In a sudden and unexpected surge of common sense, a pair of child psychologists have spoken out against the causal relationships between violence and gaming, and the ways in which they're used to vilify our pastime.

Drs. Frank Gaskill and Dave Verhaagen write on the SoutheastPsych blog that an oft-cited research article criticizing violent video games concludes that "playing violent video games often may well cause increases in delinquent behaviors, both aggressive and non-aggressive." But the research article itself later notes that forging a causal link in a correlational study is "risky at best". Gaskill and Verhaagen bring the science:

Why is it risky? Because correlations are just relationships between two variables; you can never say one causes the other. We could say that during the season when ice cream sales increase, shark attacks also increase. But we could not say the more ice cream you sell, the more you cause shark attacks.

If that sounds familiar, it's because it's a very eloquent summation of the argument that gamers have been so desperately trying to clarify to parents, lawmakers and the media for years. And we've become so embroiled in the argument's finer points—likesay, what to do when some nut goes apeshit on a game she's never played— that we may have lost sight of the fact that a fair bit of the core science upon which the argument is based might be faulty. So what prompted the pair to speak out against such unqualified remarks?

Some legislative initiatives and public opinions across the country are based on fallacious assumptions, personal biases, political posturing and weak science. Common sense tells you that you don't let an elementary school kid or an older child with a history of aggressive behavior play Grand Theft Auto. But that same common sense tells you that if 90 percent of households have owned or rented a video game every year - while the juvenile crime rate has been going down for more than a decade - then a little Halo 3 never hurt anybody...

Consider this your bright spot in an otherwise somber span of years in which the violence in games debate has reached a decidedly ridiculous tone and volume. My only hangup is the choice in venue—this is the sort of talk we need on a broader scale, not just on a blog.

Beholden though we may be to our colleagues Geoff Keighley, Chris Kohler and other journos who have stuck up for games on the ad-hoc cable news debates, we need professionals outside of the gaming sphere who actually come equipped with a working knowledge of gaming—dudes with degrees who can combat false rhetoric and back it up with expert opinion.

There's room for both ends of the argument, so long as those who participate conduct themselves with respect for the issue at hand and those who disagree. Loathe though I might be to admit it, maybe there is a link between media and violence—when I was six, I was asked by some random boy on the playground if I wanted to play "Captain Power" with him. I agreed, and he promptly socked me in the fucking mouth. I think I was the bad guy.