Blame the parent, not the game

Blame the parent, not the game.
By Chris Tracey

The past few weeks have been a tumultuous time for excited guys and girls waiting for the new Grand Theft Auto game. While reports from all reviewers give the game an outstanding score, the media has been haranguing Rockstar Entertainment about its game. Parents and concerned citizens of Australia have been protesting, petitioning and (god forbid) blogging against this game. They are all saying it is too violent, too extreme and far too dangerous to give our youth in an age of school shootings, gangs and Emo conventions outside Hungry Jacks.

The media has been throwing around accusations at the gaming community for years. Shootings, horrific beatings, rapes, the list goes on and all of these have, at one point or another, been blamed on the “fact” that computer games cause violent tendencies in the children that have played them. Children are incredibly impressionable; I am admitting to that, however this comes down to a question of parenting, rather than blaming the game itself.

Parents and organizations have protested against games such as GTA4 being released, causing it to be “toned down” for the Australian audience. There are still complaints flying around about why it wasn’t just banned entirely. At the same time, the Australian classification board has refused to introduce an R18+ rating for games.

Just to make myself clear, an R18+ rating would restrict the sale of such a game to impressionable minors, they would only be able to acquire it through their parents. Now, and this should infuriate some people, good parents would not buy this game for their children. Therefore, the rating would work, younger kids wouldn’t be able to play it, and there would be no problem. Adults (i.e. people over 18) should have the fair judgement and upbringing to allow them to look at the games as just that, games, and not see any correlation to the real world.

I was brought up in the video game age. I’ve played everything from kids learning games to the ultra-violent Manhunt (coincidentally now banned in Australia, I bought it just before the ban went in to place). Now Manhunt and GTA centre around drugs, killing and over the top violence. Clearly this means when I see people on the street, the first thing that goes through my head is to go on a gleeful jaunt through a homicidal rampage, right? Wrong. My parents and society as a whole, has taught me that that’s the wrong thing to do. I am a product of good parenting and the social surroundings I am in, not the games that I play.

A recent study in the UK at Sunderland University has shown that while games can produce violent tendencies in kids, “these studies always took children and exposed them to violent video games intended for adults.” (The Press Association) Parents ignore the ratings on the box when they buy games for their kids, and allow them to play games, which are an incredibly powerful learning tool.

Games teach kids to problem solve, work in groups, and develop leadership skills, all of which has been proven and applauded by society as a whole. At the same time, games can teach kids that violence is a means to an end. So how should we solve this issue?

Introduce an R18+ rating. Prospective buyers must present ID at the checkout, similar to buying booze, cigarettes or adult “literature”. The only children who will gain access to these games deemed too violent for children will be a result of either negligence at the store it was bought, or of bad parenting. Negligence can be dealt with at a store level or through legal means. Bad parenting can be dealt with through child services, and the parents own peers.
It’s easy to point the finger at the game as the cause of the problem. No one gets hurt and the problem can be swept under a mat until the next one comes out, as they inevitably will. However, how about we take a look at the parents for a change, those people who supply the games to their impressionable kids then scream bloody murder at the companies who produce them when they’re waiting at their child’s court case ten years later for murder one and grievous bodily harm.