Video Games Are Causing Violence In Children

Thanks Pro for the response. In this round we are just going to tie this all up and show why we have won this debate. Now I will begin to say why I have won. 1. Okay, so my opponent brought up Adam Lanza, or the horrible human being who killed 20 children and 6 adults. However, regardless of the evidence that my opponent has brought up, it does not even say that the video game that Adam Lanza was playing even was the MAIN CAUSE of the shooting. The resolution is proposing that video games are CAUSING violence. His evidence bites him back again as the evidence directly states, "The fact remains that while the report's conclusion does not mention video games as any cause for Lanza's murderous rampage (nor does it speculate on any motive), one video game was, at least, part of the buffet of mass shooting news reports, books, and other media Lanza was consuming, according to evidence recovered from the home." Again, voters, my opponent has brought up evidence that directly refutes his statements and his argument falls as mine stands regardless of the rebuttal. There is no, way, shape, or form that my opponent has brought up that a video game caused that mass shooting. Therefore you are just going to have to carry that to my side as a winning argument. 2. My opponent brought up grand theft childhood, and this again contradicts his statements. If you look at the myth category of the website, it says, "The growth in violent video game sales is linked to the growth in youth violence " especially school violence " throughout the country." And the fact is, "Video game popularity and real-world youth violence have been moving in opposite directions. Violent juvenile crime in the United States reached a peak in 1993 and has been declining since. Between 1994 and 2004, arrests for murder, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assaults fell 49 percent, resulting in the lowest juvenile arrest rate for violent crimes since at least 1980. Murder arrests, which reached a high of 3,790 in 1993, plummeted 71% to 1,110 by 2004. School violence has also gone down." My opponent clearly has lost this point as he is completely contradictory of himself and you are going to keep this flowing to my side as VIDEO GAMES ARE NOT CAUSING VIOLENCE IN CHILDREN. 3. My opponent brought up my argument that parents are influencing the child when they buy the child that game. He brought up a cooking game and how that makes people want to be chefs, however, he would have never wanted to be a chef had it not been for his parents buying the game and letting him play it. In violent video games, it is the same case , therefore voters, you are just going to flow that to my side. 4. Now voters, please keep in mind that my opponent has failed to attack my correlation does not prove causation contention therefore dropping his case even further, and not attacking my third contention leads to an even further drop in his case as the studies are false and are contradictory of his statements. http://www.grandtheftchildhood.com... http://kotaku.com... Please vote con as his case is contradictory and holds no ground in this debate, he is completely contradictory of himself, and has failed to attack my second and third contention. I have deconstructed his case and have proven, WITH HIS OWN EVIDENCE that video games are not causing violence in children. Therefor, I must undoubtedly negate.