Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

US News guest editorials debate on children and violent video games

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
alp227 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:22 PM
Original message
US News guest editorials debate on children and violent video games
Edited on Mon May-10-10 08:23 PM by alp227
The first OP is "The Government Should Stop Kids From Buying Violent Video Games" by Timothy F. Winter, the president of the Parents Television Council. Although as many of you know the PTC takes socially conservative positions, the PTC considers itself non-partisan, and Winter is a registered Democrat and says he is a liberal.

The second OP is "Video Games Don’t Cause Children to be Violent" by Michael D. Gallagher, the president of the Entertainment Software Association.

US News & World Report publishes these guest opinion pieces as the Supreme Court recently reviewed a California law that bans the sale of violent video games to minors.

The day after the Supreme Court accepted the case, California State Senator Leland Yee, the Democrat from San Francisco who wrote the video game legislation, and a lawyer for the Electronic Frontier Foundation, debated the issue on KQED's program Forum.

Winter's article begins:

Ultraviolent video games are harmful to children, and children should not be able to purchase them without a parent involved in the sales transaction. Unfortunately, the very industry that profits from selling such adult entertainment products to children has successfully waged legal battles across the country. The industry’s arguments are logically and morally bankrupt. Hopefully, the U.S. Supreme Court will see through the smokescreens and uphold a carefully worded California statute prohibiting the sale of ultraviolent video games to unaccompanied minor children.

For parents and grandparents, most of whom have never seen or played one of these explicit games, the notion of video game violence is likely to conjure up an image akin to a Tom & Jerry or Road Runner cartoon. That is not what we’re talking about. What we are talking about is a video game where the child is able to:

Shoot a police officer and urinate on him as he tries to crawl away;
Brutally beat and rape a woman, or decapitate her with a shovel;
Shoot a man, pour gasoline over his wounded body, set the man on fire, and listen to him scream in agony as he burns to death.

The courts have repeatedly held that such speech is constitutionally protected. That’s why the California Legislature, led by San Francisco Bay Area Democrat Leland Yee, set out to craft a state measure that would not interfere with the creation of violent video games, nor interfere with adults who wanted to play or purchase a violent video game for themselves or for their child. The legislation would only prevent a video game retailer from selling an ultraviolent game to an unaccompanied child.

The overwhelming weight of scientific research suggests that these games can be harmful to children. The Parents Television Council has found more than 3,000 studies linking a child’s consumption of violent media to a child’s behavior, yet we’ve found less than two dozen that conclude differently.


Gallagher's article begins:

The Supreme Court recently decided to review a California law that would regulate the sale and rental of computer and video games to minors. We can all agree that parents are the best arbiters of determining what is right for their children. The issue at hand though is how best to support those parents. We believe that with parental controls, ratings awareness and retailer support, proposals like this are a solution in search of a problem. In addition, there are numerous legal reasons why 12 courts have already rejected proposals similar to this one, and we believe there are sound constitutional reasons why we hope the Supreme Court will concur.

A few facts to consider: 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 age 50. Video games are a mass medium form of entertainment that are enjoyed today in a majority of homes by players of all ages.

The myth that video games cause violent behavior is undermined by scientific research and common sense. According to FBI statistics, youth violence has declined in recent years as computer and video game popularity soared. We do not claim that the increased popularity of games caused the decline, but the evidence makes a mockery of the suggestion that video games cause violent behavior. Indeed, as the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declared: “The state has not produced substantial evidence that … violent video games cause psychological or neurological harm to minors.”

In fact, addressing critics’ claims that games are somehow different than other forms of art, the Hon. Robin Cauthron of the United States District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma wrote in a permanent injunction against that state’s attempt to regulate the sale of games to minors that, “the presence of increased viewer control and interactivity does not remove these games from the release of the First Amendment protection.”

The industry also has an independent rating system, similar to the movie rating system, that informs and empowers parents. Watchdog groups and government agencies, like the Federal Trade Commission, praise it as a system that works.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
PM Martin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:26 PM
Response to Original message
1. Video games depicting violence: Bad!
Real wars in which violence results in death: Good!

:puke:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:41 PM
Response to Original message
2. Gamer since I was 5 or 6 (Atari 2600).
Didn't stop me from being fairly successful stable and a happy family man.

Why just yesterday I cut the jugular out of several Pazzi gaurds before driving my sword through their leader, currupt Florentine banker, Francesco de' Pazzi...then I kissed my daughter good night and read her some Todd Parr books.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ZombieHorde Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:42 PM
Response to Original message
3. What game can you...
"Shoot a police officer and urinate on him as he tries to crawl away;
Brutally beat and rape a woman, or decapitate her with a shovel;
Shoot a man, pour gasoline over his wounded body, set the man on fire, and listen to him scream in agony as he burns to death."

What game, or games?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:45 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. Oh you know...games...and stuff.
Edited on Mon May-10-10 08:46 PM by YOY
I kind of wonder if these people who write this shit live on the same planet we do.

I still laugh when someone points out those weird hentai fetish games as if they are released on the PS3 or Wii and are popular beyond a small crowd.

Video games...the DLC scapegoat to the soccer moms and NASCAR dads.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bluestateguy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 08:45 PM
Response to Original message
5. Do you ever get the feeling that President Obama doesn't much like video games?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
defendandprotect Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 09:00 PM
Response to Original message
6. Violent themes harm all of us -- especially children!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
applegrove Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 09:16 PM
Response to Original message
7. A little guy's first sexual experiences can change him. Why would we want to create
misogynists? Ban kids' access to violent video games. It is the only decent thing to do.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YOY Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue May-11-10 08:12 AM
Response to Reply #7
9. Do you actually think any of the horrific items the USNAWR author describes events actual game?
Edited on Tue May-11-10 08:53 AM by YOY
They don't. There are no such games.

The "worst" of popular releases recently was Manhunt 2...although violent as can be there is no killing and urination on cops.

Any parent who would buy it for their non-18+ kid is an idiot.

There is no connection between violent video games and crime or violence.

Please do not bring out the APA study of 2001. It has been shot full of so many holes by proper psychological peers that I have heard it referred to as "Swiss Shit" by gamers.

A lawyer have gotten disbarred for pressing this issue. A fundie RW lawyer.

Decent thing to do? No. Censorship is never a decent thing to do...no matter if one claims they are doing it for "the children".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Meldread Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-10-10 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
8. More Nanny State, please!
I'm willing to admit that exposing individuals to violence desensitizes them. In that desensitization, when placed in certain situations, they may find themselves reacting violently whereas had they not been exposed to violence they might not have acted violently.

The key here, however, is desensitization. In order to become desensitized it must be repeated and continued over a long period of time. Watch a Soap Opera. Watch Prime Time TV. Read a Comic Book. Watch a movie - especially an action movie. Pick up a children's novel. Nine times out of ten you're going to be exposed to violence. This is how you become desensitized.

What about video games? It's a chicken and an egg scenario. Violence has clearly played a critical role in our culture. Video games are a reflection of that culture - if violence was undesirable, violent video games would not be for sale. Obviously, since violent video games do well (generally speaking) in sales, then such content is desirable to consumers.

So then, if an individual believes that violence in video games is wrong - and certainly that's a legitimate point of view - then they must in order to get to the root of the problem dig deeper. That will bring them to our culture. In order to have the desired impact, all depictions of violence, large or small, would have to be banned. Clearly, this is against the First Amendment, but even if it were not... would someone wish to live in such a Nanny State?

If violence is wrong, then violence is wrong - period - the medium in which it is portrayed is irrelevant. It is the desensitization that is the issue.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu May 09th 2024, 03:43 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC