ratio between those playing videogames and those committing violent acts? Doug Lowenstein, President of Interactive Digital Software Association states, "Violent videogames have become a scapegoat for society's ills." The problem is that these recent incidents are so tragic the people need to believe there is a solid factor they can point the blame on. Many adults who have never even played a video game blame the industry because it is much easier for them than to evaluate their own selves as parents.
             The gaming industry has been thriving since the late 1970's because children and adults find them very entertaining. Both non-violent and violent games can be pleasurable, and they are just another form for people to relieve stress that is built up during the day. Henry Jenkins, director of comparative media studies at the prestigious MIT university, thinks videogames provide an outlet for children to release their natural, violent tendencies. "We cant make social policy based on the statistical aberrations of a handful of abnormal kids. Should we ban the bible if we want something that causes a killing motive?" The point is that we have a very pessimistic view of parents if we believe they have no control over the mindset of their children. The parent is responsible for teaching his/her child to distinguish between right and wrong, fantasy and reality. If the child is incapable of doing this than so many factors other than videogames can lead him to violence, such as television, media, books, and even peers.
             Moreover, because videogames are attacked constantly for only forcing violence into young children, their benefits are hardly seen. So many advantages have come out of video entertainment that people don't bother to notice since violence is what dominates their views. Most games don't even have any violent characteristics, but this is the stereotype that has been assigned t...