The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
6 Points

Are Video Games increasing violence?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/3/2015 Category: Technology
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 766 times Debate No: 72868
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)




Please do not post your arguments yet, just accept. I can't post the argument at the moment, I will post tomorrow.


I accept the debate. As the Pro, I affirm the resolution.

I have the Burden of Proof in showing that video games increase violence. However, I do not have to prove ALL video games increase violence, just some of them.

Since Con presented no definition, I will set definition.
Violent:using or involving physical force intended to hurt, damage, or kill someone or something.

Good luck to Con
Debate Round No. 1


According to federal crime statistics, the rate of juvenile violent crime in the United States is at a 30-year low. Researchers find that people serving time for violent crimes typically consume less media before committing their crimes than the average person in the general population. Young people in general are more likely to be gamers " 90 percent of boys and 40 percent of girls play. The overwhelming majority of kids who play do NOT commit antisocial acts. This article from ""Psychology Today" gives some information that they gained from their studies. "Christopher Ferguson and his colleagues, at Texas A&M International University, which will soon be published in the Journal of Psychiatric Research.[1] Ferguson's group followed a sample of 165 young people over a three-year period, assessing their video game play and various other aspects of their lives. They found no relationship at all between exposure to violent video games and real-world violence committed by these young people. They did find, however, that their subjects' real-world violence was rather strongly predicted by the real-world violence they were exposed to in their daily lives. Kids whose parents or friends were violent were, no surprise, significantly more likely to engage in real violence themselves than were kids whose parents and friends were not violent. Video gaming, no matter how "violent" the game, had no effect at all. Ferguson's study and many others lead to the conclusion that, while real-world violence causes more real-world violence, pretend violence does not." Today, worldwide, hundreds of millions of people play video games. Most of those players are perfectly normal people, and nothing newsworthy ever happens to them. Only a very small percentage of them are killers, or violent. Every day, some video gamer somewhere does something terrible or experiences something terrible, but so will one of the hundreds of millions of people who don't play video games. And, according to the Department of Justice, violence by juveniles is at an all time low.


Before I make my speech I would just like to note that correlation does not equal causation for both sides. Also, my case is solely about Violent Video Games (VVG), not any other type.

Contention 1: Alters brain violently

Journal of Experimental Social Psychology shows that "Violent video games desensitize players to real-life violence. It is common for victims in video games to disappear off screen when they are killed or for players to have multiple lives. In a 2005 study, violent video game exposure has been linked to reduced P300 amplitudes in the brain, which is associated with desensitization to violence and increases in aggressive behavior."

"A meta-analysis reported in the journal Psychological Science in 2001 noted several common conclusions among previous video-game studies, notably reports of a "fight or flight" response in children playing video games. Their heart rates and blood pressures increased, and their adrenal glands released adrenaline. Real-life violence triggers the same physiological responses. The analysis concluded that the studies "clearly support the hypothesis that exposure to violent video games poses a public-health threat to children and youths."

Other physical links were revealed in a 2006 study at the Indiana University School of Medicine, this time regarding brain activity. Researchers looked at the brains of 44 kids immediately after they played video games. Half of them played a nonviolent game, and half played a violent game. The brain scans of the violent-game group showed increased activity in the amygdala, which stimulates emotions, and decreased activity in the prefrontal lobe, which regulates inhibition, self-control and concentration. These increases didn't show up on the scans of the nonviolent-game group."

IAs shown by this Contention, VVGs alter the brain to increase aggression and decrease inhibitions, resulting in violent behaviors.

Contention 2: Makes people believe violence is acceptable

"The 2008 study Grand Theft Childhood reported that 60% of middle school boys who played at least one Mature-rated game hit or beat up someone, compared to 39% of boys that did not play Mature-rated games." This study shows direct causation effect between violent video games and violence happening.

Christopher Barlett, Richard Harris, and Callie Bruey, "The Effect of the Amount of Blood in a Violent Video Game on Aggression, Hostility, and Arousal,"
Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, Oct. 2007

This study found that it takes 5 minutes for aggressive behavior and thoughts to return to normal. The study found that more blood led to much more violence.

Making people, even children believe that violence is an acceptable answer is only the first step in creating a violent society.

Contention 3: Violence against Women
Tracy Dietz, "An Examination of Violence and Gender Role Portrayals in Video Games: Implications for Gender Socialization and Aggressive Behavior," Sex Roles, 1998
This study found that 21% of videogames involved violence against women. They found that "Exposure to sexual violence in video games is linked to increases in violence towards women and false attitudes about rape such as that women incite men to rape or that women secretly desire rape."
Specifically, women are targeted and violence towards them increases


Just because violent crime has decreased does not mean that violent video games are causing this. Violent video games increase aggression and violence, however, other cultural factors have lowered violence such as awareness and Internet.


Why does this violence occur? VVGs teach people that violence is an accpetable way to solve conflict. What really makes VVGs worse than say, violent TV? According to Elizabeth Carlll in "Chronicle of Higher Education", "Violent video games require active participation, repetition, and identification with the violent character. "

Tracy Dietz found that "Video games often reward players for simulating violence, and thus enhance the learning of violent behaviors. Studies suggest that when violence is rewarded in video games, players exhibit increased aggressive behavior compared to players of video games where violence is punished." The difference between violent videogames and violent TV is that violent videogames have the player as the killer who gets rewarded for killing.

Therefore an affirmation is necessary.
Debate Round No. 2


Violence in juveniles (up to 18) is at the lowest it has ever been as of 2010. The highest point was in 1994, and has been steadily decreasing, even though video game sales are increasing. Please note that this study is for America, Canada, and the UK. And, they tested gamers and non players, and found no difference in their behavior, anger, violence, etc. Brain scans showed no difference. Then, another group of gamers were talked to by an actor. The man told them about "increased silence due to video games", and that group had higher levels of violence. It essentially created a placebo effect. Playing video games doesn't make you violent; people telling you video games make you violent, make you violent.


Observation: As the Pro, I do not have to prove a significant increase in violence. If I can prove on case in which video games increased violence, I win as the resolution says increasing, not increasing significantly.


"In 1997, 16-year-old Evan Ramsey brought a shotgun to his Alaska high school and shot four people, killing two. He played a lot of the sci-fi horror game "Doom," in which you have to shoot a character many times before he dies. Ramsey later explained he was surprised to find that rule did not apply in real life [source: Jaccarino].

Also in 1997, a 14-year-old killed multiple people at his high school in Paducah, Ky. He'd played a lot of "Doom," too, along with the fight-to-the-death game "Mortal Kombat," two favorites of the Columbine teens, as well [source:Jaccarino]. Anders Breivik, who killed 77 people at a summer campin Norway 2011, said he trained for his attack using the war game "Call of Duty," one also favored by Adam Lanza, the shooter at Sandy Hook Elementary[source: Jaccarino]."

My opponent has not suffciently refuted my arguments that videogames increase violence. My studies outweigh his one study because I provided numerous studies and reasoning behind them.

Violent video games increase violence as they tell children that violence is an acceptable anser to problems. They reward people for killing. As the examples above show, without violent video games, the killers would not have been murderers. They were negatively influenced by violent videogames.

Case extension

My case still stands. He never refuted the fact that 60% of boys who played M rated games beat up someone while only 39% of boys who didn't play those games beat up someone. Yes, juvenile violence has on net decreased, BUT THIS IS NOT BECAUSE OF VIDEOGAMES. Correlation does not equal causation. So his correlation of violence decreasing is due to other factors, and my opponent cannot prove that videogames are responsible for this decrease. My many studies show that the brain is altered emotionally and agressively with decreased inhibitions.

Remember, I do not have to prove a large increase in violence. This resolution is not on balance, but if an increase is shown. If my opponent cannot refute the fact that videogames caused people to kill, I win automatically.

My study shows that violent video games contributed to violence. They are not the sole reason, for sure, but they contribute to an increase. Remember that Anders Breivik used VVGs to train to kill people. If there were no VVGs, Breivik could not have trained and therefore would not have killed so many people. Yes, some would have died, but only someone with the practice to murder would've killed 77 people.

VVGs are worse then other forms of violent media because the player is the killer and associates with them. They are rewarded for violent and killing behaviors.

Thank you and I urge a Pro ballot

Debate Round No. 3


TheGoldMustache forfeited this round.


Con has forfeited the round. It was interesting . Shame
Debate Round No. 4


TheGoldMustache forfeited this round.


vote pro, con could not respond
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by salam.morcos 1 year ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con ff