Persuasive Essay on Video Game Violence.
Control Your Kids, not Video Game Violence
Mike Howe
Video game violence should not be lessened in any way. MAVAV (Mothers against Video Game Addiction and Violence) and other parents feel as though there is now too much violence in video games. They state, "video game companies continue to market violence aimed at vulnerable children and young teens" (MAVAV.ORG). Their children should be controlled, not the games. The games themselves are not alive, but only the people who buy them. There was still violence in video games even in 1985 with the first video game system. In games as simple as "Duck Hunt", where you have a toy gun to shirt ducks with at the screen. Now they are just much more advanced and realistic, with games like "Grand Theft Auto" (where you can hijack cars and go on cop chases and kill anyone in your way). Games like these have been a challenging for parents because they feel like their children will act more violent or give them bad influences, and some of these games may in fact do so. They will not do so, however, if these games are not bought or played by these children.
There is much more fear and violence in the world over all now, then there was twenty years ago. This reflects on a more fearful and violent society. These games are being used as a reason for kid's violent behaviors and actions. Video games were originally intended for entertainment, and they still should be. They are not a "guide" to violence, or a violence enhancer. If these games are now "too violent" then don't buy them. There are ratings for a reason, and you can even check the rating for every game online.[1] The ratings are as follows: early childhood, everyone 10+, mature, rating pending, everyone, teen, and adults only. Like movies, these ratings are intended to keep children and teens away from games that may not be suitable for them.
If the parents are having a problem with their kids playing these games, then they should either not buy them, or set
Mike Howe
Video game violence should not be lessened in any way. MAVAV (Mothers against Video Game Addiction and Violence) and other parents feel as though there is now too much violence in video games. They state, "video game companies continue to market violence aimed at vulnerable children and young teens" (MAVAV.ORG). Their children should be controlled, not the games. The games themselves are not alive, but only the people who buy them. There was still violence in video games even in 1985 with the first video game system. In games as simple as "Duck Hunt", where you have a toy gun to shirt ducks with at the screen. Now they are just much more advanced and realistic, with games like "Grand Theft Auto" (where you can hijack cars and go on cop chases and kill anyone in your way). Games like these have been a challenging for parents because they feel like their children will act more violent or give them bad influences, and some of these games may in fact do so. They will not do so, however, if these games are not bought or played by these children.
There is much more fear and violence in the world over all now, then there was twenty years ago. This reflects on a more fearful and violent society. These games are being used as a reason for kid's violent behaviors and actions. Video games were originally intended for entertainment, and they still should be. They are not a "guide" to violence, or a violence enhancer. If these games are now "too violent" then don't buy them. There are ratings for a reason, and you can even check the rating for every game online.[1] The ratings are as follows: early childhood, everyone 10+, mature, rating pending, everyone, teen, and adults only. Like movies, these ratings are intended to keep children and teens away from games that may not be suitable for them.
If the parents are having a problem with their kids playing these games, then they should either not buy them, or set