| NinjaKido said:
The distinctions you made IMO are irrelevant ,even the examples I gave are irrelevant , the point is that there is a link between our actions and other people when we are in a society . The ordinary person can't be a member of society and say that what ever anyone else does in that society is none of their business , if your an active person you will have to interact with the man on the bus to get a ticket , call the abulance for medical assistance , call the local council if the rubish man doesn't collect your bins. What I think you mean is that , " i'm not concerned about what that person does and really it should be no one's concern" that's more reasonable than saying "this persons actions has no influences on me what so ever " , I guess it also depends on how you define "business". |
I do not think you understand our positions.
I posit: "Playing a game by yourself does not harm other people so I don't care."
I believe you posit (correct me if otherwise): "Playing a game by yourself harms other people so I care."
Your first example was an instance of someone directly harming another individual through theft. We can draw a better analogy to your example between stealing cars in GTA and stealing from a department store. Stealing in a game is not the same as stealing from an actual store. This is widely recognized as such and the reason games are given age labels is that not all children are able to fully distinguish reality from TV/movies/video games. As you grow older, your judgment improves (we hope) and you are able to tell the difference between video game antics and real life.
Your second example was misplaced by having a 3rd variable--the people deciding to do the taxing. Just as you do not blame your clock when your parents tell you it's time to go to bed, you should not blame random people for a poor (in your mind) decision of the government.
And while I appreciate your enthusiasm to put words in my mouth by telling me what I mean, I'd really appreciate it if you wouldn't do that.
