Video games these days are becoming more and more violent
and graphic year by year. This raises the argument that it also makes the
children playing these games have a much more violent nature.
Ever since columbine, where two students went on a deadly rampage at their high
school, television, movies and the big one, video games have been a popular mark for meaningless acts of violence. After
the shooting the two shooters, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebolds feelings for
violent video games as well as metal music and Goth culture were to blame for
the horrific incident.
But this incident hasn’t made teens move away from playing
video games especially violent video games. Matter of fact approximately 90% of
teens in the U.S play video games and more than 90% play games which involve
mature explicit content. Fears about how violent video games could affect teens
in real life have led legislators to propose everything from taxing violent
video games to creating age restrictions for those who can purchase the games.
Working with 3,034 boys and girls in the third, fourth,
fifth, seventh and eighth grade in Singapore, Anderson and his colleagues asked
the children three times over a period of two years thorough questions about
their gaming lifestyles and tested with a questionnaire to see their violent behaviour
and approaches towards violence. As a result of this test, students declined
throughout the years because as they get older they tend to act less aggressively
because they learn more mature ways of handling conflicts rather than resulting
to violence. But for the kids who played longer hours were indeed more prone to
violence and were asked if they were to be talked negatively about would they
strike the other and most answered with yes, which shows that games do result
to a violent nature.
Anderson and his colleagues research on violence and gaming
did show that students were more prone to violence especially ones who played
longer but why haven’t I went on a massive killing rampage
slaughtering innocent people for no reason, Anderson?