Introduction
Neither constitution nor any parents can stop children from playing video games, as children will find some or other way to play video games. Law Excessive amount of violence in Video games is one of many debated topics in our society. A number of people say that it affects behaviour of children in a substantial manner. These people advocate to ban the games that cater violence on the other hands, a huge number of people do not agree with such logic. They oppose any such step and argue in favour of games even if they portray violence. Court said that “The negation of the ban itself will likely have minimal impact, as kids would have found their way to violent games in any case” (Tassi). Children should be given freedom to play video games as first ammendment protects the right of individuals, and particpaion of parents can protect them from playing violent vide games, terefore government should not put a ban on video games.
Thesis Statement: This paper intends to discuss the violence in video games and analyses whether violent video games affect children in a negative manner. The paper also discusses the legality of these games in perspective of the first amendment of the US constitution.
Discussion
Gentile et al. mentioned that the majority of US teenagers play video games on a regular basis. Some of these games are extremely violent and may affect the behaviour of the children in a negative manner. It is difficult to believe that the children who are in constant touch of these video games are unaffected by their negative impacts. “most evidence suggests that amount of play affects school performance, whereas violent content affects aggressive outcomes” (Gentile et al., 6). Children have a tendency to learn, and they learn from these games too. If the characters of any game are involved in extremely violent activities, there are chances for a player to act accordingly.
Experts suggest that violent games adversely affect the children, and it is not very surprising if their behaviour is affected by these games. According to Tassi the voices to ban violent games are not new, and people have been raising their voices to ban violent games since a long time. Author mentioned “The ban was in place that would make it a crime to sell violent games to minors” (Tassi). Violent games like ‘Death Race’ and ‘Mortal Kombat’, Doom, Grand theft auto and ‘Night Trap’ have attracted huge public cries after they were released, and people witnessed their effects on their children. “Playing violent games increases aggressive behaviors, increases aggressive cognitions, increases aggressive emotions, increases physiological arousal, and decreases prosocial behaviors” (Gentile et al., 7).
Playing violent video game require a high amount of attention and intense participation. Liptak mentioned that modern games and controls also involve very active participation on mental as well physical level. Author mentioned that “The court has affirmed the constitutional rights of game developers, adults keep the right to decide what’s appropriate in their houses” (Liptak). In the light of these facts, it is difficult to say that violent games do not affect children in negative ways. Children participate in these games with very enthusiasm and act as their favourite actors who are usually very violent. When children see their favourite characters killing and hurting others, they feel amused. It may inspire children to act in a similar manner (Dill& Dill).
There are people who argue in favour of video games and suggest that video games are just a mean of entertainment, and they cannot affect the behaviour of children in negative ways. Tassi, in his article, advocates these video games by presenting a number of arguments in favour of video games and suggest that video games enhance the sharpness of the human brain. There are a number of people who argue that video games, including violent ones, enhance the fertility of the human brain. Bartholow & Anderson mentioned that “The results confirmed our hypothesis that playing the violent game would result in more aggression than would playing the nonviolent game” (Bartholow & Anderson, 283).
Saunders, in his study, analyses the subject and its relation with the first amendment. US Supreme Court ruled that these video games are protected by the provisions of the first amendment and it is not logical to put any kind of ban of them. The Supreme Court held that even if these games depict extreme violence, these games cannot be banned as they are protected by the first amendment of the US constitution. Author mentioned that “In Ashcroft v. ACLU" the Court addressed the community standards portion of the test for sexual obscenity and its extension to "harmful-to-minors" statutes" (Saunders, 260). It was held that these games are not different from the old books, cartoons or movies, and it will not be wise to ban only video games.
While deciding a popular case, US Supreme Court struck down a law of California state law that banned video games that were found catering violence and sex. The law advocated to prevent the sale of video games to children that portrayed violent attacks, killings and sexual attacks, “Because speech about violence is not obscene,” (Liptak). Lawmakers said that it was a necessary step to stop children from accessing the games that depict violence and sex. Author gave example by saying that “The details of the murderous spree of Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris at Columbine High can be found at a variety of sources. The tie to video games is found in the fact that Harris and Klebold were said to play violent video games for hours and were fanatics with regard to the video game Doom” (Saunders, 52). It was said that such depictions affect the behaviour of children in an adverse manner.
Justice Antonin Scalia of the US Supreme Court held while striking down the above said law that “Like the protected books, plays, and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas -- and even social messages -- through many familiar literary devices (such as characters, dialogue, plot, and music) and through features distinctive to the medium (such as the player's interaction with the virtual world). That suffices to confer First Amendment protection” (Tassi).
The Supreme Court respected the reasonable concern of California authorities but at the same time suggested the law making authority to act reasonably and in accordance with the law. The Supreme Court said that the entertainment rights of people cannot be oppressed merely on the context of protecting children. Justice Antonin Scalia said that protecting children “does not include a free-floating power to restrict the ideas to which children may be exposed” (Liptak).
Conclusion
Finally, I believe that video games do not impact children in negative manner. A number of people believe that children who play games are also better performers in their study and they do exceedingly well in sports as well as in extracurricular activities. I also observed that children who play video games have a better understanding of circumstances including odd ones. Video game player children are proved to be good drivers than non-players of the video games. Apart from this aspect, the issue involves the first amendment of the US constitution that ensures the right of entertainment and putting any ban on the violent video games amounts to violating this provision. The US Supreme Court has reiterated the constitution makers.
Annotated Bibliography
Bartholow, Bruce D., & Anderson, Craig A. "Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggressive Behavior: Potential Sex Differences." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 38 (3) (2002): 283–290.
The article describes the impact of violence shown in the video games on different genders. The article is based on a research study conducted to analyze the impact of video games on behaviour of people. The study revealed that people who play violent video games show the aggressive behaviour. However, people who play non-violent video games do not shows aggressive behaviour.
Dill, Karen E. & Dill, Jody C. "Video game violence: A review of the empirical literature." Aggression and Violent Behavior, Volume 3 (4) (1998): 407–428.
Gentile, Douglas A., Lynchb, P. J., Linder, J. R., & Walsh, David A.z. "The effects of violent video game habits on adolescent hostility, aggressive behaviors, and school performance." Journal of Adolescence, Volume 27 (1) (2004): 5–22.
The article is focused on the research study conducted to analyse the impact of violence presented in video games. The article covers various aspects associated with the subject such as video games habits, video game usage and impact of video game on children behaviour at home, in school and on education.
Liptak, A. "Justices Reject Ban on Violent Video Games for Children." 27 June 2011. The New York Times. 11 May 2014, <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/us/28scotus.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0>.
The article focuses on the removal of the ban from sales of video games in California. The article described the judgement given by the Supreme Court in favour of children who want to play with video games. The article focuses on various positive aspects associated with the video games, and how video games help children in improving their learning and overall personality.
Saunders, Kevin W. "Regulating Youth Access to Violent Video Games: Three Responses to First Amendment Concerns." Law Review Michigan State University-Detroit College of Law, 51 (2003): 52-113.
This report critically analyses first amendment with respect to restricting children access to the violent video games. The report provides detailed analysis on all major aspects of the subject. The report analyses violence presented in other media, and factors that cause violence in video games. The report also presents an analysis of evolution of video games.
Saunders, Kevin W. "The Need for a Two (or More) Tiered First Amendment to Provide for the Protection of Children." Chicago-Kent Law Review, Vol. 79 (2004): 257-277.
This article describes the possible legal and general ways to protect children from violence presented in different forms of media including video games. The author mentioned about limiting the access of children to the internet and other entertainment contents, especially when law can not limit the children. The focus is placed on parents, their willingness and steps they can take to protect their children.
Tassi, P. "Supreme Court Strikes Down California's Violent Video Game Ban." 27 June 2011. Forbes. 11 May 2014 <http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2011/06/27/supreme-court-strikes-down-californias-violent-games-ban/>.
The article emphasizes on how amendment one support videogames. The article also makes a comparison between video game and other learning materials. The article discusses how the new decision taken by the Supreme Court will change the general perception of people and reduce the lawsuits.
Works Cited
Bartholow, Bruce D., & Anderson, Craig A. "Effects of Violent Video Games on Aggressive Behavior: Potential Sex Differences." Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Volume 38 (3) (2002): 283–290.
Dill, Karen E. & Dill, Jody C. "Video game violence: A review of the empirical literature." Aggression and Violent Behavior, Volume 3 (4) (1998): 407–428.
Gentile, Douglas A., Lynchb, P. J., Linder, J. R., & Walsh, David A.z. "The effects of violent video game habits on adolescent hostility, aggressive behaviors, and school performance." Journal of Adolescence, Volume 27 (1) (2004): 5–22.
Liptak, A. "Justices Reject Ban on Violent Video Games for Children." 27 June 2011. The New York Times. 11 May 2014 <http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/28/us/28scotus.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0>.
Saunders, Kevin W. "Regulating Youth Access to Violent Video Games: Three Responses to First Amendment Concerns." Law Review Michigan State University-Detroit College of Law, 51 (2003): 52-113.
Saunders, Kevin W. "The Need for a Two (or More) Tiered First Amendment to Provide for the Protection of Children." Chicago-Kent Law Review, Vol. 79 (2004): 257-277.
Tassi, P. "Supreme Court Strikes Down California's Violent Video Game Ban." 27 June 2011. Forbes. 11 May 2014 <http://www.forbes.com/sites/insertcoin/2011/06/27/supreme-court-strikes-down-californias-violent-games-ban/>.
