Canada - Lucas Fowler, Chynna Deese, and Leonard Dyck, all murdered, Alaska Hwy, BC, Jul 2019 #18

[CinNC]

This cases are getting me worried, so out of curiosity I took a quick look and without any effort at all immediately found three studies that say there’s no correlation between violent video games and aggression. Two I ignored, since I’ve never heard of the universities those studies are associated with - but one was from Oxford Internet Institute - associated with Oxford University - and that one I took a look at, because Oxford. It’s been many a long decade since I studied statistics, so I skimmed through the methodology section and I can’t say much about it one way or another, my brain is has turned to mush. But from what I read, the researchers did seem to go into that study with a fairly strong pro-video game bias, imo. Nonetheless: Oxford. Can’t deny the validity of that.

Then there’s the over 400 studies mentioned by the American Academy of Pediatrics that demonstrate a significant link between exposure to violent media and aggressive behaviour and thoughts. I didn’t read them and can’t comment on their methodology/validity at all.

I did read the American Psychological Association’s Resolution on Violent Video Games and to quote: “WHEREAS scientific research has demonstrated an association between violent video game use and both increases in aggressive behavior, aggressive affect, aggressive cognitions and decreases in prosocial behavior, empathy, and moral engagement” ….

And, more relevant to this discussion: “WHEREAS many factors are known to be risk factors for increased aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition and aggressive affect, and reduced prosocial behavior, empathy and moral engagement, and violent video game use is one such risk factor” (my bold)

I also read the American Academy of Pediatrics Guideline on Media Violence which asserts more or less the same thing and, interestingly, discusses why people tend to deny any correlation.

So do violent video games contribute to aggressive behaviour or is there no correlation? There are studies that support both hypotheses, which is super-duper common in such a soft science as psychology. You can find studies to support anything at all really. I remember, back in the day when I was a smoker, finding a study from UGA that demonstrated that nicotine improves cognitive function. I had that study pretty much memorized because it supported my smoking addiction; in between puffing and hacking I could almost quote that study verbatim.

IMO, studies can be manipulated - and they sure can be used to manipulate us.

But statistical correlation between violent video games and aggression or not, at this point I think it’s important to try (and I am trying) to keep an open mind either way regarding this issue. And I think it’s even more important to apply that rarest of things: a little common sense.


MOO (and sorry for the essay)

Interesting and well thought out/documented post. I'll add one thing to think about. When Game Boys came out (early 1990's?) my 10 and 12 year old nephews were each gifted with one. They used them at the same time, for the same length of time and played the same games. One nephew broke out in severe hives all over his face, scalp, neck and torso within 2 minutes of engaging with his. The other one did not. As soon as he turned it off the hives subsided. I witnessed this multiple times with my own eyes. Their parents were disconcerted by this and took them away.

There was a clear (to me) association between his brain's absorption of the video stimuli and a physiological reaction. Mind you, these were harmless, benign games.

 

[Jan424]

Maybe your friend has read this -
This is Your Child's Brain on Video Games

Before anyone defends avid video game playing, I’m not saying it has a negative effect on everyone. But for some, gaming onself into a perpetual state of fight-or-flight can’t be a good thing.

Thanks for that link.... pretty disturbing and eye opening.... wow.

 

[KR72]

This cases are getting me worried, so out of curiosity I took a quick look and without any effort at all immediately found three studies that say there’s no correlation between violent video games and aggression. Two I ignored, since I’ve never heard of the universities those studies are associated with - but one was from Oxford Internet Institute - associated with Oxford University - and that one I took a look at, because Oxford. It’s been many a long decade since I studied statistics, so I skimmed through the methodology section and I can’t say much about it one way or another, my brain is has turned to mush. But from what I read, the researchers did seem to go into that study with a fairly strong pro-video game bias, imo. Nonetheless: Oxford. Can’t deny the validity of that.

Then there’s the over 400 studies mentioned by the American Academy of Pediatrics that demonstrate a significant link between exposure to violent media and aggressive behaviour and thoughts. I didn’t read them and can’t comment on their methodology/validity at all.

I did read the American Psychological Association’s Resolution on Violent Video Games and to quote: “WHEREAS scientific research has demonstrated an association between violent video game use and both increases in aggressive behavior, aggressive affect, aggressive cognitions and decreases in prosocial behavior, empathy, and moral engagement” ….

And, more relevant to this discussion: “WHEREAS many factors are known to be risk factors for increased aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition and aggressive affect, and reduced prosocial behavior, empathy and moral engagement, and violent video game use is one such risk factor” (my bold)

I also read the American Academy of Pediatrics Guideline on Media Violence which asserts more or less the same thing and, interestingly, discusses why people tend to deny any correlation.

So do violent video games contribute to aggressive behaviour or is there no correlation? There are studies that support both hypotheses, which is super-duper common in such a soft science as psychology. You can find studies to support anything at all really. I remember, back in the day when I was a smoker, finding a study from UGA that demonstrated that nicotine improves cognitive function. I had that study pretty much memorized because it supported my smoking addiction; in between puffing and hacking I could almost quote that study verbatim.

IMO, studies can be manipulated - and they sure can be used to manipulate us.

But statistical correlation between violent video games and aggression or not, at this point I think it’s important to try (and I am trying) to keep an open mind either way regarding this issue. And I think it’s even more important to apply that rarest of things: a little common sense.


MOO (and sorry for the essay)

I hear you, and I myself go back and forth wondering about the same issue. I hate violence, I'm almost as much a pacifist as LD was, and I hate everything to do with violent games and movies and so on...however, I think that unless a person is already prone to something extreme, violent video games alone wouldn't cause someone to go off and kill people. IMO, I think there's got to be something more going on with a person to cause that.
The right subject material can trigger the wrong person, imo. I think there was like at least three prominent murderers/would be murderers who claimed that Catcher in the Rye was the inspiration for their crimes. Same thing with Manson's warped interpretation of late 60s music.

All moo of course. I'm just trying to wrap my head around it too.

 

[JoshuaTree]

The route they took is essential to understanding this story. Some things must be ruled out and others ruled in by that route.

Which is why I posted my question.

WHY would Kam and Bryer choose a route that does not show up on a general inquiry search, if they were as inexperienced as perceived?

 

[CinNC]

Maybe your friend has read this -
This is Your Child's Brain on Video Games

Before anyone defends avid video game playing, I’m not saying it has a negative effect on everyone. But for some, gaming onself into a perpetual state of fight-or-flight can’t be a good thing.

Holy moly! Excellent article!

 

[FactFinder3000]

[...]

So do violent video games contribute to aggressive behaviour or is there no correlation?

[...]

There's a 3rd choice: people who like violence like violent video games. One would expect there to be a correlation. That's just common sense. But correlation does not equal causation.

 

[JoshuaTree]

..however, I think that unless a person is already prone to something extreme, violent video games alone wouldn't cause someone to go off and kill people. IMO, I think there's got to be something more going on with a person to cause that.
The right subject material can trigger the wrong person, imo.

Exactly! Alan has been perceived to have mental health issues (which can be/ are hereditary). Add that to the influence of the violent gaming with Bryer.

IMO

 

[Iwondertoo]

The route they took is essential to understanding this story. Some things must be ruled out and others ruled in by that route.

This is a link to a map that otto (a poster here) drew up many, many days ago when we were hashing out their route. It makes the most sense to me. Why KM and BS chose that route though, I have no idea.

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachments/upload_2019-8-6_19-31-40-png.197239/

 

[Jan424]

Let's not bash someone the RCMP considers a credible witnesses. Just because TSC didn't mention the sleeping bag to the media in his initial interview doesn't mean he didn't mention it to the RCMP. In the media interview, it was about the personal interaction, not what he may or may not have seen in the surrounding area. His RCMP interview would have been much more in-depth about what he and his relatives saw around that time, and around the site.

Okay definitely not try to bash the witness.... sorry if it came off that way. Personally I’m skeptical about some details but I suppose my post could have been less sarcastic. MOO

 

[JoshuaTree]

This is a link to a map that otto (a poster here) drew up many, many days ago when we were hashing out their route. It makes the most sense to me. Why KM and BS chose that route though, I have no idea.

https://www.websleuths.com/forums/attachments/upload_2019-8-6_19-31-40-png.197239/

Thank you. Yes, I have seen Otto's maps (and they are awesome!)

But like you say, no idea why they chose this route (which does not come up on a general search). Thus my asking those who have travelled the north of B.C. (and I have read that several posters have) for their input.

Sorry, just trying to get a grasp on / make sense of things ... just like everyone else here

 

[ktm44]

And since SIN cards are no longer issued (just a paper confirmation), it is reasonable to assume people that age don't have a SIN card.

One thing never mentioned by police is that a person can have no criminal record, yet still have a police record. This is all a person did with police involvement, but without getting a criminal record.

There is also something about an address record. For example, if someone calls police, there is a record of calls made from that address. Let's say you call about a disturbance on the street, or a suspicious person. That stays on the address record.

Given how police can't say anything about anyone due to privacy laws, or so we are told, they told TLC in Cold Lake about no criminal records?

As crazy as it sounds, it's not easy to get a job at Walmart but students can use their school ID card as one of the two pieces of ID required.

I was very surprised that police would say anything about a criminal record to an outsider. I was witness to a gun thing and even living in a small town, with everyone knowing the person who pulled the gun was the local dealer, police would not speak of his criminal history in any way and that includes further charges of uttering death threats to me, if I testified in court.

Police may make comments like 'known to police,' at appropriate times.

 

[Schmoosh]

I hear you, and I myself go back and forth wondering about the same issue. I hate violence, I'm almost as much a pacifist as LD was, and I hate everything to do with violent games and movies and so on...however, I think that unless a person is already prone to something extreme, violent video games alone wouldn't cause someone to go off and kill people. IMO, I think there's got to be something more going on with a person to cause that.
The right subject material can trigger the wrong person, imo. I think there was like at least three prominent murderers/would be murderers who claimed that Catcher in the Rye was the inspiration for their crimes. Same thing with Manson's warped interpretation of late 60s music.

All moo of course. I'm just trying to wrap my head around it too.

Nailed it. Not one murder in the history of the world can be explained by just one cause/influence. It's lazy thinking to think so.

 

[Shlock Homes]

I mentioned this about a week ago, I'm still suspicious if Mr. Ste-Croix did truly did see a sleeping bag? He said he recognized it as the same one the "Ontario media" put out and the RCMP recovered way down the river at Port Nelson. I have searched high and low I am yet to see an actual photo of this infamous blue sleeping bag. I'm not saying he's making things up. I mean it's entirely possible being cramped in the RAV they pulled over for the night in Cold Lake, shared a sleeping bag and slept under the stars and it got wet from the dew or it started raining. I recall the RCMP saying they weren't confirming the one in the river actually belonged to Kam and Bryer but it did spark them to search the river bank more thoroughly especially after it lead to the discovery of that john boat. What's more, is it possible much of these things they found at the burnt out RAV originally belonged to Leonard? I also pictured a scenario where they crashed the RAV had one last "picnic" before torching it, perhaps one of the boys carried a sleeping bag, one carried a tent and whatever they could fit in back-packs and into the woods they went.

I was under the impression that Ste Croix didn't see anything in their vehicle that looked like they had camping gear.
The reason why I would take that as his first and true opinion is because as a cop, he's probably checking out their vehicle, casually looking inside as he's talking to them, to see if there's anything suspicious there. So I would expect if he had seen it, he would have said it.
Also, a blue sleeping bag would have stood out. Blue in the wilderness is not a natural colour. So if it was spotted randomly later on from the river by someone, how come it wasn't spotted by helicopters or other search people in that area during their intensive manhunt? It wouldn't have moved by itself.

 

[NJSleuth91]

This cases are getting me worried, so out of curiosity I took a quick look and without any effort at all immediately found three studies that say there’s no correlation between violent video games and aggression. Two I ignored, since I’ve never heard of the universities those studies are associated with - but one was from Oxford Internet Institute - associated with Oxford University - and that one I took a look at, because Oxford. It’s been many a long decade since I studied statistics, so I skimmed through the methodology section and I can’t say much about it one way or another, my brain is has turned to mush. But from what I read, the researchers did seem to go into that study with a fairly strong pro-video game bias, imo. Nonetheless: Oxford. Can’t deny the validity of that.

Then there’s the over 400 studies mentioned by the American Academy of Pediatrics that demonstrate a significant link between exposure to violent media and aggressive behaviour and thoughts. I didn’t read them and can’t comment on their methodology/validity at all.

I did read the American Psychological Association’s Resolution on Violent Video Games and to quote: “WHEREAS scientific research has demonstrated an association between violent video game use and both increases in aggressive behavior, aggressive affect, aggressive cognitions and decreases in prosocial behavior, empathy, and moral engagement” ….

And, more relevant to this discussion: “WHEREAS many factors are known to be risk factors for increased aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition and aggressive affect, and reduced prosocial behavior, empathy and moral engagement, and violent video game use is one such risk factor” (my bold)

I also read the American Academy of Pediatrics Guideline on Media Violence which asserts more or less the same thing and, interestingly, discusses why people tend to deny any correlation.

So do violent video games contribute to aggressive behaviour or is there no correlation? There are studies that support both hypotheses, which is super-duper common in such a soft science as psychology. You can find studies to support anything at all really.

Well, a lot of evidence has to be collected -- with good methodology and large sample size! -- before a significant conclusion can be reached. A meta-analysis is more likely to provide an accurate conclusion. But it sounds to me like a lot of these organizations are thinking there is a correlation. I haven't gone too deep into the research though, since we don't know if video games were even a factor here.

I don't think video games are the only thing that will turn someone violent. But I think it definitely could be a contributing factor. Like if you factor in the violence and dysfunction Bryer experienced in his upbringing, plus his family history of mental illness (and it's possible his dad has a history of psychosis and delusions, according to his dad's interviews), plus negative and violent influences from video games/media/the internet, etc. plus various societal factors, it's like a perfect storm.

Sure, most people can play these hyper-realistic games where they're killing people, from a young age, and not have it negatively affect their brain development. But maybe some people can't. Just like most people can drink without an issue, and some are raging alcoholics.

I remember, back in the day when I was a smoker, finding a study from UGA that demonstrated that nicotine improves cognitive function.

It does, at least in the short term. It's a nootropic. That doesn't mean that certain methods of delivering nicotine to the body improve cognitive function though.

 

[Shlock Homes]

Possibly but as recent as the last PC announcing the bodies were recovered the RCMP had not found a prior connection.

“However, according to Hackett, there is no evidence suggesting a link between the suspects and victims.”
B.C. murder suspects Bryer Schmegelsky, Kam McLeod believed to be dead

Assuming that KM and BS had been up in Whitehorse, they would have been traveling in the opposite direction to LF and CD (who's van was on the northbound side). But there isn't much light, so unless LF & CD had some lights on around their vehicle, it would have been hard to spot them from far away. KM & BS would have had to do a u-turn on that highway to check them out. The police haven't said anything of that nature. They haven't said anything about what actually ties KM & BS to their murders, other than the fact they were in the area, like probably hundreds of other people.

 

[Shlock Homes]

Which is why I posted my question.

WHY would Kam and Bryer choose a route that does not show up on a general inquiry search, if they were as inexperienced as perceived?

Are you talking about going up to the Sundance Camp area? Maybe they were searching for camp, and then they found Sundance near Gillam and were going to check it out? But that would mean they were accessing the internet, and the police haven't said anything about their phone use during the time they were reported missing.

 

[SovereignSnake]

I was under the impression that Ste Croix didn't see anything in their vehicle that looked like they had camping gear.
The reason why I would take that as his first and true opinion is because as a cop, he's probably checking out their vehicle, casually looking inside as he's talking to them, to see if there's anything suspicious there. So I would expect if he had seen it, he would have said it.
Also, a blue sleeping bag would have stood out. Blue in the wilderness is not a natural colour. So if it was spotted randomly later on from the river by someone, how come it wasn't spotted by helicopters or other search people in that area during their intensive manhunt? It wouldn't have moved by itself.

Wait a minute, Ste-Croix was a cop!? This is news to me. I also didn't know he looked in the RAV? I thought he just talked to both of them outside and the closest he ever got was hooking up to the back of it, maybe glancing in the rear window and also talking to Kam at the driver side window giving him instructions on what maneuvers to use while he pulled them out.

 

[Gina20]

I was under the impression that Ste Croix didn't see anything in their vehicle that looked like they had camping gear.
The reason why I would take that as his first and true opinion is because as a cop, he's probably checking out their vehicle, casually looking inside as he's talking to them, to see if there's anything suspicious there. So I would expect if he had seen it, he would have said it.
Also, a blue sleeping bag would have stood out. Blue in the wilderness is not a natural colour. So if it was spotted randomly later on from the river by someone, how come it wasn't spotted by helicopters or other search people in that area during their intensive manhunt? It wouldn't have moved by itself.

TSC is a cop?

Walmart has sold blue sleeping bags for years. I have a couple.

 

[Schmoosh]

Wait a minute, Ste-Croix was a cop!? This is news to me. I also didn't know he looked in the RAV? I thought he just talked to both of them outside and the closest he ever got was hooking up to the back of it, maybe glancing in the rear window and also talking to Kam at the driver side window giving him instructions on what maneuvers to use while he pulled them out.

No.

 

[Zella]

Tommy Ste-Croix is not a cop and has never claimed to be one. I have never seen any source that indicates that. I have read he is a businessowner but don't remember where I saw that. MOO