A), in a statement before a House subcommittee in 1994, stated this: “like violence depicted elsewhere in the media, video game violence has a horrifying potential to coarsen society, promote acts of violence against real victims, and desensitize children to the real thing” (“Violence…” 195). Their report mentioned some preventitive measures such as the previously mentioned rating system as well as the “inclusion” of statements warning players of the “real life” effects of killing fellow human beings. The AMA also added the following, “ scenes should be incorporated into games in which the consequences of violent acts are depicted…such as an ambulance rushing the character to a hospital or cemetery, and other characters representing the family and friends of the injured or killed character crying and grieving” (195).The AMA feels that such definitive “warning labels” could at least educate young teens about the horrors of killing live human beings, and assure them that such matters are not humorous. The rating system mentioned would help parents take preventive measures against the mere purchase of such video games; thus preventing some children from even coming into contact with such actions of violence. On this same note, the Video Software Dealers Association has vowed to enforce the current rating system as a means of helping parents take preventative measures against the purchase of these games. The VSD opposes government regulation of video games and instead feels that parents should be the means of control and filtering (“Do video games...”). The Dealers Association has taken it into their own hands to avoid, what they feel a potentially harmful situation, of kids killing in games as well as even on the streets. Another proponent of the idea that media and games cause teen violence is the American Pyschological Association. Cou...
