2007-05-09 01:26:42 · 13 answers · asked by da best 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Law & Ethics
It's called spoiled rotten brats.
My wife and I both agree. We are going to censure our kids music, movies, games and friends. We're the parents and we're the ones in charge.
After all, isn't that what good parents have always done? Mine did.
2007-05-09 01:31:24 · answer #1 · answered by scottdman2003 5 · 2⤊ 0⤋
It is a sad fact. That you bring up.
When it comes to wanting the best four our children, all of know what is right.
When it comes to thinking how much time it takes to parent and how much more free time we would have with a PS2 babysitter, it is a slam dunk argument.
It is not good. The parents win out in the immedediate future by have more free time whil children are playing same-quietly. But, the parets should be spending twice as much time or more to explain that the video game is not reality and shouting a fellow citizen to steal his car is generally unaccepted.
2007-05-09 08:35:50 · answer #2 · answered by Asclepius 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Your question lacks the perameter in which you have stated "Younger children". 16 is a younger child than 17, however, it is not too young to learn to tactical warfare. Why? Because children as young as 10 were allowed to participate in gaining this country's freedom from Britian. You don't have to believe me, all you need to do is believe science and see the graves of young bones buried in a soldier's battlefield.
I do not condone sending 10 year olds into battle. I also do not condone violent video games. I'm simply saying that it's nothing new.
2007-05-09 08:50:02 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Quite frankly, the games are not bad for the kids. It's the parental lack of supervision that is bad for the kids. Did I play violent video games growing up? Yup! I watched really violent movies and television too! Why did I turn out alright? Because my parents were actually parents. They were involved in my life. They taught me that movies and games are just that, movies and games.
2007-05-09 08:43:58 · answer #4 · answered by cyanne2ak 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I disagree, aggressive video games are not completely (to a degree) unsuitable for children.
What it does need however is parents to put them into context before just letting their kids play them 'ie. violence in real life hurts people'
thats the problem, its not the games, its the irresponsible parents who allow children to play certain games (I'm certainly not advicating all video games) without proper supervision.
2007-05-09 08:33:05 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
It is sad to see, kids are supposed to grow up in a happy care free enviroment, buying these games for them will just make them think its the norm in the future, same as the kind of rubbish and violence they put on tv in the early evening.
2007-05-09 08:32:02 · answer #6 · answered by Fadwa 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I don't agree that violence in media is the real culprit. Lack of guidance by the parents is more likely the problem. Moderation and education is the key, not barney and teletubbies.
2007-05-09 08:37:46 · answer #7 · answered by Paladin01_98 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
games aren't the bad thing, the parents need to nut up and be responsible for what their kids do
2007-05-09 08:33:25 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
I don't understand either. I would NEVER buy my kids video games that show violence. Its unbelievable.
2007-05-09 08:36:01 · answer #9 · answered by ME 3 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Because giving in is easier than parenting.
2007-05-09 08:31:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋