The Instigator
JustAnotherGuy
Pro (for)
Winning
25 Points
The Contender
Galath
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Video Games do not Cause Violence

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 6 votes the winner is...
JustAnotherGuy
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/23/2014 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,732 times Debate No: 46540
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (6)

 

JustAnotherGuy

Pro

I will be arguing that video games do not cause violence. First round is for acceptance. Good Luck!
Galath

Con

Do video games cause violence? In a simple answer, yes.

In the past 15 years, the number of gamers has gone up drastically due to both increased gaming quality and the new notions of multiplayer games, such as MMO (Massively Multiplayer Online) games and simple 'LAN' games which allow you to play with a friend.

Allow me to quote a news article.
"On April 20, 1999, two seniors walked into their Colorado high school carrying assault rifles, and they opened fire. They shot dozens of people, killing 12 students and one teacher, and the nation was floored. School shootings had happened before, but this was a new scope of carnage, and in the ensuing search for answers it came out the shooters had spent a lot of time playing violent video games."

I'm sure everyone is aware that the PG rating on First Person Shooter games, or pretty much any game that contains violence or sex is literally just ink. Do people really think that kids underage pay attention to those ratings? Get with the modern world. Though it may be unfortunate, it's common knowledge that children participate in over 18 activities including not limited to these video games.

It was only last year that an 8 year old shot and killed his caretaker (87 years old) after playing a particularly violent video game. It's people like that little boy who are most vulnerable to influence from video games and from adults who encourage that sort of behavior that are often encountered online.

The real reason these games cause violence is because they are given to people who are sometimes mentally unhinged, and also to small children who can easily pirate them from the web. The facts state that these games are mentally damaging to many people. But the biggest problem of all lies in the age rating, because it means nothing. In fact, I'd be willing to bet children want to play those games more, to feel like a proper adult. Winning in a game is a childish notion of victory and defeat is the same. Those notions, however, have killed people in the past. That is proof enough that the games cause violence.
Debate Round No. 1
JustAnotherGuy

Pro

I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate.

As to the Columbine massacre (the news article that you are talking about), it has never been proven that Eric Harris' and Dylan Klebold's playing of violent video games had influenced their actions. The most likely cause of the massacre was bullying and mental illness (as the FBI had found). Many implications have been made pointing to video games being the cause but the majority of these are either proven untrue or not confirmed. [1]

To the 8 year old killing his grandmother, the link between playing violent video games and the murder is unproven. This was just the police racing to find a cause of the attack and finding out that the kid played a violent video game. This unfortunately happens a lot with violent crimes, people will race to find a cause and end up finding the wrong one. [2]

A study published in the Journal of Youth and Adolescence found absolutely no evidence between video games and violence in vulnerable teens. In fact, in some cases the violent video games had a calming effect on the player. [3]

My arguments:
Many studies have shown that violent video games do not desensitize kids and those most liable to have their minds altered. The studies would show kids who play non-violent and violent games different pictures, some showing graphic scenes (like a man holding a gun to a woman's head). The subjects would have their reactions to the photos monitored and recorded. They found that there was no difference between the violent game players' and non-violent game players' reactions. Many kids recognize and respect the boundaries between the virtual and real world, and would not cross them when it comes to violence. [4][5]

Sources:
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] http://www.cnn.com...
[3] http://www.springer.com...
[4] http://health.usnews.com...
[5] http://gamepolitics.com...



Galath

Con

I can't help but laugh at the sources you've provided me. "Journal of Youth and Adolescence? Gamepolitics.com?"
Let me make it very clear right now. You can't PROVE that video games affect someone's mentality to make them become violent. Not unless you could somehow read their minds. What we can do, however, is study people's reactions to violent games.

I suppose you'll brush it off, and say it was mere "chance" that the murderers, one of which was eight years old at the time, just happened to kill others. Where do you think they learned how to use a gun? This eight year old probably thought his caretaker would just "respawn" or something. But that's not real life.

People could be curious to find out what it's really like to shoot someone. Maybe for the "high" feeling of adrenaline before you kill an innocent person, or maybe just for the fun of it. Because they feel like it.

You must also realize that it isn't always other people they are hurting. You can be violent towards yourself. Cyberbullying can take place over online chat streams. There was even a 13 year old who jumped out of a building because he was trying to reenact a scene from the game.

There is also the case of frustration and addiction. These aren't the fault of the game itself, but are definitely caused by it. To present some figures: The latest Black Ops game has more than 920million hours played on it. That's over a hundred thousand years.

People aren't thinking of what the game actually has in question. It's just a virtual figure. It can't hurt, right? After all, it's just a little relief from the stress of work.

But then they get addicted. They lose the game over and over again. They're fired from work because they took so many days off to play the latest Grand Theft Auto, and the few days they do show up, all they're thinking about is strategies to kill the latest Alien NPC. They start thinking of the game as real, because they prefer it to real life. The main characters become their role models.

To be honest, it looks like you're just hiding behind the "there's no solid proof." Well, there CAN be no solid proof, even if we repeat it a billion times. There can only be what's almost definitely correct and what is almost definitely incorrect. Take a look online. There are so many cases that if I copied and pasted them all then I'd crush the word limit. The evidence is staring you in the face.
Debate Round No. 2
JustAnotherGuy

Pro

I can't help but laugh at the sources you've provided me."
Please tell me why they are so facetious as to make you laugh. I do not see anything wrong with them.

"I suppose you'll brush it off, and say it was mere "chance" that the murderers, one of which was eight years old at the time, just happened to kill others."
Wait, the murderers just happened to kill others? This is big news to me. All sarcasm aside, many people with extreme stress do play video games to escape from the harsh realities of life and to enter a virtual word. Video games have been found to have a calming effect on gamers, even violent ones.

"Where do you think they learned how to use a gun?"
If the parents kept guns in the house, it was most likely them who taught the young child to shoot a gun. Video games don't teach you how to load, release the safety, and all the preemptive steps.

"People aren't thinking of what the game actually has in question. It's just a virtual figure. It can't hurt, right? After all, it's just a little relief from the stress of work."
Actually studies have shown that gamers can tell the difference between reality and fantasy. You can see that here: http://www.rockpapershotgun.com... (Although you might die of laughter after seeing this "outrageous" source)

As to addiction, professional health boards have looked into this subject, but have always dropped it. If that isn't saying something...

I'm not hiding behind the "there is no solid proof" card. It's just that you haven't presented any.

Thank you for taking your time to read this, and good luck.
Galath

Con

Galath forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
JustAnotherGuy

Pro

I extend all arguments.
Galath

Con

Galath forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Galath 3 years ago
Galath
Apologies, I didn't read. I accept the terms of this debate.
Posted by Blade-of-Truth 3 years ago
Blade-of-Truth
Dang, I'd love to take you on since you are 8-0 but I'm currently partaking in a debate with a similar topic that hasn't ended yet... http://www.debate.org...

Good luck to whomever challenges you. I look forward to seeing what argument you'll make.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by codemeister13 2 years ago
codemeister13
JustAnotherGuyGalathTied
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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con broke conduct in the first round and instead used first round for opening statements when it was intended for acceptance. Con also had multiple forfeitures. Pro gets arguments for having logical arguments while Con defeated their own case in the beginning of the second round by saying "You can't PROVE that video games affect someone's mentality to make them become violent." Pro sourced their arguments while Con had no sources for his claims.
Vote Placed by iamanatheistandthisiswhy 2 years ago
iamanatheistandthisiswhy
JustAnotherGuyGalathTied
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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro gets argument and source points as arguments were sourced and logical. In contrast Con made multiple please to emotion. Conduct points go to Pro for Cons forfeit. S&G is tied. I think this debate had potential, its a pity the forfeit happened.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Krazzy_Player
JustAnotherGuyGalathTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Actionsspeak 2 years ago
Actionsspeak
JustAnotherGuyGalathTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by druminboy918 2 years ago
druminboy918
JustAnotherGuyGalathTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Video games are amazing
Vote Placed by yay842 2 years ago
yay842
JustAnotherGuyGalathTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF