|ROCK OUT CENSORSHIP - FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS|
We have heard this excuse being used by some criminals seeking leniency from the justice system, and we have heard this excuse given by government officials to justify unconstitutional legislation, but in both cases, the people using this flawed argument that absolves individuals of personal responsibility for their own actions have a vested interest in the outcome of the decisions made based on this logic. In the case of the criminal, their vested interest is gaining a lesser sentence. In the case of the government official, their vested interest is in gaining powers specifically designated as off-limits for them in the First Amendment of the US Constitution.
We say that those that claim music influences people to commit acts of violence are wrong. There is no *causal* relationship between the entertainment choices of individuals and criminal behavior. Have you ever noticed that nobody ever says "it was the music that made them do it" when the criminal is a fan of classical music? We have seen ZERO credible studies that prove a link between music and violence. What we believe is that naturally aggressive people tend to choose more aggressive music as a reflection of their own personality. So in that regard, people that listen to the more aggressive music might tend to be more aggressive nature and *possibly* more prone to violence. But, in that opinion, we do not admit to any *causal* relationship whereby the music turns someone into something they are not. At best, using music as a source of blame is merely scapegoating to avoid looking into deeper causes of the problem. At worst, it is politically motivated rhetoric by those that would repeal the First Amendment if they had their way.