The Instigator
whitesoxfan450
Pro (for)
Losing
21 Points
The Contender
vxd9772
Con (against)
Winning
28 Points

The government should NOT rate video games!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/11/2007 Category: Arts
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,851 times Debate No: 261
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (15)

 

whitesoxfan450

Pro

The rating system used now is ok! The government would stereotype games! All shooters would automatically be M!
vxd9772

Con

Hi whitesoxfan!

I strongly believe in the 1st constitution and disagree with government censorship of the media (news, public opinion, politics, radio, etc.) However when it comes to youth and violent games and movies, I'm afraid censorship is required to maintain a healthy society.

My argument is based on the fact that psychologists have proved over and over that media violence desensitize our mind to violence, especially in children.

What I mean by desensitize is that it lessens the emotional impact causes by seeing or conducting violence.

You will most likely argue that you and people you know kill video game characters all the time or watch very violent movies and it doesn't make you kill or hurt real people or act out violently. However studies have shown that it increases the chances of you acting out more violently that a person not exposed to those things.

Research on exposure to television and movie violence suggests that playing violent video games will increase aggressive behavior. A meta-analytic review of the video-game research literature reveals that violent video games increase aggressive behavior in children and young adults. Experimental and nonexperimental studies with males and females in laboratory and field settings support this conclusion. Analyses also reveal that exposure to violent video games increases physiological arousal and aggression-related thoughts and feelings. Playing violent video games also decreases prosocial behavior.

CHECK OUT THIS DETAILED SCIENTIFIC STUDY:
http://culturalpolicy.uchicago.edu...

More articles:
http://mentalhealth.about.com...
http://psychcentral.com...

Another example:
Boyatzis, Matillo and Nesbit (1995, in Gunter and McAleer, 1997) investigated the children's reaction to the popular series Mighty Morphin Power Rangers to prove that children became more aggressive in their styles of play after watching an episode from this program. Children who had watched the episode committed seven times as many actions classed as aggressive as did the other children.

This is just from watching a tv show, it just makes sense that when you are actually controlling the animated violence the effect similar if not stronger.

In a speech I once heard by Ph. D. James Garbarino. He spoke of the effects of video games on the likely hood of a person shooting at a real person in a war situation.

He said that studies showed that in WWII only about 15 to 20% of US soldiers would actually aim and fire at enemy combatants. After the military changed from using circular targets to humanoid once the percentages went up to 80%-100% during Vietnam. Now that the military also uses realistic video games as part of the training the percentages are almost always just about at a 100%
Debate Round No. 1
whitesoxfan450

Pro

Yes, I think censorship is needed too. My argument is that the ESRB should continue rating games, and NOT the government. The ESRB is doing a great job rating games( I actually think they rate too harsh sometimes.) They include ALL potential violence, language, or anything warnings on the FRONT and BACK of the box.

Yes, I do agree that video games PARTIALLY increase chances of violence, but not completely. The last time that happened was about 3 years ago, when Manhunt came out. And WAY worse games than Manhunt(Gears of War, GTA, etc) have come out since then! I haven't seen a kid curb-stomping someone in the last year, have you? It does increase the about 4% chance of violence to mabye 10%! Its not very likely.

Also, along with my first argument, EVERY GAME ever released has been rated by the ESRB. There are ratings now! Its just the government doesn't need to stick their nose in. The problem is the PARENTS. The parents need to be educated about the ESRB(Although there are SIGNS EVERYWHERE explaining it, and commercials. And most of the time, someone in Gamestop, EB Games, or any other game store will tell you what the game is rated, and why.) It is also the law that you must have a liscene to buy an M-rated game. So really, its the parents fault for buying their kids these games.
vxd9772

Con

vxd9772 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
whitesoxfan450

Pro

whitesoxfan450 forfeited this round.
vxd9772

Con

vxd9772 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Modus.Operandi 9 years ago
Modus.Operandi
Do you know exactly how they rate these games? No, because the ESRB doesn't release the information about how they determine what is too violent, or is too sexual or what they determine is too etc. etc. etc... Until they release that information to the public, I don't think that there should be a rating system.
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
The government isnt banning them , they only want to rate them ..Just like movies are rated .. It is strictly for parents .
Posted by Klashbash 9 years ago
Klashbash
The government has no right to take away the wealth I produced via taxes to finance its own market regulation when the market already regulates itself independently.
Posted by forensics 9 years ago
forensics
If your parents want to desensitize you, then that is their prerogative. Ratings are there for a reason. With all this argument about the government it sounds as if anarchy is the only solution. No one wants the government to do anything now days. They are there to educate us and to help us make decissions cause most of the time, we are to dumb to make them ourselves. I think the rating is a good idea and will help parents and children choose games appropirate for their age.
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
I believe it is necessary to rate video games. If youre a parent buying video games for a young child , you need to know which ones are appropriate and which ones arent. They arent outlawing them , just rating them ,as they do movies and music.If your parents are okay with it and youre old enough then there isnt a problem , otherwise well thats what being a child is about ...
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by pcmbrown 8 years ago
pcmbrown
whitesoxfan450vxd9772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by LedLegend 8 years ago
LedLegend
whitesoxfan450vxd9772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by whitesoxfan450 9 years ago
whitesoxfan450
whitesoxfan450vxd9772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by richguy_69 9 years ago
richguy_69
whitesoxfan450vxd9772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Ethereal 9 years ago
Ethereal
whitesoxfan450vxd9772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by TheMasterBrask 9 years ago
TheMasterBrask
whitesoxfan450vxd9772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Modus.Operandi 9 years ago
Modus.Operandi
whitesoxfan450vxd9772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by forensics 9 years ago
forensics
whitesoxfan450vxd9772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by ryanqq 9 years ago
ryanqq
whitesoxfan450vxd9772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by revleader5 9 years ago
revleader5
whitesoxfan450vxd9772Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30