Americans Must Give Up TV Violence For the Kids, Or Else
             To the unsuspecting eye, this nation's response and reaction to the rise in number of violent acts committed by teenagers could be described as appropriately overwhelming, but when examined more closely, does America really care? When examined in a general sense, violence has declined overall in the US but has risen among teens (Hunt 651). Who is to blame and how are we trying to prevent youth crime and teen promiscuity? A New York Times poll in 1995 reported only 21 percent of those who were surveyed
             actually put the blame on television (Hirschorn 643). Both those who cite TV and popular music as the source of teen aggression and those who disagree have reasons to do so. There is valid proof behind both points of view but I firmly believe there is a direct cause/effect relationship between what children view on TV and how they act in the real world. Research, which I will discuss, conducted in both England and the US proves to me beyond reasonable doubt that violent television programs either directly or indirectly effect children and I think the government should take a more active role in youth crime prevention.
             Though some of the evidence that supports my beliefs has been viewed as circumstantial, it is too valuable to be ignored. Brandon Centerwall, a professor at the University of Washington, summarized some of the evidence in an article in the Spring 1993 issue of The Public Interest. His research findings focused on instances circa 1975 when television was introduced to rural Canadian and South African communities. In both countries, there was a significantly noticeable increase in violent crime committed by the young (Kristol 641). "Professor Centerwall also notes that when TV was introduced in the United States after World War II, the homicide rated among whites, who were the first to buy sets, began to rise, while the black homicide rate d...