Send the link below via email or IMCopy
Present to your audienceStart remote presentation
- Invited audience members will follow you as you navigate and present
- People invited to a presentation do not need a Prezi account
- This link expires 10 minutes after you close the presentation
- A maximum of 30 users can follow your presentation
- Learn more about this feature in our knowledge base article
Do you really want to delete this prezi?
Neither you, nor the coeditors you shared it with will be able to recover it again.
Make your likes visible on Facebook?
Connect your Facebook account to Prezi and let your likes appear on your timeline.
You can change this under Settings & Account at any time.
Why shouldn't there be age restrictions on video games?
Transcript of Why shouldn't there be age restrictions on video games?
Why should there be restrictions?(Republicans)
Debates are suggesting that games have contributing majorly to antisocial behavior.
Why shouldn't there be restrictions?(Democrats)
Most gamers were proven to be over 18 with the average age being 29 years of age.
The research evidence on media violence is overly exaggerated and is not actual evidence. So there is no true evidence that games are harmful.
To sum it up
Banning video games would mean a big loss in money and would cut the amount of entertainment to gamers.
The Way out
Video games, violent or not, have a very minimal effect on our adolescent society. Gaming is already monitored by parents and the law doesn't need to ban violent games.
A video game called, JFK Reloaded, puts the player in the role of assassinating President Kennedy.
Rod Blagojevich claims, "parents face unprecedented challenges in monitoring and protecting their children from harmful influences".
Do video games really make children violent?
David Thompson, a 16 year old child, killed two policemen and before killing them he said, "life's a video game and sometimes you have to die". He claims that Grand Theft Auto San Andreas influenced him to kill those policemen.
If psychologists are claiming that video games have such a negative influence on children then they should just ban movies and the internet. There are plenty of places to get negatively influenced from. Video games are simply a way of entertainment and that goes the same for movies and internet. They also have the potential to make children smarter.
Why shouldn't it be banned?
If games are so bad for children then wouldn't there be more school shooting in the E.U. and in Japan?
Also, ever since games have become more and more popular, the government has proved that there has been 44% less violence.
One reason important to children
Even if the government does ban the sell of violent video games. That would restrict almost every game. Games are based off of mystery and crime and things that are issues realistically and fantasy-like.
Most video games would be non entertaining to children if it didn't have a hint of violence in it. This would bring down so many ideas in the media and get rid of some of the greatest video games in history.
Parents don't want their children exposed to violent games and want to prevent them from buying these games.
Parenting has nothing to do with it
Parenting is a subject that is debatable on the topic of violent games. Even though banning violent games would make this easier for parents. Parenting is meant for the parents and good parents would know how to control what their children are exposed to inside of the house.