*sighs heavily*
Ok, this is simple and easy to resolve. Let's look at the facts, shall we?
1)Games have clear, explicit ratings to show who should play them, similar to the movie rating system.
2)These ratings mean that stores will not sell games to people that aren't supposed to play them (presuming that they are following the law.)
3)Kids are still getting their hands on these games.
4)Porn is legal. This may seem an odd fact to include, but hold on, I have a point to make.
Ok, now that the facts are assembled, the presentation:
Q: Why are kids getting their hands on this stuff?
A: Not the retailers anymore, due to fact 2. The only people that can be blamed are the parents. My parents refused to buy me M rated games until I was 16, and I happen to be a perfectly functional member of society. If the parent cannot be bothered to check the labels to see if a game is appropriate or not before buying it for their kids, they clearly need to reorganize their parenting priorities. Also, if a parent buys a game for him/herself, then for god's sake, keep it out of the kid's reach! Simple as that.
Q
on't these games make my kids more violent?
A:Nobody knows for sure. But if I had to speculate, I'd say it depends on the kid. I watched Looney Tunes as a kid, and some of that stuff is more violent than some M-rated games.
Q:Well, can't we ban them anyways? To make sure they don't fall into the hands of kids?
A:No. First off, that's a Free Speech amendment violation, in several forms. Secondly, I have serious issues with a society that thinks that violent games need to be banned, but purchase and posession of porn is A-ok. Porn is clearly damaging to the minds of children in ways that are instantly obvious, but adults can go around buying as much of it as they want. Why can't games be the same way, especially since we have yet to prove if games really do damage kids? The tests conducted so far have given no clear consensus, so until they do, nobody has any right to attempt to ban games.
EDIT: I forgot to mention this, but a friend of mine at college actually helped his dad play Castle Wolfenstien as a kid, by sitting in his dad's lap and pressing the weapon select keys. He's also very mellow, and completely nonviolent. Perhaps it's the context of how the kid plays the game that defines if it turns out to be good or bad...
Ok, this is simple and easy to resolve. Let's look at the facts, shall we?
1)Games have clear, explicit ratings to show who should play them, similar to the movie rating system.
2)These ratings mean that stores will not sell games to people that aren't supposed to play them (presuming that they are following the law.)
3)Kids are still getting their hands on these games.
4)Porn is legal. This may seem an odd fact to include, but hold on, I have a point to make.
Ok, now that the facts are assembled, the presentation:
Q: Why are kids getting their hands on this stuff?
A: Not the retailers anymore, due to fact 2. The only people that can be blamed are the parents. My parents refused to buy me M rated games until I was 16, and I happen to be a perfectly functional member of society. If the parent cannot be bothered to check the labels to see if a game is appropriate or not before buying it for their kids, they clearly need to reorganize their parenting priorities. Also, if a parent buys a game for him/herself, then for god's sake, keep it out of the kid's reach! Simple as that.
Q
on't these games make my kids more violent?A:Nobody knows for sure. But if I had to speculate, I'd say it depends on the kid. I watched Looney Tunes as a kid, and some of that stuff is more violent than some M-rated games.
Q:Well, can't we ban them anyways? To make sure they don't fall into the hands of kids?
A:No. First off, that's a Free Speech amendment violation, in several forms. Secondly, I have serious issues with a society that thinks that violent games need to be banned, but purchase and posession of porn is A-ok. Porn is clearly damaging to the minds of children in ways that are instantly obvious, but adults can go around buying as much of it as they want. Why can't games be the same way, especially since we have yet to prove if games really do damage kids? The tests conducted so far have given no clear consensus, so until they do, nobody has any right to attempt to ban games.
EDIT: I forgot to mention this, but a friend of mine at college actually helped his dad play Castle Wolfenstien as a kid, by sitting in his dad's lap and pressing the weapon select keys. He's also very mellow, and completely nonviolent. Perhaps it's the context of how the kid plays the game that defines if it turns out to be good or bad...
