Did you know violent video games cause our kids to murder? This is probably one of the alleged claims that people, whom think violent video games contribute to youth violence, would provide. There has been an ongoing dispute towards whether or not violent video games contribute to youth violence. There are very intriguing articles on procon.org regarding violent video games. Proponents of this proposal believe that violent video games do indeed, contribute to youth violence. While very distinctly the “con” stance believes violent video games do not contribute to youth violence. In my opinion, the “con” side makes the much stronger argument on procon.org.
I believe the con side has a stronger argument because they provide convincing evidence to prove the opposing side wrong. For example, in “CON Contribute to Youth Violence” a strong piece of evidence is shown through the lines, “A short-term increase in arousal and aggression does not mean a child is going to leave his or her house and commit a violent act.” This is conveying that the opposing stance provides no proof towards the fact that they are not just providing alleged claims. The proponents of this argument provide a ploy towards there evidence, although they have no proof why there evidence proves violent video games cause violence in youth. The con aide has stronger arguments and is obviously the better side of this dispute, even with its weak evidence.
The “con” side still has a stronger argument even with its weaknesses. For example, in “CON Contribute to Youth Violence” a weak piece of evidence is given stated through the lines, “Violent games do not cause youth to be violence. Instead, youth that predisposed to be violent seek out violent entertainment such as video games.” This example is conveying weakness because it is demonstrated more as an opinion that can easily be proved wrong. They state that youth whom are predisposed to violence seek out violent entertainment, but they have no proof or evince which proves this is the case towards the argument regarding violent video games causing violence. Even with its flaws the “con” stance makes the better argument, although the proponent side did provide compelling evidence.
The proponents of the argument, even with the weaker argument did provide strong evidence. For example in, “PRO Contribute to Youth Violence” a strong piece of evidence is given through the lines, “A 2009 study found that it takes up to four minutes for the level of aggressive thoughts and feelings of children to return to normal after playing violent video games.