Video Games, Violence and Parenting

In this essay, the author

• Argues that the ignorance of people who argue against this shows their one-minded views on this topic. parents refuse to take responsibility to teach their children right from wrong.
• Argues that violent games get at least a ‘’ages 15+’’ rating on them. parents must stand up to children and teach them they can’t get what they want, when they always want it.
• Explains that learning is a big process for children while growing up, and their biggest role models are their parents. if they whine and cry until they get what the want, they're not going to learn patience.
• Opines that when children play violent games, their parents should supervise them and ensure they know that it is just a game. keep reassuring them that you couldn't get away with this or that in real life.
• Opines that if you are more responsible and don't let them play violent games until they're more mature, they would already know that violence is bad and they shouldn’t re-create anything they see in the games.
• Opines that a child's violent upbringing influences their violent side more than video games or t.v. being hit isn't good at all, and parents should love and care for their child.
• Explains that almost every video game these days does have some form of violence, be it a simpsons hit and run or postal 2.
• Argues that banning either of these games would cause some controversy from parents and teenages who aren’t paranoid that their child will turn into a violent maniac.
• Explains that the irresponsible parents who are lazy with their teachings of right and wrong just want to eliminate the problem of violent games. but what would come after a ban like that?
• Concludes that banning violent video games is a bad idea, and that the only good out come might be the decrease in childhood obesity.