Supreme Court Has Ruled; Now Games Have a Duty



Supreme Court Has Ruled; Now Games Have a Duty

Introduction

Recent studies suggest that, kids in United States play video games at an average of 270 hours per month. (Bartholow, et.al 2005)It concluded in research that around 21.4 % school students played video games for 42 hours per month. Furthermore, 70 % school students consider themselves as experienced gamer. These studies prove that video games are popular; it is also reflected by the annual earnings of 17.9 billion dollar income earned by the gaming industry (Bartholow, et.al 2005).

Negative outcomes associated to gaming can be harmful for the society, for example, violent and aggressive behavior has a higher likelihood of hurting people or failing to interact with other people. This decreases ability to excel at school, all of these are negative factors associated to negative outcomes of violent gaming.

Summary of the Article

In the mid 2011, the case filed in the court of California ban selling of violent video games to kids. It seemed very exciting what will happen in court and people awaited for the groundbreaking decision of the court. Similar to all cases there were two opinions creative games developer wanted to continue selling and so as the kids, but the parents want it to be ban because of the negative consequences of the violent gaming. Now the game makers have duty on them.

There are around eight states along with California that wanted to impose a ban on selling violent games to kids. The topic became controversial, and individuals came with their own opinions. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who spent millions of dollars showing the Terminator and Conan the Barbarian, appealing the Supreme Court to uphold the ban on selling violent video game to kids and minors. With the considerations judges agreed to hear the ...