California Game Ban "Fixing Something That's Not Broken"
Preventing children from playing games that they already don't play.
A leading psychologist has criticised the efforts of the Californian government to ban the sale of violent video games to minors, suggesting that it is trying "to fix something that is not broken."
Christopher Ferguson, an associate professor in the Department of Behavioral Sciences at Texas A&M International University, wrote in an opinion column that several issues had yet to be discussed fully, including the ignorance of research that does not support the government's stance and using an almost irrelevant game as an example to push its agenda forward.
"Our concern was not merely that there are a few inconsistencies in the research on video games, but rather that California had ignored wide swaths of literature that demonstrate absence of even correlational relationships between video game violence and harm to minors," Ferguson wrote.
The comments come following an editorial piece by the Tampa Tribune that supports the California state's ban campaign. Ferguson argues that institutes like the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) is more than enough to tackle the issues of under-age video game playing without resorting to bans.
"The state of California (and the Tribune) makes references to a single game, Postal. Indeed, this is a vicious game morally unsuitable for minors," Ferguson added. "However, I've reviewed research databases of my own and colleague Cheryl Olson and the Pew Research Foundation in which children report on games they play.
"Of approximately 2,500 children, not one reported playing Postal or its sequel. So California is paying millions of dollars (which could have gone to children in need and families at risk or used to not lay off thousands of teachers) to prevent children from playing a game they already don't play."
Christopher Ferguson, an associate professor in the Department of Behavioral Sciences at Texas A&M International University, wrote in an opinion column that several issues had yet to be discussed fully, including the ignorance of research that does not support the government's stance and using an almost irrelevant game as an example to push its agenda forward.
"Our concern was not merely that there are a few inconsistencies in the research on video games, but rather that California had ignored wide swaths of literature that demonstrate absence of even correlational relationships between video game violence and harm to minors," Ferguson wrote.
The comments come following an editorial piece by the Tampa Tribune that supports the California state's ban campaign. Ferguson argues that institutes like the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) is more than enough to tackle the issues of under-age video game playing without resorting to bans.
"The state of California (and the Tribune) makes references to a single game, Postal. Indeed, this is a vicious game morally unsuitable for minors," Ferguson added. "However, I've reviewed research databases of my own and colleague Cheryl Olson and the Pew Research Foundation in which children report on games they play.
"Of approximately 2,500 children, not one reported playing Postal or its sequel. So California is paying millions of dollars (which could have gone to children in need and families at risk or used to not lay off thousands of teachers) to prevent children from playing a game they already don't play."
Games:
Postal
Read More Like This