Should Stores Sell Violent Video Games to Minors?

Student Opinion - The Learning NetworkStudent Opinion - The Learning Network

Questions about issues in the news for students 13 and older.

The Supreme Court is currently debating this question and trying to determine “what the drafters of the Bill of Rights would have made of an extremely violent game like Postal 2.” What do you think about this? How violent, “deviant,” “offensive,” or “morbid” should a game have to be to make it unsuitable for people under 18? How would you draw the line? And how do you think violent video games affect young people in general? Why?

In “Justices Debate Video Game Ban,” Adam Liptak writes in The Times:

In a lively and sometimes testy Supreme Court argument on Tuesday over a law banning the sale of violent video games to minors, the justices struggled to define how the First Amendment should apply to a new medium.

… The law would impose $1,000 fines on stores that sell violent video games to people under 18. It defined violent games as those “in which the range of options available to a player includes killing, maiming, dismembering or sexually assaulting an image of a human being” in a way that is “patently offensive,” appeals to minors’ “deviant or morbid interests” and lacks “serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value.”



Justice Stephen G. Breyer took the other side. He said common sense should allow the government to help parents protect children from games that include depictions of “gratuitous, painful, excruciating, torturing violence upon small children and women.”

Students: Tell us how you feel about this issue: Do you agree with Justice Breyer that the government must help protect children from games that include depictions of “gratuitous, painful, excruciating, torturing violence upon small children and women” —  or, do you side more with Justice Scalia, who wondered how such a law would draw a line between a “deviant violent” video game and a “normal violent” video game? How do you think violent video games affect young people in general? Why?


Teachers: Here is a related lesson plan as well as a reader Q. & A. with the video games expert James Gee.

Comments are no longer being accepted.

I saw Saving Private Ryan the first day it came out, when I was 12. My mom took me because I wanted to see it. The next oldest person in the audience was twice my age. I don’t know if you remember, but the movie was controversial at the time due to its graphic D-Day scene. The theater manager actually came out and warned the audience about the first 30 minutes, to which I responded with an enthusiastic COOL! which made the audience give Bad Parenting glances to my poor mom. Needless to say the D-Day scene was indeed COOL! beyond all belief. To my knowledge, I didn’t not become a blood drenched sociopath from seeing the movie at such a tender young age, though I did get a lot of schoolyard ire from all my bragging.

The moral of the story is that no matter how graphic the content, and how young and malleable the mind is, there is an ENORMOUS gulf between contemplating and experiencing artistic violence and actually committing it. The brain is a social engine that has many hardwired neuronal brakes that inhibit violence, no matter how much media blood you drench it with.

Does exposure to violent media make violence more likely? Absolutely, but minutely. Does the benefit of restricting this minute source of violent behavior outweigh the risk of government censorship? Absolutely not.

Besides, from a practical standpoint it’s just as pointless as outlawing pornography. You can download (perfectly legal) video game console emulators and video game roms online and play Grand Theft Auto to your hearts content with mom and dad (and Justice Breyer) none the wiser.

I think it should be the responsibility of parents to decide what their children purchase. The effects of violent video games on minors, drawing from my experience, is negligible. The fact of the matter is my experience of video games is like that of watching a film, I recognize that what I am watching is fictional and therefore my perception of what I am seeing is different from how I would perceive something in real life. As such, the effect of violent video games on me is next to nothing. Parents should be able to decide because they after all know their children best and are most able to decide what is right for their child or not. And at the end of the day if kids want to play violent video games, they will play them, regardless of the parent’s opinion or some law passed in Washington.

the first ammendment protects everything from freedom of speech, to freedom of expression. Our founding fathers made it clear that they wanted Americans to have complete freedom when choosing how to live their life. Americans should be able to buy anything regardless of how old they are. Yes video games are violent. Life is also violent. Kids that want violent video games will find a way to buy them, even if its through an older brother or 18 year old friend. I believe our founding fathers would find in unconstitutional if this law was not over turned. But then again, many things in America that SHOULD be unconstitutional have been enacted. Children and teens will not be effected by video games. In recent studies (i know this because of an A.P gov class last year) experts found that most kids that played violent video games turned out like everyone else. Basically, stop trying to edge in on our rights, America.

I think the violent video games should not be only sold to the age of 18 and up. The reason why is you see more on the news, outside, driving, and any other public or residential place. There is no way to completely not see crime. Crime is everywhere, and holding people back from seeing it is bad. The video game though should be sold to those who have a valid drivers license. If you are driving chances are you have seen worse than an actual video game, and you know not to act to a game, rather than listen to everything it tells you.
Video games are getting more and more violent but that is actually an increase in the market. If you hold these back this leads to more and more people losing jobs, and two not helping the economy not get any better. Therefore if you have a valid drivers license, you should have the right to purchase a game that is violent.

I think that the government should mind their own business and if anyone wants to buy a violent video game or some kid’s parents want to buy them a video game that might be violent, they should be able to do whatever they want without being told that they cannot get something for their child even if it is “to violent.” I do not think that violent video games affect anything, if they do affect something or someone, then it is their fault for letting saomething as stupid as a video game get to them. Its not like it is real ora anything, if they want to be violent and kill people or something, then they should join the military, and the government should mind thier own business about everything,

I work at the movies myself and the law that you must be seventeen to watch a rated R movie is useless. I believe if your parents are willing to buy them a ticket to watch the movie then it should be fine for them to watch it. Just by watching a horror movie or game filled with shooting and blood doesn’t mean all the kids in the audience are gonna go on a reckless rampage. Kids are smarter than you think these days, we have the ambition to get things complete, control our lives, and make the best of everything. We may sway off track every now and then but not enough to go crazy. People act like we go to school to come up with a plan to kill everyone on a massive blood bath. All in all if the parents buy the kids the tickets or game then they believe it is safe for their kids.

I do not think that underage children should be sold violent video games because that does, no matter what some say, influence violence into the minors. Video games about war, car jacking, deaths, and robberies should not be made at all. Why would you want to promote something like that? That just makes the company that produces those games look bad. Underage children should not even know about those games, let alone be allowed to play or buy them. Games like Mario, Super Mario, and Mario Kart are acceptable for all ages and those are the games that should be played. I play Mario Kart like nobody’s business and I love it.

I think that you should have to be over the age of 18 to buy game that are violent and show bad graphics. The reason I say that us because nobody would want there kids to be kkilling of people on game and hearing alot of cussing at a young age and because if you dont no like any kind of violence and any bad words then when you play the game a whole lot your gonna catch on to the words and start useing them no matter if you no them or not.

I personally do not play video games what so ever. So I don’t know as much about them as some others do. Although, none of my friends play them either, so again, I don’t know much about them. But about selling the violent ones to minors, I think that it should be their parent’s responsibility to control what kind of games they play. If they think that their child’s maturity level is high enough to play violent video games, then so be it. I don’t think that they should not sell them to someone just because of their age, because they have a right to play what they want. Overall, it is a game, it’s not like it’s a true story. They are animated characters, they won’t do any real life harm.

As the parent of a middle school child, I can say that I am sick of all of the violent video games that are being manufactured, let alone peddled to kids under age 18. My child’s best friend owns many of them (Call of Duty, etc. His dad buys them for him) and whenever my child goes to his house, he plays them, and there is nothing I can do to stop it. As a result, my child goes around pretending to “shoot” people and things, and it makes me nuts. He also wants me to buy them for him. I refuse to, but his dad sees no problem in doing so. While these games may not have a direct adverse effect on one’s health, as do cigarettes, I do believe that children’s exposure to them fosters the perception that the only way to solve problems with the world around them is through violence.

i dont think they should sell violent games to minors I mean they ask you for i.d so yeah.

They don’t even sell violent games to minors. They ask you for your age and what not, sometimes they ask for I’d. And if you don’t have it you can’t buy the game. But no, I don’t think they should sell violent games to minors. The world is already full of violence; there’s no need for minors to view it in video games or movies. But most of the time the minors parents buy the violent games for them so it shouldn’t really matter because their parents bought it for them. But then again they have flea markets and what not where younger kids can be violent.

I think a parent should know what their child is playing and know what’s in it. And if they let their child play a game like this well then that’s their choice. Just like with movies. I know if I was a parent I wouldn’t let my kids play a game like this, but I would check the game first before I said no.

no i dont think minors should be able to buy violent video games because it teaches them violence.

I think that’s kids underage shouldn’t be sold violent games, but if they parents buy if for there kids well I guess you can’t really say anything about that. Games that have to do with war; car jacking, deaths, and robberies, drugs are bad influence on children. Therefore some kids that play these games think its cool and then when they get older some in up doing the same and it in so much trouble. Underage children should not even know about those games, let alone be allowed to play or buy them. young children should stick to games like super Mario or even Mario cart.

In my personal opinion no I don’t think they should sell a violent video game to minors. I play a few video games here and there and I have every rating and some of the games are very violent with blood and gore and language and all sorts of other stuff in them but I keep playing them. I also think it all depends on the game type and what the game is all about. There are a lot of things that minors have seen not in video games most every minor has seen every thing there is and I don’t think that a video game will teach them all much more than they have already learned.

I do not care about studies or surveys that people like to cite because you can find a survey to support pretty much every statement in the world. Extremely violent video games will have an impact on a child if they are young and impressionable enough, it is not a matter of opinion it is a fact. This being said, I do not think a law on selling violent video games will help anything. Even if it is illegal for younger people to buy violent games they can just go ask an older friend or family member to do it for them. Giving violent games to children is not something the government should be responsible for or even involved it. It is an issue that deals with the responsibility level of the parents involved and no law can change that.

well if they are like army games they should because what if the minor wants to go into the war then it would help them a little .

I think stores should sell violent video games because our parents should be able to tell us what we can and can’t play. Because games like Grand Theft Auto show’s someone the real world in which we live in. Also it can show us how to drive cars and airplanes. Plus violent games are awesome!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Assassins Creed 2!!!!!

I don’t think so, because impressionable kids could get the idea that it’s okay to go and do dangerous stuff, and then they go out and do it. They think it’s just a big joke until they get seriously hurt or end up in the ER. Especially movies, because it tells them that even if they do something stupid, like, say, get shot or get a knife in their back, they’ll pull through it, and everything will be okay and they’ll all live happily ever after. That won’t happen, and they’ll end up hurt, in a bad position, or any other number of bad scenarios.

honestly,as a passive 13 yr old,i agree that this is totally acceptable.i play no “violent” video games exept WoW(world of warcraft)and it doesnt affect me negativly despite my hours in front of the screen.this is not that bad of an idea,even through the criticisim of wanna-be gangsters.

I have been playing video games since the moment I could hold a joystick in my hand. And I have been exposed to R rated movies since I could blink. And yet I’m a perfectly normal adult. No criminal record here.

The reason that this is such a big debate is that if the courts side with California, there is nothing to restrict them from limiting sales of movies, television shows, books, and other media products. Which in turn will cause less creative products to be sold, because Walmart/Target/BestBuy doesn’t want to be fined for selling R/M rated material so their stock will consist of non-R/M rated items. Which will then dum down the entire entertainment industry.

What people seem to forget is that all major retailers of video game products (as someone who works at a corporate office for such a company) have some form of policy in place to prevent anyone under the age of 17 from purchasing an M rated title. Gamestop, for example, requires that a child’s parent or legal guardian be the one to purchase an M rated game. An older friend, relative, or otherwise does not count. If it’s not a parent, you’re not getting the game. And! you get carded. Doesn’t matter if you’re 17 or 70, you will get carded. If an employee does sell an M rated title to someone under 17, it’s grounds for an immediate termination. Corporate offices don’t joke around about this stuff.

It shouldn’t be the government’s responsibility to parent children. It’s just one more excuse for parent’s to be lazy and not take responsibility for their own actions. Parents need to be involved in their child’s lives. Quit blaming it on others and start being a parent!

yes, because if you don’t were gonna play them anyways. I mean should stores sell alcohol to minors? they don’t but we still get it? I mean if you think about it games aren’t as bad as smoking or drinking which I know people who have done both.

As a matter of fact, it depends. If it is children then they should not be involved with violent video games. Their minds should not be infiltrated with stuff like that. In my opinion, if you are old enough and mature enough then you should have the right to play video games such as that. High school kids are mostly immature so to allow them to watch and play such violent games is atrocious. Why can’t video game companies make the games less violent? Many companies do have games that are educational but most of them are not. It is disappointing to see this. One day I hope that the world will be a better place.

I think that they should because some kids like to play the game grand theft auto. It is a game rated M for Mature. Some kids play that game because you get to drive a car and a motorcycle. They are not old enough to drive a real car so they play the game to drive the car.