GAMING Entertainment or training killers?

1)Supporting arguments for Moore:
he was simply playing a vddieo-game as all teens do, and didn't think it would influence him that heavily.
Supporting arguemnts for strickland:
Video-gaming industries have created addicting games that promote violence and in a snense"train" one to kill, especially in teenageers who arent' fully developed mentally, and act on impulse. Video-game companies and its carriers should be mroe carefula and take responsibility, as well as the teens who purchase them and play them excessively.

2)Supporting arguements Gaming Industry:
The gmaing industry has the right to free expression and can create whatever games they would like. They are not responsible for the actions fo those who choose to purchase and play them. They do have the games rated and placed in the market so technically those impressionable and easily influencedd shouldnt even be buying them.

3)When selling violent games in the industry, the game rating should eb taken more seriously. One should only purchase a game if they can accoding to the rating, and those who carry and sell the games should try and moniter to the best of the ability who they are sold to. This way, incidents like the one discussed in this article can be rpevented.

4) Videogame companies should eb more careful in terms of violent video-games. Yes, they do haev the right to freedon of expression, but they should limit the violence in their games as well as any otehr innapropriate material. They should also have strogner ratings on the games and if a game is very violent still, they shouldnt be easily available at all stores, maybe sold only in particular stores where adults may access them but children cant.