by Tate Delano

The Supreme Court is currently discussing a bill that would make certain violent video games illegal.

The bill’s logic is misconstrued. It’s not the video games that need to be curtailed, but the children.

The bill, aimed directly at California, will fine anyone who sells or rents a violent video game to a minor $1,000. But parents are still able to buy these games for their children.

Congress believes when teens and kids play video games, they are expressing their right to free speech, just like when they watch movies and TV shows.

Many believe playing video games makes children more susceptible to be influenced by violent images. If time spent on video games is limited, their is less influence on the person who is playing the game.

Parents’ lack of attention to their children can cause them to spend too much time playing video games that can be harmful to the way they act.

In the past, people have taken guns to school and murdered students. Upon investigation of their homes, numerous Mature-rated video games were found.

Columbine High shooters Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold played “Doom” and “Wolfenstien 3D” for hours and hours.

The overplaying, rather than just normal use, of these M-rated games most likely led to the violent actions of these teenagers.

Clearly, graphic games cause violent thoughts and actions in minors only if overplayed.

Parents need to take an active role in how much their children play video games, so the attitudes and the actions of their kids will become much more mild.

Palo Alto Medical Foundation says that an effective way to limit the intake of violence from video games is to impose a time limit on how long their children are allowed to spend playing video games.

Congress should reject the bill because it puts the blame on retailers instead of parents, who are the ones who should be more involved with how much their children play video games and monitor the games they play.