As a policy matter, should the government be able to restrict the sale Essay

As a policy matter, should the government be able to restrict the sale of video games with violent content, and if so, what rest - Essay Example The students were reported to have played the video game â€Å"Doom,† and were inspired by it. This led to heated debates between two opposing sides. While advocates argued in favor of a restriction in sales of violent video games, groups of opponents led by the game developers argued against such move. They explained that correlation between the violent video games and the acts of the two students were incidental and could not be used as a justification (IDEA, 2012). While proponents argued about a link between violence and increased watching of violent games, the opponents denied any link between violent behaviors and watching of violent videos. Therefore despite the efforts the government has undertaken to restrict violent video games, the government is not able to regulate them as required due to legal implications and high demand of such games in the market. In 2011, the Supreme Court struck down a ban on selling violent games to minors. The Supreme Court found the Califo rnian law that sought to restrict the sale of violent games to minors to be in contradiction with the free speech rights and was overturned. The judgment was overwhelming in a 7 to 2 decision and declared that the Californian statute against the sale of violent games was in serious violation of the rights protection under the First Amendment (Richey, 2011). The Californian State as the judges agreed had the right to protect children against harm by such violent games. However, the judges noted that such powers cannot be free floating to restrict all ideas to which children have possibilities of being exposed to (Richey, 2011). This was the first ruling on violent materials restriction, which was a huge setback to the California state in its bid to protect children against harm caused by such violent games. It implies that the government is not able to restrict or control such video games as required. The government has weak laws and statutes aimed at limiting such sale of violent ga mes to minors. In 1968 the Supreme Court upheld a New York statute that sought to restrict and ban any sale of nude and obscene materials to underage children. The court found that the government indeed had the right and the power to regulate and restrict sale of such sexual materials to children without violating the protection of free speech as stated under the First Amendment (Mcmahan 2013). However, the Supreme Court on the Californian case rejected any application of the same principles by arguing speech of violence is not obscene; thus the 1968 ruling could not be applied in the ban of violent materials. This revealed a serious anomaly under the First Amendment. As one of the 2 dissenting judges, Stephen Breyer noted, there was no sense of preventing a child from accessing a nude picture of a woman, while in the same violent games children are allowed to view such women and even go further to strangle them to death virtually (Mcmahan 2013) . The law in this case is contradicto ry and needs a more elaborate evaluation of the First Amendment to include violent materials under the same category with obscene materials to facilitate the government to use the, law in protecting children against such violent materials. Psychiatrists and research suggest that offering blanket blame to violent games would e missing the point behind violence in children, which would hugely impact on efforts by the government to restrict such games. Kathy Royer a clinical nurse specialist at 4Kid Help Center for Child Adolescent Psychiatry, Ohio