Um.... no, that STILL means it depends on the person/kid in question.Forboding Angel wrote:no liger, imo it depends on how well and what morals were taught to the kids.
Why the fuck is everyone afraid to take responsibility for their actions nowadays? When I was a kid things were a lot different...
Video Game Violence
Moderator: Moderators
- BlackLiger
- Posts: 1371
- Joined: 05 Oct 2004, 21:58
- SwiftSpear
- Classic Community Lead
- Posts: 7287
- Joined: 12 Aug 2005, 09:29
A) I belive it's up to parents to decide weather or not it's appropriate for thier children, parents are partially responsible for the development and actions of thier children and studies have shown that violent video games aren't right for everyone. A parent should know thier child enough to determine something like that.
B) Because it's a parent's right to decide weather or not a child should be playing violent video games I think that the retailers should have an obligation to ensure that minors are not being sold mature rated video games. If a child want's a mature rated video game and the parent belives that it is appropriate then they can buy that game in their child's stead. The inverse is not true.
C) I think the argument that if we don't sell children violent video games then they will get them elsewhere is nulled entirely. It is illegal to download retail games online without paying for them. It is illegal to steal games off the shelfs. If a parent catches thier child doing either they have an obligation to deal with it appropriately. There's no reason that purchase laws should be dicated by what is already possible if you are willing to break the law anyways. It's possible to just shoot someone with a gun yourself, and it's possible to just run someone over with a car, so why bother making it illegal to hire assassins?
B) Because it's a parent's right to decide weather or not a child should be playing violent video games I think that the retailers should have an obligation to ensure that minors are not being sold mature rated video games. If a child want's a mature rated video game and the parent belives that it is appropriate then they can buy that game in their child's stead. The inverse is not true.
C) I think the argument that if we don't sell children violent video games then they will get them elsewhere is nulled entirely. It is illegal to download retail games online without paying for them. It is illegal to steal games off the shelfs. If a parent catches thier child doing either they have an obligation to deal with it appropriately. There's no reason that purchase laws should be dicated by what is already possible if you are willing to break the law anyways. It's possible to just shoot someone with a gun yourself, and it's possible to just run someone over with a car, so why bother making it illegal to hire assassins?