Video Games and Violence

| 1 Comment

I read an article from CNN, "High Court Accepts Case Over Violent Video Games". The article discusses that there is a dispute in California over a law that banned the sale of violent video games. All video games come with a rating of the level of violence or maturity needed to play the particular video game. For the more violent games, a person must either be 17 years of age, otherwise a parent is required to purchase the game for their child. So clearly, the "kids" playing these games are either old enough to know right from wrong, or their parents are perfectly capable of determining if their child is old/mature enough to handle the video games. With these restrictions, there should be no blame put on video game makers or sellers for children that are violent. Either the parents are to blame for buying a game that their children are not old enough for and they don't explain to their children that things in the game aren't meant to be done in real life. Or a child old enough should be held responsible for not using self control of their anger and emotions. To conclude, let the people of California game!!

1 Comment

Yes, I do agree with the aspect that children should understand the age limit to play, but have you considered maybe the possibility of the children having older siblings? Maybe if these siblings were significantly older and mature enough to play the game, that will trigger something in the child to think it's the norm to play these types of games by just observing. Just something to think about. Great article!

Leave a comment

About this Entry

This page contains a single entry by tolle195 published on November 6, 2011 11:00 PM.

Are babies smarter than we think? was the previous entry in this blog.

The Role of the Father is the next entry in this blog.

Find recent content on the main index or look in the archives to find all content.