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

the government should ban violent video games to kids and adolescent

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 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/12/2014 Category: Education
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 793 times Debate No: 45717
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)




Im with this question, help me prove I'm right


I accept pro's challenge and argue that the government should not ban violent video games to kids and adolescents.

Video games = any of various games played using a microcomputer with a keyboard and often joysticks to manipulate changes or respond to the action or questions on the screen.

Violent = acting with or characterized by uncontrolled, strong, rough force

I wish my opponent good luck with his arguments.
Debate Round No. 1


I would like to testify my con's response because violent video games change your temper, and when you loose your temper you will go crazy.


I ask pro to elaborate his argument and, since he has the burden of proof, ask him for evidence suggesting violent video games cause violent behaviour.
Debate Round No. 2


Here are some examples do kids who lost their temper because of violent video games:
"A 13-year old boy jumped from the building"s 24th floor and committed suicide after playing Warcraft III for 36 hours straight.
"A teenager went on a rampage and killed three men, two of them police officers, after months of playing Grand Theft Auto.
"A 17-year-old male killed his mother and wounded his father after they took Halo 3 away from him.
"A 15-year old ran away from home after his parents took his Xbox console away. His dead body was found almost a month after.
If you don't believe me search it up
I just proved to my con's point
Take that


Pro has failed to provide proof for his claim such as test results or any scientific evidence whatsoever. Only some uncited anecdotes of extreme cases which may or may not be true.
This was a terrible debate and I hope that pro will learn from his mistakes.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by jdtroughton 5 years ago
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con you said it. Terrible debate, you won.
Vote Placed by codemeister13 5 years ago
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made minor spelling and grammatical errors. Con stated quite clearly that Pro faced the BoP but Pro failed to provide the evidence necessary. When Pro gave evidence, they failed to cite sources thus resulting in the questioning of the evidence's legitimacy. Had Pro cited sources, this may have gone another way.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.