The Supreme Court has just ruled against a ban on selling violent videogames to children and the result has fanned the flames of this debate yet again. Many have come out against the idea of children playing videogames, claiming that they can inure children to violence and encourage delinquent behaviour.
I am, I’m afraid, in the other camp. Parents are the ones who should determine what level of videogame their child is playing based on their own understanding of their kids. And on how their children react to various stimuli. Videogames in and of themselves are unlikely to cause bad behaviour, usually there are plenty of other factors to be considered too.
The New York Times columnist, Emily Bazelon wrote that Scalia’s majority opinion was that violent videogames “are more like Grimm’s fairy tales or Bugs Bunny cartoons than like ‘a virtual form of target practice’.”
ZDNet tackles the fact that the Californian politician, Leland Yee, whose law it was that failed to make it past the Supreme Court has vowed to carry on the fight. He believes that the evidence pointing towards the harmful effects of violent games on children is clear.
And CNN throws fuel onto the flames with their feature of the 10 biggest violent videogames controversies.
What do you think? Do you think that videogames should come under law, fining the games manufacturers for selling them to minors, or do you think that it should be up to the parents to decide?