Video game violence shouldn't be blamed for any real violence.

Arguably, with a sufficiently realistic video game, it would be possible to desensitize a gamer to the act of violence, which would make it easier for the aforementioned gamer to commit violence.

However, two things would still be necessary:

1. Technology that could sufficiently mimic reality, removing contextual barriers that help distinguish video games from reality. This does not yet exist, and probably never will, owing to things like realism being bloody annoying in video games (who wants to be gasping after jogging half a mile while playing NBA Street?).

2. The active decision to commit a violent act toward sentient beings, which requires that the gamer make the conscious choice to hurt others. This is completely independent of video games, and is really the crux of the matter. Regular people don't decide to kill others, video games or not.

J, I disagreed becasue you didn't give an age profile - children do kun-fu kick their siblings in the head after playing Mortal Combat.

And that's when you beat them until they realize that there exists a difference between video game violence and real violence.

[Actually, I've never encountered this in person, and I grew up to games like Mortal Kombat. Then again, I really grew up to games like Wolfenstein 3D, so maybe my trigger is actually Nazis and crazy outer-space aliens from Hell.]

Mimicking behavours is a natural part of learning. If a child does not yet have the intellectual capacity to differentiate between positive behaviours and negative and the physical and virtual, they shouldn't be playing Mortal Kombat. Or watching a video of someone kicking a "bobo doll".

However, for older, more rational people who understand the difference between fantasy and reality, playing violent video games (or watching violent films or reading violent books) should not make them more malicious. In my experience the effect is cathartic.
Historically, when a new media has been used to explore the darker side of human nature, there's always been a backlash.
I don't subscribe to the idea that video games are the perfect devices for "learning aggression either". In most of the severely violent video games I've played, victory comes from "keeping a cool head" rather than loosing yourself in the violence. Perhaps people learn not to become arroused (desensitised) by these games because that's where the reward lies?
Books seem to me to have the most profound mind altering effects. With a book written by a skilled writer, you can really come to understand the motivation of the characters. If that motivation is violent, and its all you're exposed to...
...But then, books have been around for a long time. With far more liberal supply than films or videogames without a huse increase in violence in the literate community. The cries for certain books to be banned seem to be declining in favour of banning video games.

I think it's repression we ought to fear more than anything.

Violence is just part of nature...

Actually, the books are probably scarier because they can portray a character of similar background and motivations to the reader and subtly demoonstrate how his ideals suit a more violent and depraved worldview, either due to experiences or necessity.

The reader connects a lot more closely with the character in the book than with some unnamed soldier that raided a friendly base, only to find a portal to Hell (or Phobos) from which monsters are spawning endlessly.

Agreed Rho - the key is being able to differentiate between fantasy and fiction. That's why young kids should not (in my mind) be allowed access to too much violent material.