Derek Tremblay Help Received: Conference with Maj. Garriott
Major Garriott Peer Review: Darren Barile
ERH 102-11
27 March 2017
Why Violence Shouldn’t be Taken Out of Video Games
After numerous school shootings and instances of violence from young people such as Sandy Hook and many others, Congress is looking to pass legislation to limit the amount of violence in video games. Members of Congress, such as California Democrat Sen.Dianne Feinstein, have suggested to Congress that they take steps to “make sure (video games) don’t glorify guns” (huffingtonpost.com). While violent video games such as Call of Duty, Halo, Grand Theft Auto, and Battlefield have been on the rise in popularity with young adults, youth violence has declined in recent years (usnews.com), they do not cause the people who play these games to commit acts of violence. Rather than focusing on video games it would be more useful to control the weapons used to carry out these horrendous acts. The people who do any outrageous acts of violence are mentally ill, and whether or not they play violent video games has no influence on if they commit these acts or not. The current laws and age limit required to buy violent video games should be taken out because there is no evidence that playing violent video games cause people to act violently, and limiting people’s ability to create video games would be a violation of their right to free speech. Instead the current video games laws banning anyone under the age of 17 to buy a mature rated video game should be repealed to protect the rights of minors.
Video games do not cause anyone to commit mass homicides, the people who do these acts were previously mentally ill and if video games had been banned they would have committed these acts regardless. In a recent study conducted by Christopher J. Ferguson and Cheryl Olsen found “little evidence that violent video games had negative influences on children with pre-existing mental health problems (cnn.com). This research means that the violence in video games has no correlation to the effect the mental state of children, and that it doesn’t cause kids to act how they otherwise normally would. The urge to commit violent acts is a result of being mentally ill rather than what type of video games someone plays. I know many people, myself included, that grew up playing violent video games since grade school like Halo, and Medal of Honor, and it never gave us the urge to go out and mimic the violent acts in real life on real people. People who kill others are born being mentally ill killers, and playing video games does not turn anyone who is normal into killers. Also supporting that video games don’t cause violence are the many cases of people who are not children, such as men over the age of 60, who commit terrible acts and are not in any way influenced by the violence in video games (cnn.com). When lawmakers debate making a restriction on video games they often ignore the facts relating to video games and mass homicides and they just point at the violence in the games, which doesn’t have an effect on the mental health of a person.
Lawmakers looking to ban video games because of potential violence from the youth could be barking up the entirely wrong tree. “The average video game player is 35 years old and has been playing for 12 years. Forty percent of gamers are women, and one out of every four gamers is over 50” (usnews.com). Since such a large percentage of gamers aren’t easily influenced youth in grade or middle school the eliminating the violence in video games would most likely not affect the target audience of America’s youth. The main factor in any mass homicides is never a certain video games that a certain individual played. The real factors that pushed someone over the edge are always more serious such as, being fired from a job, being treated unfairly, a bad home life, a mental illness, or many other reasons not attributed to playing a video game. If playing video games cause mass homicide violence would be more widespread because of the millions of people that play violent video games. But it’s not, violence is isolated because people can distinguish playing a game on a television and real life, and because video games do not cause people to commit violent acts.
The banning of violent video games would not solve the problem of mass homicides, and therefore they should not be censored. If video games are censored or banned there would be a large backlash from the public. Many people play and enjoy these games as well as the many others who develop and sell these games as a means of revenue and supporting their family. Video games are a positive thing in many people’s life and can be a tool used for bonding between people. I have countless great memories of playing video games with my friends and my siblings and even my parents that I will hold onto forever. Video games are an enjoyable experience for everyone that allows for people to express themselves and to do what they love. Studies show that video games can help people with mental issues such as depression. “Brain scans show the most active parts of the brain are the rewards pathway system, which is associated with motivation and goal orientation, and the hippocampus, which is associated with learning and memory. These are the two main parts of the brain that don’t activate when people are suffering from depression” (time.com). Video games are more helpful to people and their mental state than hurtful. Taking away video games might have a opposite effect on the amount of violence, because of the stress that video games can relieve. Mass homicide is not related to the enjoyment that video games are to many people. To take away video games from people would be wrong and a violation of people’s right to express themselves.
If the government were to take away from the people’s ability to make the video games that they want it would be a hit on their free speech granted in the constitution. Video games were declared in 2011 by the Supreme Court to be “entitled to the protection of free speech as the best of literature” and that “disgust (such as violence) is not a valid basis for restricting expression” (ibls.com). Video games are like books or movies in many ways. “Many have elaborate plots and characters, often drawn from fiction or history” (nytimes.com). Such as book enthusiasts there are video game enthusiasts who sit on the edge of their seats waiting for the next version of the game to come out so they can find out what the fate of their favorite character is. Everyone has the right to enjoy the free creations of others and violence in a game should not be discriminated from violence in a book or movie, or any other form of violence. Video games are a form of free expression (nytimes.com) and proposing a ban on video games based solely on violence would be against the Supreme Court ruling in 2011 and could never happen because it would be a violation of free speech.
The laws regarding video games in the United States are not fair in respecting people and their Constitutional rights, and they should allow for minors to buy the video games that suit them and that they want to play. The current laws for the sale of video games only allow for Mature and Adult Only games to be sold to those 17 and older. This way youths cannot get violent games unless their parents approve of them having these games. The Supreme Court says “government doesn’t have the authority to restrict the ideas to which children should be exposed” (thedailyrecord.com). Not allowing kids to have access to the games of their choice is not the right thing to do, as kids should have equal rights to enjoy video games as adults do. Most kids know the difference between fantasy and reality and can understand that violence in video games is different that violence in real life. Kids should be allowed to buy games at their discretion in order to protect their freedoms.
The violence in video games should not be taken out or censored to children, because doing so would not fix the problem of mass homicides. Taking away video games would violate the freedom people have to express themselves and should not be done.
Work’s Cited:
“Don’t link video games with mass shootings”, cnn.com, http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/20/opinion/ferguson-video-games/, 20 Sep. 2013
“Internet Law – Violent Video Games are Constitutionally Protected Speech”, ibls.com, http://www.ibls.com/internet_law_news_portal_view.aspx?s=latestnews&id=2539, accessed on 27 Mar. 2017
“Video Games and Free Speech”, nytimes.com, http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/opinion/06thu3.html, 5 May 2010
“Dianne Finstein: Congress may take action on video games”, huffingtonpost.com, http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/04/04/dianne-feinstein-video-games_n_3016703.html, 4 April 2014
“Why Playing Video Games Can Actually Be Good for Your Health”, time.com, http://time.com/4051113/why-playing-video-games-can-actually-be-good-for-your-health/, 26 Sep 2015
“Supreme Court: Kids have right to violent video games”, thedailyrecord.com, http://thedailyrecord.com/2011/06/27/supreme-court-kids-have-right-to-violent-video-games/, 27 June 2011
Word Count: 1519