Violent Video Game Proposal

Just imagine two brothers. The youngest one (16-years-old), spends his life playing “Halo 3,” and has now developed a sense that killing isn’t that bad. After a while, without him even knowing, the horrid murder stories on the news don’t bother him anymore. One day, after leaving his console, he finds that his older brother (18-years-old) had switched on his system without asking! Infuriated, he runs to the kitchen and grabs the nearest knife and stabs his own brother in the back, killing him within seconds. This is exactly what happened on April 4th of this year.

What many do not realize is that violent video games pose a great danger to both gamers and non-gamers. The disturbing thing is that not a lot of people know it. Many studies have shown that violent video games increase aggression levels within most gamers and generally, the longer the play time, the greater short-term and long-term effects it has on them. This issue alone does not pose much of a threat, but there a few more things to add to that. One of the most worrisome facts is that violent video game consumers become desensitized to violence and gore – even the military uses violent video games to train their people how to kill without emotional counter-effects. On top of these two problems, there are negative behavioral effects of long term playing. Put all three of these factors into a blender and out comes the situation described above – violent outbursts, both controlled and uncontrolled.

Obviously gaming is a right to be had by many, and rightfully so, but there needs to be limits if our right to life is in danger. This leads to the great question: How does America solve this problem? The solution may be easier than what is expected.

A perfect opportunity has presented itself to the American people. The Federal Supreme Court has just granted writ of certiorari to the Californian case, Schwarzenegger v. Video Software Dealers Association. The very essence of this case will determine whether or not states will have the ability to prohibit the sale of violent video games to minors. This is a very important case, but winning this case only solves half of violent video game problem. We also have to consider the question, “Well, can’t the parents buy the games for their children?” Yes they can, and that’s why I’ve composed a solution that solves both problems.

The solution is that we need to let others know the harms that can come from violent video games! There are three ways to go about this: 1. Telling parents of minors. In turn, parents will pay more attention to their children’s video game playing and keep it in realistic check (e.g., balancing it with other activities, or even telling him or her of the harms associated with violent video games). This will cause the parents to carefully purchase video games and children to play less. This solution is very feasible to anyone who can speak. Why? Because if parents love their children and want to ensure their mental well-being, they will at least let their children know of the dangerous effects violent video games pose. 2. Tell the voting public. By letting the voters know about the harms, they can vote into Congress those individuals who will construct violent video game regulation laws. 3. To make a big impact, you can write letters to the governing officials showing why these laws are Constitutional.

Here is why these laws are Constitutional: The Supreme Court has established that any type of expression that incites imminent lawlessness is not protected by the Constitution, and therefore states can make laws regulating such speech. Video games pose a danger to even the non-gamers in the real-world due to the issues discussed. That is why, and how the American people should and can stand up for our protection rights and guard our country’s future!

Cause and Effect Concerning Violent Video Game and Regulation

In this blog I will be discussing the PRIMARY cause and effect arguments that are being used concerning the law and Supreme Court lawsuits. To define the subject that will be discussed: whether or not the Supreme Court should allow laws that prohibit the sale of violent video game sales to minors. The importance of this post is for another intelligent discussion that analyzes cause and effect arguments so to make sure that people are not fooled with fallacies.

The primary cause and effect argument is that violent video games increase violent crimes. In other words, what is being said here is that the effect of regulating violent video games will decrease crime... violent crime. Although this law would restrict the freedom of expression, derived from the First Amendment, this would be Constitutional because this is a state compelling interest. A state compelling interest is self explanatory in that in order for the state to make a law that restricts an amendment right, it needs an very good reason to do so. Thus, this is the primary cause and effect argument made in the discussion of violent video game regulation.

Opposition to Court Decsion of Violent Video Game Regulation

In USA Today, April 30th, 2010, several authors say that parents can control video game regulation themselves for their own children. Here is a quick analysis on the author's writing technique:

Michael did well starting his argument. It is what seems to be fairly sound, but only because it is based on values. He starts off saying that the Supreme Court skipped over the most relevant and easiest solution to the problem of violent video games. Usually the American people think of the Supreme Court of looking at facts too many facts. The main tool that this author used was simple logic. It is so logical that it makes you think, "Yeah, why doesn't the Supreme Court just allow parents to regulate the video games themselves?" He restates his claim at the end that parents need to raise their children, not the government raising the children for the parents.

I totally agree with his point: parents need to give children the attention and parenting they deserve; after all, the parents did decide to make adult decisions that brought them into this world. The problem that is easily missed with this is that a lot of parents do not care what games their children buys or plays, so, the government now has to take it in its own hands when this issue starts to effect the safety of rights of surrounding lives.

Works Cited
Michael Bailey. "Parents can Police Video Games." USAToday.com. 30 Apr. 2010. Web. 1 June 2010.