Andreas is better than doing so in real life (at 30 I'm getting on a bit so I'm not sure what the image of a violent video game is these days).
I tend to play a lot more RTS, TBS and RPG games which don't tend to be brought up in this discussion as much.
I agree though that if you play a violent game then you are not completely against violence, at least not against it enough to have your objection to military service taken seriously.
It's a paper-thin argument but I imagine if he was ONLY playing shooting games and had his house decked out like a military armory, they may have SOME sway.
Otherwise, we've heard it all before. I'm reminded of that image online that says playing this (eg Cooking Mama) doesn't make me this (a chef).
The amount of comments justifying slave soldiers is insane.
The biggest issue here that nobody is talking, is that his government can see his online activity and history.
Remember guys, "they aren't trying to take your X away."
Dang
It's an absurd reasoning/ruling against consciousness Objecting. I and many others wouldn't hurt or be willing without extreme reason, little take a life. One can play a game that is violent and not be violent, just as one can watch or read violent media and not partake willingly in reality. To say doing something in fiction is as legitimate as saying one could do that in reality is just pure insanity.
You can't claim to be anti-violence while playing violent video games. That's like claiming to be vegan while eating bacon.
@@uanime1 You can't claim to not be a convicted rapist while breathing the same air.
@@uanime1 I hope you are joking. Playing a video game, reading a book, watching a movie, etc, that are or have violence don't equate to wanting or being a violent person or a person who wants to inflict violence in real life.
It would be claiming to be vegan and eating tofu flavored bacon with no actual animals involved if we use your example. Given that you have an anime PFP, does that mean you are whatever you watch? If you say yes, seek professional help if you say no, which is the logical answer. Then do you not see how ridiculous it sounds to compare a fictional war game with actual war...
If joking or trolling, I can get that, but knowing people actually think like how you suggested is why, in part for so much insanity that is promoted as being the logical perspective.
@@VanTeslayou’re missing the point:
South Korea is not at war. They have mandatory drafting. Meaning it is a duty to learn to be a soldier, body conditioning, learnt to shoot and to do labor like maintaining infrastructure etc etc.
We’ve got a guy claiming that he is so averse to violence, similar to people who pass out when they see blood, that his conscience cannot tolerate even learning to shoot and a martial art!
People with the above position generally do something about it, because they feel strongly, like joining an NGO and protesting. Some make a channel to spread their objections and ideology!
Not only did he not do any of the above, he actually enjoys fictional violence and gore…
It seems his extreme intolerance to violence doesn’t kick in when he is playing videogame soldier….it doesn’t kick in enough for him to talk about it and make videos! It also doesn’t kick in for him to protest wars abroad etc
🤔it seems his conscience only kicks in when it would be useful to avoid sleeping in barracks, sweating and learning martial arts, leaving his personal life behind…etc etc…
Now, how curious is that?
@@AdalbertoMaggioJunior That is mind reading the individual and assuming they are lying to get out. It is possible he is lying, but saying with no proof outside that he plays FPS games isn't actual proof.
That is the courts saying without empericempirical evidence that playing such games means you can cause actual violence so you can be in the military... So where is the line to that train of thought? Will those playing those games be arrested next as murderers? Thiefs? Etc... It is a leap in logic making an assumption of the individual with no actual evidence.
South Korea is also still in a cold war with North Korea, and if I recall, that required military time isn't counted similarly for the women. In South Korea, you can be exempt if conscientious objectors are without being openly public and just let others be and you the individual be left alone. They are as far as I can see, just using this guy to scare others into duty as if the court had a better reason/evidence than pointing to the guy playing PUBG they would have.
The court saying playing violent video games means you can't be a conscientious objector is insane and a slippery slope. Next, watching movies with violence, books with violence in it, etc... Let's have the South Korean Pro League FPS players be the real-life sharpshooters regardless if they have no real qualifications in real-life applications...
If they found he lied, then sure, under South Korean law, he goes to jail. By what the judge I saw state, they didn't find a lie outside a stretch of an assumption that because he plays games, he is lying... That isn't a just system and is again obviously done to just scare other young men into service.
Do you know what quality of soldier a nation gets from force? A very poor soldier that in many cases can, in worse cases, cause more friendly casualties if war did break. Mind reading and saying one plays a game so that person is capable of military is an insane reach.
if u wanna dodge draft just play invalid its super easy, any 20 min trip to shrink will get u diagnosed with some type of personality disorder
That only works in countries without mandatory military "service"
I guess Korean isn’t alone but there is some games was banned in some but not most countries
Objector: “I hate war of all kinds.”
Judge: “I main Kanbei in Advance Wars.”
Objector: “What? But Colin is way better-aww, dang it.”
Wow
People who can't tell the difference between fiction and real life should not be allowed to hold any power
I mean, it really does sound like he was draft dodging. I think drafts are stupid, but I don’t think video games are a major factor here.
Clown Planet
Seems like a cheap excuse for him to do his military service.
Damn I guess reading One Piece makes me a pirate then
The second Korean War will never happen
Jack Thompson fucking won...
North, South, it's all the same.
Pretty sure that this was just the excuse.
This seems a bit clickbaity. Guys, it's conscription. South Korea has it. A lot of countries have it. In general any government conscripting people aren't going to accept any sort of plea to avoid service unless it's a very strong case. Otherwise everyone in their dog will come up with lame excuses and then you don't have any soldiers.
The mention of video games in this case as reported here is very tangential. Like a garnish. They're basically saying, "Not only have you shown us 0 evidence that you're a pacifist but you also like violent media, wtf." If he wasn't playing pub G they still would have tossed him in jail. Pretty much unless he showed some eviidence of being a devout follow of the philosophy or had dedicated his life to humanitarian aid they might have accepted it. And you're luck in modern times they even accept excuses like that.
"Guys, it's forced conscription, don't you know you're a slave who owes the masters risking your life?"
Remember when Doom and Mortal Kombat caused people to go on genocides against demons and tear peoples hearts out?
Yeah, me neither.
Wouldn't surprised if something this level of rediclus happened here in Canada...
korean games are about grinding in MMO's. so he messed up not grinding XP.
Was this in North Korea or South Korea?
South Korea. In North Korea, they wouldn't have accepted his justification at all, and there wouldn't have been a trial.
i think that was a bit more of a stretch since that the main problem we having with this is that we only know base on the article that the young man claim himself to be anti-violence and anti-war, but as to the details of what he said exactly when claim that is what the judge likely used against him really. 0:19 Even here the judge threw it back at his face to the man claim and 0:32 again just created a bigger doubt since the dude even spend some of his time freely playing a violent game at home even thought he could have been using that time to working NGO who focus goal to anti-violence. The ruling likely lean to punish the man because he meremly claim to have anti-violence ideological without putting no effect into it which was seen as an excuse in order to avoid the draft which is what made a big deal. - " Military service is enshrined in the constitution as one of the five primary duties of a citizen, alongside the payment of taxes, gainful employment, educating ones children and protecting the environment. The government also keeps a public database of evaders. Applicants for conscientious objector status endure intense scrutiny of their private lives-having to satisfy investigators, for example, that they have never played violent video games." - from ( Inside South Korea’s Harsh Alternative to Military Service ) Time's Article
Videogames have no link to violence once again we are being attacked by people who have never played a videogame.
LOL skill issue
With WW3 just around the corner, I wouldn't be surprised if this is used as a precedent.
I would not go to war if I had to if I did would serve into the military if I had to go through a draft and I think I blame person because it’s his choice to sit on his butt to play games all day instead of going to the military or a job I don’t blame the game I blame the person and I have a job and I game a lot too but I don’t gaming overnight and it doesn’t affect my life. I limit myself to four hours a day I try to do that as best ad I can and I anti war/ violent in any country but I still play games like Grandtheft, auto and more
It's so weird how many people don't know the difference between fantasy and reality these days... I imagine it will only get worse.
Whether or not you can be a conscientious objector but enjoy video games that simulate warfare is kind of an interesting philosophical question, but I doubt that's the real issue here. I believe what's happening here is people can't just dodge mandatory military service by claiming to be a conscientious objector.
No, it's not interesting or philosophical.
@@wrongthinker843 Sure. Like I said, it wasn't the real issue anyway.
Research books/movies about war? Cartoony war? Coffee drinkers vs others in Kingsley's adventure PS1 XD Harm vs controller/sim hmm. Games/AV suppressant. Crime thrillers? Nope.
Poor dude, this is injustice. They are using video games, because they want to use him as an example. They know how many young people are playing these kind of games and they don't want people to get around forced military service, even if they have the right to refuse military service in certain cases. We had similar laws where I live in the past. They try everything to get you.
You can't be anti something but still enjoy or consume something that is the very message your against. But this guy was saying it because he didn't want to be drafted and made to fight in war like a wuss while his other fellow countrymen do. So he is saying he is antiviolence and against his beliefs yet he still plays games for enjoyment that contradict that message. Its like he is playing Tekken games but he says the sight of violence triggers his PTSD or is completely turned off by the sight of it. This man just wants an excuse to get out of obligations.
@@Fate862 Are you against murder? Then why aren't you out there stopping murder? Clearly you're pro-murder but lying about it.
That's funny as hell
😅😅
Ayo wtf
At worst, he has a need for adrenaline that these type of games give him.
What peaceful people truly wants, in my opinion anyway, is to not be cannon fodder. We can’t hold guns, we shit ourselves at the sight of danger, what good would we bring on the battlefield besides more casualties?
No. Peaceful people are people who don't want to keep feeding into the vicious cycle of violence, which hurts the societies we live in.
They just wanted him to serve lets be fr
Lmfao
Forced labor bad, forced military service good.
North or South?
I mean yeah... the supreme court are a bunch of boomers that don't play video games. So there is definitely a bias to the whole violence=video games debate.
I don't agree with the logic. But I do agree with the ruling. The guy was draft dodging 100%. I don't believe he's a consciencious objector. He's just some dumbass kid quoting the common line that would allow him to dodge the draft. Because as the court said, he would be more public about his objections to war if he actually believed in that.
Any country worth defending wouldn't need a draft.
@@valcaron Not all countries has a northern neighbour who is still actively at war with you.
@@valcaron Dumb analogy. Military service instills discipline. Why do you think military schools exist for troubled kids?
@@czaczaczarIt's creates sociopathic little drones for the state government
Yeah, as they stated, if he were truthful in his beliefs, he should promote or work for them in some way
So does playing spider man make me spider man? I'd say "this is terrible logic" but it doesn't deserve to be called logic at all
You're using the wrong fallacy. It's like claiming you're against smoking yet you pick up and consume every cigarette in Bioshock.
I agree with the Korean man not the supreme court
Let’s be honest who the hell what’s to fight in
wars
Thank god I don’t have to join a military
While I do think that the reason the Korean Supreme Court is using to justify their decision is a very iffy, they did make one thing clear:
"The defendant has not put any effort into spreading or realizing what he says is his ideological belief, such as working at an NGO related to anti-violence, anti-war or peace."
In other words, regardless whether or not he's playing PUBG, the defendant isn't practicing what he preaches. Had he opted to do non-military government services or join a peacekeeping group, the court may have dismissed his case.
It's also worth noting that he _admitted_ to playing PUBG. A simple denial might have changed the Court's reasoning. Prosecutors will take any and all opportunities exploit such comments as this one and use it in the case.
Edit: After doing some research, I can confirm 2 things:
1) The defendant can legally refuse military service (conscientious objection), however he must supplement it with civilian military work. This change happened in 2018.
2) Starting in 2023, Korean Esports teams are exempt from military service, provided they top in their respective events. There is an Esports team that does play PUBG.
Finally someone using logic instead of complaining.
Unless he's attacking people, he is practicing anti-violence.
Also, "peacekeeping group" lol
@@uanime1well people have a good reason to be against this but at the same token people are too quick to jump to conclusions.
@@uanime1 Nobody has an obligation to activism, one may hold sincere beliefs and not be an activist. Also, lying to the court about not playing such games would be immoral and likely unwise assuming it's illegal to do so. Complaining is warranted & logical.
Yeah, I'm not gonna side with the government when they make such a dumb and patently false statement about violence in games.
The title is all sorts of weird, I couldn't understand what it was about until I watched the video.
Also these guys are full of shit. I love Mortal Kombat but I've never wanted anybody dead in my life.
Boomers
I don't think the English language has the words to express the depths idiocy on display here by the Korean supreme court. I doubt the Korean language has them either.
To be fair, they do have some grounds for such blatant hypocrisy. There are a million games the "pacifist" could be playing that don't depict war-like settings and gameplay. It's like saying you're staunchly anti-tobacco yet, when you play Bioshock, you grab and consume every cigarette collectible.
Gamers always taking the piss
lmao typical government beurocratic bullshit
First
this has the same fucking vibes as "oh, you enjoy this anime that has disgusting fictional ecchi and gag scenes in it? you must be a Child predator in real life then!". i hate the world sometimes.
He should've been jailed just for playing PUBG, no other reason
Jokes aside, if the Korean court can't differentiate between fiction and reality, they're not fit to judge anyone.
Word of advice: If you object to military service object to the killing of humans and weapons. Claim you do not want to have any part of the process of killing humans and you shouldn't need to worry about Video games, because you are not killing humans. You might still have to go to the army tho, serving in the orchestra or as part of the medical team, but usually those positions are full.
And that as for Movies and other media... Video games are an interactive media, unlike Movies and the like. With Movies and such i would find it iffy if you said you are against violence and then consumed violent media, but you could still argue that you are not participating in the violence. Unlike video games where you are definitely participating in the violence.
What's you definition of participating? Is playing chess participating in violence? How about an actor in a play about war? Or what about playing whack-a-mole? What about inflicting violence on bowling pins or billiard balls? Is that different because there is no aesthetic of violence? But it's a similar experience to playing a video game or doing target practice with guns or bows...what about darts at a pub then??
@@tvsonicserbia5140 Chess is a violent game, though you could argue that it's sufficiently abstract that it isn't perceived as violence by most people. Historically Chess was meant to represent actual humans and how rulers use them to dispatch others by trading the lives of those in their charge. There are other, less violent board games with a similar strategic mindset and if you claim to be against violence, then you would pick those. Remember, the argument here is that they object because of the violence.
As for the actor in the play, it would depend on how far the play is acting it out. If you had a play set in the US civil war, where its largely about the guy "going off to war" and then returning later, then there wouldn't be any violence involved. If the actor however has a scene with graphic depictions of what they did in combat or a sword fight.. then yes, that would be participating in violence.
And yes, bowling can be perceived as a violent activity, since its inherently destructive in nature. Billiards on the other hand does not aim to destroy anything. You could argue that Billiard is a game about connections and how ones actions influence third, fourth and fifth parties.
Neither Bows nor Guns have a non violent purpose. Again, if you argue that you are against Violence then you cannot participate in this.
I am not against Violence. I even served in the army of my country and went to do a tour of duty. However if you claim that you do not like violence, then there are a lot of activities you probably wouldn't like engaging in, if you don't like violence. Shooting human like pixels, controlled by other humans, is most definitely among the activities you should abhor if you truly dislike violence. There are mental gymnastics you probably can perform for sufficiently disembodied activities like chess and archery. But when we talk about shooting human shaped pixels, controlled by other humans, in order to "kill" them, then the inherent violence in that activity cannot be denied. It is also nothing you'd approve of if you actually were anti violence. You'd have all sorts of arguments why people engaging in that behavior is bad.
I have an actual vegan pacifist in my family and they will lecture you for months about how you made them accomplice to murder by simply BBQing their pickeled carrots on the same grill as the steaks for everyone else. So yeah, if you really object to these things based on your convictions you will not engage in these activities or approve of people engaging in them.
But how is playing out simulated violence inherently not anti violence if a core component of violence is harm being done to real people/things. Imagine if we lived in a utopian world where every country has completely sworn off war. It's in everyones constitution, no politician would think of conscripting anyone and if they did not a single person would show up for military service. Now imagine they play the same video games as us for fun/artistic enrichment. Is there a contradiction there?? It's called conscientious objection for a reason, why would my conscience be tained by video games@@IshanDeston
@@tvsonicserbia5140 Did you seriously just ask how simulated violence could be considered violence? There is nothing anti violence in simulating violence. You are mixing up your arguments. The argument of conjecture about how violent video games might have had a positive effect on human on human violence does not make it "not violence". It simply allows an outlet for violent impulses.
If your argument is that you do not like violence, then you cannot engage in simulated violence. It is still violence, even if its simulated.
And it doesn't matter if its an utopian goal to have a human society without violence. If you say it goes against the consciousness to partake in violence then you can't go and play violent games. Which is why i said: If you want to get out of the draft, claim you are against the killing of humans. Which might still mean they will draft you for jobs that do not have any expectation of combat (such as serving in a field hospital), but at least you get to play PubG in your spare time without going to jail for lying about your convictions.
And it doesn't matter if "no wars would ever exist if nobody ever would serve". I volunteered for the army, despite my country having conscription at the time, because I believed in doing my part and wanting to protect my family. You have a lot of people that will show up to the army for that reason alone.
I didn't sign up to have the chance to do violence on others or because i really wanted the feeling of killing someone. And in hindsight i could do without all the mental baggage it gave me. But despite all the bad, i'd sign up again. For the same reason. I don't blame anyone for wanting to dodge the draft. Just don't lie. Say you are against War. Against the Institution of the Army... say you are against carrying real fire arms. Say you do not want to kill someone or be party to someone being killed. But don't go play simulated violence on humans when you are in the process of trying trying not to do your part for society.
Don't know who its in South Korea but in my country you could choose the army of a social program, such as helping old people, or driving a EMS vehicle or doing a year or two as fire fighter. You could still go to the army and then try to dodge all of it by going conscious objector, in which case you didn't need to do the social service. And a lot of people did it, because they didn't want to do their social service. They ended up lying about it, signed a statement about why they didn't believe in doing their army service and got sent home.
If you then prove to have lied on that statement you commited perjury. This is what happened here. The guy claimed he was against violence but played violent video games, to proved that he wasn't telling the truth.
Just give another reason why you can't do your service. Something you know you can adhere to. Like not wanting to kill real human people.
@@IshanDeston I seriously do not get it. How does it have any bearing on real life, it's just a story (told through gameplay). If a gay guy plays a straight dating sim and enjoys the artistry of it, the challenge of the gameplay mechanics, the atmosphere, the writing of the characters, is he then dishonest if he says he is gay in real life? Is romance romance even when it's simulated??
Well, he is a draft dodger, let's not bullshit ourselves. The court's argumentation is very iffy, though.
"He is a forced labor dodger"