There is a concern that video games provide a central reason for belligerent behaviours that lead to massive killings of others. The rationale underpinning this controversy is rooted in the recent cases of the mass shooting that caused 24 injuries and 22 killings at Texas and Walmart in El Paso and the 1999 Columbine High School shootings. Politicians argue that these devastating events emanate from participation in violent video games viewed by the same individuals.  The president of the United States, Donald Trump, proclaimed that video games, among other things, were reasons for mass shootings. In addition, the gun-rights activist also views that real-life violence and video games have a closer connection. Therefore, this essay provides a critical analysis of whether video games cause people to kill other people.

The existing literature does not provide coherent ideas regarding video gaming and violence. Some studies show that participation in aggressive video games can lead to physical aggression among preteens and adolescents (Hartmann et al.). However, other research findings firmly disagree at the same point. Many public shootings that occur are executed by young men who fall in the bracket of active participants in video games (Markey et al.) According to the retrieved data from the Entertainment Software Association, 75% of residences have at least one active gamer. This is an indication that most people usually enjoy playing video games. It is due to these reasons some studies argue that video games may not be the cause of violence since there are only a few events of mass shootings that do not reflect the huge traffic of people playing violent video games.

The APA research made an elaborate distinction between aggressive behaviour and lethal violence in relation to video games. According to an APA study, video games can cause aggressive behaviours among active video gamers, including pushing, hitting, insults, biting, threats, hair pulling, and physical and verbal aggression (Greitemeyer and Tobias). However, Video gamers do not participate in leather violence that can cause killings. The APA study was further criticized because it did not provide sufficient research evidence to ascertain their opinion regarding lethal violence. However, various studies agree that video game users have lowered desirable social behaviour and empathy.

In 2011, in California, the Supreme Court banned the rental and sale of fierce video games to young ones because they contained ill language that went against Amendment Rights in the entertainment field (Sauer et al.). According to Justice Samuel Alito, most video games were so astounding and disgusting that the killing of victims involved machine guns, hammers, chainsaws, and clubs, among others. The victims are decapitated, dismembered, chopped, left to burn, and disembowelled. They could also cry and beg for help or mercy. Blood splatters, gushes, and pools. Another reason for banning video games in California was that some games had antisocial themes. The games depict the re-enact of the shoot killings of Virginia Tech and Columbine High School. The main aim of the game is to rape the daughter and the mother as well as raping the women who are Native American. This kind of game can lead to the shooting of Jews, African Americans, and Latinos. Fortunately, no evidence exists that games with search content could lead to violence.

Justice Antonio Scalia asserts that the reason why most studies have failed to establish whether violent video games lead to the killings of other people is because of admitted methodological flaws in their studies. He further asserts that most studies focus on the correlation between exposure to violent video games and the probability of becoming violent in a real-life setting within a short duration of time. Exposure to fierce video games may take a longer period to influence an individual to participate in massive shootings completely.

Other studies took the social learning theory approach, which claims that social learning includes acquiring cognitive and social behaviours through observation. This is to ascertain that children learn some behaviours upon viewing some content from violent video games. Therefore, they tend to mimic the actions and behaviours portrayed by actors representing certain characteristics.  This aspect was convincing to various officials in the government, but it lacked details concerning whether violent video games were the major cause of massive shootings.

In conclusion, there is no empirical evidence that clearly shows video games influence massive shootings or killings of other people. Other factors may contribute to the root cause of these events. However, violent video games may lead to aggressive behaviours because of defeat while playing or for not accomplishing certain levels of play. Surprisingly, many people love playing violent games, and there are chances that the same individual has never engaged in any violent behaviours. In addition, it is very difficult to predict whether active, violent video gamers will become violent.

References

Markey, Patrick M., Charlotte N. Markey, and Juliana E. French. “Violent video games and real-world violence: Rhetoric versus data.” Psychology of Popular Media Culture 4.4 (2015): 277.https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/ppm0000030

Sauer, James D., Aaron Drummond, and Natalie Nova. “Violent video games: The effects of narrative context and reward structure on in-game and postgame aggression.” Journal of experimental psychology: applied 21.3 (2015): 205.https://psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/xap0000050

Greitemeyer, Tobias. “Intense acts of violence during video game play make daily life aggression appear innocuous: A new mechanism why violent video games increase aggression.” Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 50 (2014): 52-56.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2013.09.004

Hartmann, Tilo, K. Maja Krakowiak, and Mina Tsay-Vogel. “How violent video games communicate violence: A literature review and content analysis of moral disengagement factors.” Communication Monographs 81.3 (2014): 310-332.https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2014.922206