Melvin Faylogna
Mr. Davin Kubota
English 100
April 11, 2004
A little 2-year old girl is at a party playing with other children about her age. They all are having a good time playing with the toys available to them. Most of these toys are little kid's toys like Legos, toy cars, or wooden blocks. This girl then sees an interesting object, a mini toy rifle. She picks it up, puts her hand around the handle, gently cradles the trigger with her fingers, and starts making motions involving pulling the trigger and feeling the gun's recoil. She smiles and laughs as she guns down her grandfather, who flails and falls to the ground. The grandfather acts as if he's been shot, wailing quite loudly. So where did a young innocent child learn how to commit such acts? Nowadays, video games are being blamed for implanting such acts into kids' minds. Yet one can't blame video games for her disturbing behavior in this case. I know because this little girl is my niece--her family doesn't have any gaming consoles and her parents wouldn't let her play in any case.
I question, therefore, why video games are getting a lot of heat
regarding violence nowadays. The media says video games teach
violence to kids and some adults believe the media's claims. But
there is no concrete evidence to support this assertion. Take
the above example regarding my niece's behavior. That is why the
media and adults should take into account other factors of violence
before blaming video games for influencing violent acts. By not
doing so, video games get a bad and evil reputation but video
games should not receive blame for all of the violent crime that
occurs.
I personally have been a gamer for over 10 years. I have tried
about every type of game there is, from puzzles, role-playing
games, to first person shooters. I feel that violence is a factor
in almost all of the ones I have played, even if it was just a
simple jump on the head of an enemy. I also feel that without
this element of violence, video games wouldn't be as entertaining.
Without violence, life itself would be boring. We, as mortal beings,
need to see, and are attuned into seeing conflict and struggle
just like how the Romans did with gladiators fighting within the
Coliseum. Video games provide much of this concept.
The popular first-person shooter "Doom" has been a darling
target of the media's after the Columbine shootings took place.
Many blame "Doom" for providing the two high school
kids lessons on how to kill. I played "Doom" before,
and while I will admit that it was certainly violent, in no way
did it make me want to go on a shooting spree like how one does
in the game. As for this violent incident, "Doom" was
far from the root of the problems these boys had:
In a journal written a year before the attack, Harris wrote of
his and Klebold' s (the Columbine shooter suspects) plans: "It'll
be like the LA riots, the Oklahoma bombing, WWII, Vietnam, Duke
[Nukem] and Doom all mixed together . ...I want to leave a lasting
impression on the world." (Associated Press, par. 06)
These teenagers clearly were troubled and they wanted to do something
violent just for fame. Out of the six comparisons made, four were
from real life events, and two were from video games. Violence
was a part of their motive, but to target video games as being
solely responsible for their murderous intent seems irresponsible.
I feel that I pick up more violence by watching television rather
than playing video games. In TV shows, there are more violent
shows like fist-to-fist fighting, gun shows and hunting shows,
fictionalized gladiator battles, and the news. Consequently, when
something happens like the Columbine shootings, why isn't there
more exploration and analysis of the shows these kids watched?
There isn't a game out to reenact the Oklahoma bombing or M-11,
nor are there plans to market such games. It's because video games
are a tiny medium when compared to television that we shouldn't
scapegoat games as a crucial determinant for violent crime.
The television industry is too big for the media to touch, and
it is also one form in which the media is able to reach out to
the world. It would be hypocritical for the media to blast television
like how they do with video games.
Science has found some evidence linking how our environment around
us can have an impact on hormone levels and also our genes. One
example is "environmental factors such as prolonged trauma
can potentially result in changes to fear and anxiety levels."
(Etherington, par. 12) But even if there is evidence, there is
no direct proof that pinpoints video games as the direct cause
of such violent behavior, one that boosts up our level of rage.
When compared to other countries that have an abundance of extreme
violence in fiction-based entertainment, such as Japan, the United
States will still have more rapes and killings. Etherington of
BBC News points out that "Japan provides a similar study
where fictional violence is arguably more widespread than in the
US, but the country's murder rate is around 800 per year in a
population of 127 million. In New York, there were around 600
murders in 2003 in a population of eight million." (Etherington,
par. 17). Although there are many studies, not much credible work
has been done yet and there is no direct prove that links violent
video games with violent behavior.
My bottom line is that media can't prove or have such proof that
there is a direct connection between violent video games making
someone violent (if they do, I will always be proof for a viable
counter-argument). The media exploits violent acts done by troubled
teenagers and puts exaggerated blame on the video games they have
played. So as Eminem once asked in his song "The way I am",
where were the parents at (regarding the teenage shooters of Columbine)?
Parents/adults ultimately get the choice of what their child sees
and do. If the media wants to blame video games for violent acts,
they have to also blame the adults who let their kids play these
video games and those who do not monitor their child or teenager's
behavior. The parent must help discipline their child and point
out what is good and bad, acceptable and unacceptable for them
to do in this society. As for my niece, the one who doesn't play
video games, a simple "that's not appropriate" in a
disapproving tone made her drop the toy rifle. So my point is
video games are for everyone, but not all are appropriate for
some. Adults must determine which are appropriate. Troubled teens
and people need immediate attention and guidance because it is
their troubled minds that are telling them to kill and pull the
trigger, not the video games they played.
Cited work: Associated Press. "Columbine Lawsuit Against Makers of Video Games, Movies Thrown Out." 05 Mar. 2002 <http://www.freedomforuniorg/templates/docunient.asp?docurnentlD I 5820>.
Etherington, Daniel. "Blaming the Dark Side of Gaming."
BBC News. UK Edition.
7 Feb. 2004 <http ://newshbc. co ukl 1 /hi/technology/3466525
. stm>.
-----