On the morning of December 12, 2014, a boy by the name of Adam Lanza had just shot his mother, Nancy in her sleep. Adam then visited a near by elementary school and gunned down 20 teachers and students. The actions that Adam Lanza that day caused worldwide controversy on topics ranging from gun control to the regulation of violent video games. The sheer horror of the incident left the world with one fundamental question in mind ... why? Adam Lanza's life was investigated heavily by law enforcement, reporters, and civilians alike, and through this mass coverage of the details of his life, people were bound to jump to uninformed, simple-minded conclusions. Violent video games are not the cause of violence in adolescents, in fact video games can actually decrease violent crime. The attempts to regulate violent video games, are unconstitutional, and could lead to an increase in violence. These efforts are also blatantly ignoring the larger and more pressing problem of mental illness and readily available firearms to adolescents.

When looking at such a serious problem it is important to look at how large the demographic is that would be affected, if the public was to be mislead into believing that violent video games cause an increase in violence. According to a study done by Venture Beat, six out of the top 10 most popular video games of 2015 were violent video games (Grubb). Another study done by Garry C. Gray. and Tomas Nikolakakos,  who work for the Institute of Health at the University of Toronto found that  "the most popular played video games contain significant amounts of both violent and questionable non-violent content", and in this study the questionable non-violent content included things like drug-use, alcohol, profanity, and sex (Garry). These video games include popular titles like GTA, Call of Duty, and Mortal Kombat, and with these violent video games being at the top of a 13.1 billion dollar industry, the claim that violent video games cause violence would be effecting an outrageous number of consumers, not only in the United States but all over the world (Grubb). A study done by The Kaiser Family Foundation, found that on any given day, 60 percent of kids age 8-18 played video games (Rideout). Another study done by Amanda Lenhart found that 81% of teens either owned, or had access to a game console (Lenhart). The statistics on how many people play video games obviously points toward a large percentage of Americas youth playing video games, and using the logic of the opposition the people playing violent video games should be committing violent acts, when in fact they are not. In 2010 more than half of American kids aged 8 to 18, reported having played Grand Theft Auto, which is considered to be one of the most violent and graphic video games out (Kaiser). Obviously over half of Americas kids are not committing violent acts, so the assumption that the violent video games cause violence is clearly overlooking a more serious problem. Simply put, if so many kids are playing violent video games why aren't all of them committing violent acts? The answer is simple, there is not correlation between violent video games and violence, and if there was, one would have to say that half of the kids in America are violent and committing violent crimes. 

The simple fact of it all, is that violent video games have no correlation with violent crime, and in fact, an increase in video game consumption can be contributed to a decrease in actual violent crime. In a study done by Michael Ward, a Professor of Economics at the University of Texas at Darlington, he claims that "a 100% increase in violent video game consumption led to a 1% statistically measureable decrease in violent crime", which can be explained in two different ways. The first major reason why violent video games could actually decrease real world violence is the idea that some children use violent video games to vent, or blow off steam, and by doing this the children vent violent impulses through playing violent video games rather than by actually hurting someone or something. Another straightforward reason is the idea of time management, meaning that the time spent playing video games is time that could be used to commit a violent crime. There have been many studies showing that there is a connection between violent video games and increased aggression, for example in a study done by Jack Hollingdale, and Tobias Greitemeyer found that "both playing violent video games online and offline compared to playing neutral video games increases aggression", and even with their studies there have been similar studies with the exact opposite findings (Hollingdale). For example Eric Kain points out that there was a study that found "cooperative playing in the graphically violent Halo II made the test subjects more cooperative even outside of video game playing" (Kain). With studies pointing in different directions it is shaky at best, to rely on the research done to draw any kind of conclusion. That being said, even if there was a consensus that violent video games increase aggression, aggression and actual violence are not the same, and because of this the correlation does not equate to causation. Another point to be made is that with the rise in the popularity of these video games, shouldn't there be a rise in violence along with it? No, the statistics actually show the exact opposite. In a study done by The Economist there is indeed a rise in the popularity and consumption of computer and video games, but there has actually been a steady decrease in the total number of violent crime offenses over the past few years (Chasing The Dream). Even with a watered down interpretation of the definition of the word violence, researchers have proven that violent video games, are not even correlated with conduct disorder. For example in a study done by Peter Etchells, who's article was published in the Public Library of Science, found that the connection between violent video game content and aggressive tendencies is weak, and are not big enough to make any kind of definitive statement (Etchells). This study proves that even with extremely extensive research, the connection between violent video game use and increased violence is simply not there.

With all of this research, there is still a substantial amount of legislative efforts to regulate the video game industry, and as previously stated "a 100% increase in violent video game consumption led to a 1% statistically measureable decrease in violent crime" (Ward), so knowing this, any kind of regulation to decrease the consumption of violent video games could actually cause more violent crime. For example there was Bill introduced in Alabama that would "prohibit the selling, leasing or renting of video games to persons under the age of 18 years", and the insanity does not end there (Anders). There have been countless attempts to regulate the industry. These attempts are wrong for several reasons, first, these bills, if passed could lead to an increase in violent crime, because if violent video games actually cause a decrease in overall violence, then the absence of these games to consumers that use them to vent their violent impulses, could lead to those very same consumers having no where to vent their violent impulses, leading to an actual violent crime. Another and equally important reason that the attempts to regulate the industry is that the government is blatantly ignoring the First Amendment rights of the video game producers. 

There is a simple reason why the public believes that violent video games are connected with violent crime, this reason being that popular school shootings, that dominate the news cycle for weeks on end, were the works of disturbed teens that in some cases were coincidentally avid users of violent video games. For example, in the case of Adam Lanza, the boy who attacked the Sandy Hook Elementary school after murdering his mother, was said to have played the violent video game Call of Duty for "hours upon hours" in his windowless basement, which was filled with posters of guns, and a closet of guns (Drinka). As soon as that mental image was nationally reported, it painted a horrendous picture in the minds of the American people, of what violent video games did to this boy. While the amount of time Adam spent playing these video games is bizarre, the fact that he played video games was made a scapegoat to the real problems and underlying causes of why he chose to commit this unspeakable act. The real issues at hand in this horrible school shooting are the mental illnesses that Adam Lanza had that went unnoticed or untreated, and the availability of the guns to Adam, but these issues do not grab headlines, like the violent video games did. In the Sandy Hook shooting, there are clear signs that the actual circumstances that lead Adam to commit those murders were covered up by blaming his actions on his violent video game obsession. For example one week after the Sandy Hook shooting the NRA released a statement stating "Guns don't kill people. Video games, the media, and Obamas new budget kill people" (Kain). Notice how the gun advocates do everything they can to distract the American people from the fact that if it had not been for the readily available firearms, Adam Lanza would have never had the opportunity to hurt all of those people and this brings up a bigger and more pressing problem of the gun laws in our country. The gun laws in America is a very broad topic and could be an entirely different paper in itself, but it is worth mentioning that easily accessible firearms to Americas youth has some part in the increase in violent school shootings. 

With some of Americas most prominent figures backing the idea that violent video games increase actual violence, there is no wonder the American people have been deceived. For example, Donald Trump, the current front-runner in the race for the republican nomination for the President of the Untied States, tweeted that "Video game violence and glorification must be stopped -- it's creating monsters!" It is not just Mr. Trump, a myriad of political activists including Ralph Nader have belittled and attacked violent video games for their apparent cause of violence among adolescents (Kain). There have been studies that show a correlation between violent video games and aggressive behavior, and as previously explained these studies have all contradicted each other, while some studies show that there is a correlation between aggression and violent video games, some found that there was no correlation at all, and with findings so inaccurate, it is risky to say that there is a connection between violent video games and aggression, but it is completely wrong to state that there is a correlation between violent video games and actual violent crime. The opposition to this statement claim that the player becomes the shooter when playing these games, and that they have become so realistic that kids are now somehow learning, and training to shoot guns, through these violent video games (Drinka). The claim that games that involve shooting can train its players to actually shoot guns is completely false. Video games, however realistic they may look are no way of training to shoot an actual firearm, the complexities of shooting go far beyond the pressing of a trigger on an xbox controller, and to try and say that someone can train to go on mass shooting sprees by pressing buttons on a console controller is like saying that someone can train for the tour de France by watching the tour de France on TV. 

In conclusion, the recent school shootings and mass shootings by young adults have been a horrifying scene for all of the American people, and with the media keeping these stories at the top of their new agenda for weeks on end, is only exacerbating the countries fears. While these fears are completely rational, the backlash to these crimes has been directed at the wrong group. News reporters, political activists, and other ill-informed citizens have put the blame on violent video games, claiming that these violent video games lead these people to commit truly heinous crimes, and in some cases, claiming that violent video games were training the shooters to commit mass murders. This conclusion is completely false, and is blatantly ignoring the larger problems facing Americas youth, that being easily accessible firearms and mental illnesses. It is important to debunk the popular stereotype that violent video games are a contributor to violent crime, because studies have proven that playing these games, actually decreases violent crime, and any kind of legislative or social attempts to block kids from playing these games could lead to an increase in violent crime. The reasoning behind thinking that violent video games is understandable, when coming at this subject with little to no knowledge, but through thorough research, we have proven that violent video games actually lead to a statistically measureable decrease in violent crime.  

