Censoring Violent Video Games

Millions of children around the world are proud owners of a wide array of
video games. Many of these games are appropriate for the whole family, while
others continue to become increasingly violent. There is no question that intense
violence exhibited in some video games has a powerful effect on whoever witnesses
such brutal sounds and images. So how does a parent allow children to enjoy the
modern gaming experience without risking the influence of aggressive behavior or
promoting a desire to imitate what is experienced? Game developers have
pondered the option of censoring intense violence in order to prevent negative
changes to participants. This solution is not a pleasing answer for many video game
fans. While some people believe that violence in video games does not affect the
observer, I believe that censoring video games will reduce aggressive behavior in
young children.
Opponents of censorship claim that censorship violates some First
Amendment rights the freedom of speech and press. However, I disagree because
censoring assists in ensuring the safety of others that may come into contact with
someone who has been negatively affected by intense violence in a video game. A
goal of our country is to have a safe, organized environment for everyone to enjoy.
People walking around the streets with unruly behavior due to playing intensely
violent video games could risk putting others in harms way. For example, there are
no games in the United States that have been forcefully censored due to the First
Amendment laws. However, the ESRB (Entertainment Software Rating Board) has
incorporated a rating system that can be found on most games. The rating system
includes age limits on certain games based on content. This suggests correlation
between age and aggressive behavior; therefore we must take precautions to
protect our society. Theoretically, free speech in the U.S. can be limited if it might
cause an imminent lawless action (the term used in Brandenburg v. Ohio that
overturned the First Amendment definition of clear and present danger).
Many people object to censoring video game violence because of the fact
that movies and video games are similar in experience for the participant, yet
movies are rated instead of censored. According to the APA (American Physiological
Association), fewer actions are taken to censor movies than are taken to censor
brutally violent scenes in video games. Would a parent rather have their child see
violence in a movie setting, or be the one performing violent acts in a video game? I
would opt for the movie setting. Video games are more behavior changing than
movies. For example, would it be more realistic to see people getting shot, or to be
the one pulling the virtual trigger to shoot people? Video games more closely relate
the cruel action to real life by deeply and physically involving the observer.
Censorship is the best way to solve this problem. Violent video games can be made
to minimize violence by participants.

Another argument is that video games do not affect the behavior of the
gamer. This argument describes video games as an outlet for aggression, not a
source. Everyone is different, and so is the way they interpret the intense violence
portrayed in some video games. Some may understand the difference between
reality and fantasy, but others may take ideas from these particular scenes and try
to imitate some of the experiences. Having fun and being cool are common
explanations for those who have a desire to reenact violence. I believe extremely
brutal video games can corrupt young, innocent minds. A prime example is when a
young Thai boy killed a taxi driver and stole his car after repeatedly playing a
violent scene in the video game Grand Theft Auto IV. Censoring violent games will
significantly produce less violent and aggressive behavior in those who play video
games containing intense violence.
Although many people in the United States feel that video games should not
be censored regardless of violence, others believe that censoring certain video
games is the best option to reduce aggressive behavior and violence in our society.
While censorship conflicts with First Amendment rights, violence in video games
may be treated differently than films and television. Children are steadily becoming
more aggressive and violent. Censorship will not only help ensure the safety of our
communities, but it will prevent the corruption of innocent minds and limit the lifelike simulation of cruelty that imprints in the minds of gamers playing intensely
violent video games.