Are 'violent' games such as, 'Grand Theft Auto' hazardous for kids?
As pro, I believe that content matters. The industry for gaming has taken a giant leap of faith, to extraordinary measures . Nowadays, people are sorely dependent with their gaming consoles in order to experience entertainment through 'online/bluetooth or standard connection. Every year or two, we witness the release of enhanced technologies in terms of consoles: From PS1 to PS2 and then finally PlayStation 3. From a retail perspective, it's sufficiently helping the economy from an upward recession, however its causing a massive disturbance in the area of social activity. PlayStation 3 is probably the most competitive gaming console in the whole world. Depending on the social grade, there are at least one or two members in a family, who can afford to buy such thing.
This is where the problem start to occur. Violent games such as 'Grand Theft Auto' & 'COD', which are both compatible on X-Box and PS3, however, it must never be played by someone who's under the age of 18. Why? Answer: Psychologically it may change a person's behaviour to act in an aggressive way, through intimidating people by copying what they've already seen on television, and then putting it into practice in a 'real life' situation.
Do anyone disagree?
No they are not I have recently begun playing games such as Saints row 3 and Grand Theft Auto. They are both similar gangland violence fantasy games, I believe that the are not hazardous to children as children today are not foolish enough to be swayed by fantasy games such as this.
Also if we look at the progression of games throughout they years many of the games such as GTA have moved away from the serious violent nature of themselves and ushered in a new era of out of control comedy based game play which is obviously too outrageous to be believable.
As a child I grew up playing such games and I turned out fine. I believe we should encourage children to play more games like GTA as it teaches them the way of the world and so indirectly pumps money into the world economy.
You all may not se it the same as me but I believe I have a very convincing argument here.
Grand Theft Auto is a very controversial game, and over the past years it had created quiet a sense of depression for family members in America. For example: ‘On October 20, 2003, the families of Aaron Hamel and Kimberly Bede, two young people shot by teens William and Josh Buckner (who in statements to investigators claimed their actions were inspired by GTA’. As a result, there was a 246 million dollar lawsuit towards the publishers of Rockstar Games. Over all, it was tragic for both the family and the company itself.
My opponent states that “GTA have moved away from the serious violent nature of themselves and ushered in a new era of out of control comedy based game play which is obviously too outrageous to be believable”. In my defense, that was a weak statement, with reference to no actual facts. GTA has moved drastically towards a more ‘severe’ and dangerous nature by ushering in the ability for gamers to attack citizens, using guns to kill people for the sake of having fun and robbing vehicles.
When my opponent claimed that ‘children should be encouraged to play these games to understand the “way of the world”, and also to boost our economy, I would like to point out that, it does the exact opposite. Here’s another controversial case that occurred due to the amount of influence from violent games: A high school student murdered a taxi driver in Bangkok. Before the incident, he was at a store playing GTA, until he ran out of money. He looked outside, and a taxi driver in which his initial thought was to rob him. He knew he was an easy target, so he took the opportunity.
According to Bangkok police, Chino (the student) “had wanted to find out if it was as easy in real life to rob a taxi as it was in the game.” He stabbed the taxi driver multiple times and threw him into the back of the cab. He wanted to drive away but was arrested shortly after. Another innocent man’s life wasted, due to violent gaming. It’s disgraceful!
My opponent is right. I might not see the same way as he does, but the facts speak for itself.
So i conclude "chino" was not influenced by games but was simply clever enough to realise that blaming a game would earn him leniency......
Also you cannot hold games responsible for what they "inspire" people to do... for instance when Wayne Rooney became a proffessional football player he didnt state "fifa" as his influence now did he? my point being that for all we know 'chino' lied to save himself.....
Furthermore GTA has done good, granted this next statement is not based on solid facts as i cannot find the article..... but im 99% sure i read somewhere that a gangland enforcer on the east coast of america had recently played GTA for himself (cant remember which GTA) and he saw for himself what happens when you are involved with gangland violence.... and therefore he left the country and got away frohis gang.
My point is if Games such as GTA can influence people to kill and copy the games protagonist it can influence people already in that situation to change.
Blaming a game for murder, would not earn anyone leniency. If there’s something that you can’t get away with after being caught, it would be ‘murder’. Chino knew that perfectly well, and he had admitted to the police, with reference to actual details. These ’details’ were well on spot & matched the incidents that took place prior to the murder. (Playing GTA in a store) - Which was evident to the CCTV footage. - Therefore, to respond to my opponent’s third paragraph, Chino did not lie to “save himself”.
Furthermore, ‘GTA’ has been banned from Australia, because the Government believe that’s it’s making a negative impact on their society. - In return, these legislations has shown positive results & families of children are pleased/happy for it.
Before, I end my side of the argument, I think it’s perfectly normal for enforcers to play such games in order to understand the ‘nature’ or what have you, in regards to unusual activities which are being caused due to the affect from gaming, but it’s absurd for them to leave the area because they’re too scared to execute their duty properly for witnessing the chaos that gang members can cause. That concludes my point, as violent games can mentally ‘affect humans’ & also put them under fear and anxiety.
My opponent claimed that GTA has done ‘good’ by referencing to a gangland enforcer & his ability to move away from his district. That’s not good, because it was his duty to enforce the area from ‘bad’ suspects, and that he’s gone, the area is no longer safe.
Lastly, I would like to thank my opponent for participating in this debate.
And yes i wil take you poin that "violent games can mentally ‘affect humans' " but as the argument isnt talking about mentally affecting people it is asking if they are "hazardous for kids" and i can see a way in which they can be but the child has to be easily mislead to be influenced in which case it falls to the parent to take extra care to make sure that said child does not play such games.
All im saying is that more often than not games such as GTA can bring out good raher than bad.
Thank you and i would also like to thank 'Photographer' for participating in this debate with me :)
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||3||0|