I recently read a Time article called “A Brief History: Video Game Violence.” And at 298 words, it was brief indeed. In essence, the story skimmed over a few violent titles (such as Mortal Kombat and the little known vampire killer called Night Trap) and focused on the fact that the U.S. Supreme Court would soon be ruling on the constitutionality of a California law that seeks to make selling violent games to minors illegal. (The law was passed in 2005 and was immediately struck down by lower courts.)
I know, you’re probably saying, “Wait, I thought they weren’t supposed to be selling that stuff to kids anyway.” But that’s a common misconception. The fact is that retailers can sell whatever they want to anybody who toddles through the door with some greenbacks clutched in their little fists.
Following the tiered rating system set up by the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) is totally voluntary for game sellers and parents alike. And kids of all ages are definitely diving into the gun-blazing, death-delivering waters. Anecdotal tales abound of youthful gamers playing M-raters from Halo to Grand Theft Auto. In fact, there were many a youth group reportedly sponsoring “Church Halo Nights” just a couple years back.
But all that bothersome reality aside—or maybe in light of it—the conclusion of the tiny article was what got me. Author Claire Suddath shrugs off any possible links between simulated violence and aggressive behavior and says: “With an estimated 80% of retailers voluntarily refusing to sell mature games to minors, it stands to reason that the more violent the scenario, the less likely it is that a child is the one mashing the buttons.”
What E-rated make-believe land does she live in?
Recent Comments