Violent Video Game Controversy

In 2011, a California law was brought before the Supreme Court, a law that would have banned the sale of “violent” video games to minors. The former governor of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger, had originally supported this law, having signed it in 2005. “We have a responsibility to our kids and our communities,” stated Schwarzenegger, “to protect (them) against the effects of games that depict ultraviolent actions, just as we already do with movies.” Despite the ex-governor’s sentiments, the law was vetoed by a majority vote of 7-2. One justice, Antonin Scalia, having voted for the majority, gave his own personal reasoning behind his decision. “As a means of assisting concerned parents, (the law) is seriously overinclusive because it abridges the First Amendment rights of young people whose parents (and aunts and uncles) think violent video games …show more content…
This claim, like the previous two, is backed with valid evidence. The first step to proving this statement to be true is to properly define the word “antisocial.” The word itself literally means “of or relating to a pattern of behavior in which social norms and the rights of others are persistently violated.” Such a description is used by Dr. Vincent P. Matthews of the Indiana University School of Medicine when illustrating the behavior of the subjects in a study regarding the effects of violent video games. “(They) demonstrate an increase in arousal of the areas involved in emotional response and a decrease in activation of areas involved in self-control, inhibition, and attention span.” In layman’s terms, the subjects were more prone to react out of their emotions and less out of self-control and empathy for others. Such behavior would be disruptive at best but can be potentially dangerous in certain situations in which the subject already possesses several risk