Personal tools
 
Views

Debate: Ban on sale of violent video games to minors

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 01:40, 2 July 2011 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(Con)
← Previous diff
Revision as of 01:42, 2 July 2011 (edit)
Brooks Lindsay (Talk | contribs)
(Background and context)
Next diff →
Line 10: Line 10:
===Background and context === ===Background and context ===
 +
 +The California law would have imposed $1,000 fines on stores that sold violent video games to anyone under 18.
 +
|} |}
Line 18: Line 21:
|- |-
|colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"| |colspan="2" width="45%" bgcolor="#F2F2F2" style="border:1px solid #BAC5FD;padding:.4em;padding-top:0.5em;"|
- 
=== Arguments === === Arguments ===

Revision as of 01:42, 2 July 2011

Is banning the sale of violent video games to minors justifiable?

Background and context

The California law would have imposed $1,000 fines on stores that sold violent video games to anyone under 18.


Arguments

Pro

Click "edit" and write arguments here




Con

  • Violent video games are defended by the first amendment. Justice Scalia wrote in his opinion defending the June 2011 Supreme Court ruling against the California ban on the sale of video games to minors: "Like the protected books, plays and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas — and even social messages — through many familiar literary devices (such as characters, dialogue, plot and music) and through features distinctive to the medium (such as the player’s interaction with the virtual world). That suffices to confer First Amendment protection."[1]


External links

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.