help darkspot with her homework!

[darkspot]

I'm writing a report for my Survey class, a persuasive essay about how violence in music lyircs doesn't cause violence. I want the use some examples of situations blown out of proportion because of the music involved. I have Columbine and this thing with Slipknot in Germany. I also want to use the Judas Priest and Ozzy Osbourne cases. If someone could give the date (the year is enough) for the Judas Priest "Better By You, Better Than Me" case and the Ozzy 'Suicide Solution" cases, and also whether or not the prosecuting attornies of either case were also reverends (I think one of the guys for one, or both, of the cases used the Devil as a big part of his defense), that's be very appriciated.

This thing's due on Monday and I am just now starting it. Yay, I'm screwed.

 

[Whocares?]

http://www.reversespeech.com/judas.htm

 

[Karmic]

actually, if you look at rap and hiphop and stuff, maybe it actually does

 

[Captain Beard]

Usually the folks affected by their music ARE predisposed... that is, they would have done it eventually anyway, and the music just sped things up. No point in suing the artist for that.

 

[Necromunchkin]

Art can influence people to at least some degree, just as any aesthetic and rhetorical medum can. The argument that I believe would be ideal to make is that if the assumption that music with violent lyrical content caused physical violence, the numbers would be dramatically higher. For every person that can be identified having been "inspired" to a violent act because of music, how many were inspired by the Bible or religious texts? There has to be a predisposition towards a behavior, an impetus that functions prior to musical, artistic, or rhetorical influence.

A person who tends towards violence will be drawn to music with violent lyrics/content becauss of his/her preexisting mental state because of a desire for affirmation or sympathetic associations. That mental state is very unlikely to come into being because of the influence of that music.

It could be safely stated that a person with a stable mental condition would not become violent because of music, just a person with an unstable mental condition is inclined towards no matter what other factors or influences are then added.

 

[rebirth]

its all real and reality
you can't change personality, just do the meyer-briggs test..and see then we can classify everyone...
anyhow yes lyrics do effect people especially violent ones...
most of all the mass murders were done in recent times by heavy metal merchants...
WHAT WAS THE QUESTION, OH YES, MOST IT IS MEDIA HYPING IT UP..
JUDAS PRIEST WANTED THE CASE TO GOTO COURT AS THEY WERE FLACKING IN THEIR SALES...IN THE USA....

LOOK FOR THE ITALIAN ONE , ITS QUITE NEW....

 

[darkspot]

actually, if you look at rap and hiphop and stuff, maybe it actually does[/QUOTE
Yeah, I know, but my speech is trying to disprove that ... so I'm only focusing on the music that really gets the blame. It's not like you hear about Old Dirty Bastard being sued for drive-by shootings and gangtas not paying their baby's mothers child support.

 

[darkspot]

And thanks very much for the other info and opinions people posted in their thread. Very helpful.

 

[Mantraschism]

My opinion is that even if music/lyrics does/do affect a person, there had to have been a person who already had that mindset in order to create that music or write those lyrics. Music doesn't just come from some other planet - it's a product of a human, and it reflects his or her self, his or her mind, at least to some degree. I agree that people do not develop new personalities by listening to violent music; rather, they are drawn to it because they feel that they can relate. Music can strengthen a person's negative (or positive, let's not forget) feelings, but it does not create them (unless a person is being subjected to music he or she does not like).

 

[rebirth]

iam coinfused