Constructing the Con Speech

I. Introduction
• In 2011, the Supreme Court rightfully ruled against a law that wanted to make it illegal for minors to purchase violent video games on the claims that these types of game cause violent behavior. • The court over ruled it stating that it was unconstitutional violating both the 1st and the 14th amendments. My opponent wants to take this law even further by banning the use of these games to any minor under the age of 18, however I believe that this will decline youth there constitutional rights as a citizen of the United States. • Today I will be discussing the casual link between violence and violent video games, and how this law will interfere with the constitutional amendments. II. Body

A. Significance/harms/III
The reason this law was created was because of a belief that violent video games cause violent behavior in adolescent youth. 1. According to ESA (Entertainment Software Association) In the period form 1985-2008 video game sales have more than quadrupled, while violent juvenile crime in the United States has declined 2. On the other hand, The FBI issued a report that states that the arrest rate for juvenile murders has fallen 71.9% between 1995 and 2008. 3. The arrest rate for all juvenile violent crimes has declined 49.3%. 4. The problem there in hand doesn’t lie within the parameters of violent video games, it lies with parenting and other unforeseen issues. B. Inherency/Blame

The main drive in this law is that violent video games contribute to violent behavior in minors. However, this is not true. 1. Studies show no conclusive evidence that directly links adolescent aggression to violent video games. • Studies are poorly designed and unreliable

2. 2004 Secret Service review of school attacks found 1/8th of attackers showed interest in violent video games. Less than all other media, including movies, books, and their own violent writings. No relationship between school shootings and violent video games. C. Plan/Cure

1. The Law my opponent wants to instate would violate both the 1st and 14th amendments. 2. Video games are a type of media, which is a type of speech; therefore this law will take away our freedom of speech. 3. The 14th amendment states that No State shall make or enforce any law, which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States. If this law is passed, minor’s 14th amendment I will be violated. D. Solvency/ Results

1. This law will not work, as it is a direct violation of constitutional rights. 2. Minors will always have ways to play these games. Enforcing this law will not stop their wants. 3. The laws enforced now allowing minors to buy violent video games with consent of an adult, is the best way to give everyone what they want. • It allows for regulation by the parent, gives minors an outlet for stress or anger, and drives creativeness and a healthy economy. III. Conclusion

A. In conclusion the Supreme Court was right to overturn this law. • It violates both the 1st and 14th amendments • There is no conclusive evidence linking violent video games and violent behavior in minors • So this law would be made based on fallacies. IV. Rebuttal

A. Allowing the law to stay as is, is the best solution for both parties. This will allow for parents to control what they wan or do not want their kids to be exposed to, while letting the minors have their constitutional rights, and it can be an outlet for stress and aggression.