Video Game Violence
"Video Game Violence Law Poses Questions", is an editorial located in the online magazine V Planet. Vance Velez, the author of the controversial issue, opposes the Washington law involving specific forms of video game violence, which is on the verge of being passed in the Legislature. He successfully persuades his audience that the Washington law limits people’s rights and that they should take a stand against the proposed law. His audience includes people who are in favor of the Washington law, concerned parents, and adult video gamers that oppose the Washington law, who are, in his definition, those 18 or older. Those who are in favor of the law may include politicians, or mothers who can relate to influential violence on children. Adult video gamers are those who enjoy playing video games as a favorite pastime, just like golf or aerobics, for most Americans. “It's no argument that video games are becoming more violent”, states Velez. “Many parents and politicians oppose the violence; some even want to get these kind of video games banned.” A politician who opposes this specific form of violence is Mary Lou Dickerson. Mary Lou Dickerson is a State Legislator who has proposed a law to restrict certain violent material in video games. The proposed law, which is quoted in the editorial, states: "Levies a fine up to 500 dollars on anyone who rents or sells to someone 17 or younger computer games in which the player kills or injures a human form that is depicted as a public law enforcement officer. Police officers and firefighters are included in that classification.” Velez addresses many flaws in the proposed law in detail and also explains some consequences that may occur if the law is passed. Vance Velez is the author of many editorials that appear on this online magazine. His broad knowledge of video games allows him to pinpoint the main problems of the law. He successfully persuades people that are in favor of the law, that it may, in the long run, actually harm our youth. The author's main argument throughout the editorial is backed by issuing a series of examples how many games that do not endanger young children, may be banned because of a faulty law. He mentions that passing the law will limit people’s rights and may also act as a gateway law, to limit others rights. “If they take away our right to have fun and view what we enjoy, then what else will they take away when violence is still present in our society?” Vance Velez explains in detail why people should oppose the Washington law on video games. Although he does introduce and define many terms involving video games, he expects the reader to at least have some knowledge about video games. He addresses many games, like Simcity and Grand Theft Auto, which have been in the mainstream lately; therefore, readers must be up to date with video games and must be familiar with certain type of video games in order to understand the author’s references. Velez addresses adult video gamers and let’s them know that their precious games may be lost, so he urges them to take action and protest this pending law. Velez opposes the Washington law because it violates people’s rights. Velez' stand that taking away things mature Americans enjoy would be a crime in itself because it violates the Freedom of Speech rights. In his definition a mature American is a person who knows right from wrong. He states, “The Washington law, because it’s built on fear of the unknown and lack of communication, fails to recognize the freedom of speech rights.” The author uses logos by referring to people’s values of their rights. The author opens the first paragraph with a question, "What's the right way to protect children from violence?" He appeals to those who are against video game violence and lets them know that he wants safety for our youth with the use of good reasons. He gains trust from this audience by showing he wants things for the better. His definition of children...
Please join StudyMode to read the full document