"Violent Media is Good for Kids" Response, 21st of September, 2011

On the points made by Gerard Jones about violent video games and their effect on young people, I am delighted to see they are not negative. Whenever a young person performs a violent act on others, people always come to question whether or not he/she played violent video games. If the discussion makes it to the news, the people watching it get the idea that anyone who plays these video games could grow up to be a murdering psychopath. Being a person that plays video games that have been called a bad influence on kids and teaching them bad lessons, I take a bit of offense. This isn't true. Out of all the people out there who play violent video games I doubt that more than a small portion of them ever committed a violent act. I enjoy that Jones has made this article not only stating this point, but making several other convincing arguments as well.

Jones says in his article that he was able to start reading comics because a student of his mother had told her that the comics were “devoted to lofty messages of pacifism and tolerance.” (Jones 36) This is a true statement that people don’t often realize. Yes, comics and video games are full of violence and fighting, but they also have messages and morals.

It’s nice to see an example of how violent media helps people. Jones’s story about how he grew up in a sort of “uptight” household, discovered these wonderful portals into another world, then grew up to create them himself is the general sort of dream I see a lot of people have. Many fans of a certain video game dream of growing up to work on the art or making of that franchise. Some do, others go into a similar career as game designers, and many others just go into other career fields, as a lot of people do even though they once had a dream job. I myself once dreamed of growing up to work at Nintendo, designing new Pokemon and working as a graphic artist. But I soon realized this dream job was not for me, because I could never live in Japan, so far away from my family. Plus I would be competing with the thousands of other people who wanted the same job as me and odds are I probably wouldn’t cut it.

Jones says “Children will feel rage" (Jones 36). And that is true. It is much better to have a child take out their rage on a video game by yelling at it in frustration rather than screaming at their parents. I know from experience that most of the time video games don’t influence kids to do bad things. The game Pokemon, for example, is seen by some people to “advocate animal fighting” (Gurney 1). Yes, when put to its most simplistic elements, yes, it is two creatures fighting against one another. Despite this, not anyone I have ever met who plays Pokemon would ever think of harming an animal. In fact, their pets are the dearest in the world to them. I know that isn’t the best argument for this subject, but it seems okay to me.

Works Cited

1.       Jones, Gerard. “Violent Media is Good for Kids”. Mother Jones

28 Jun. 2000

2.       Sally Gurney, “Pokemon - it genuinely worries me.” Epinions, June 29, 2000

http://www.epinions.com/game-review-330B-709F097-395B74B4-prod2

Critical Response: Exercise 2.8

According to Gerard Jones, violent media can actually have positive effects on young people because it helps them develop into people who are not afraid to stand up and take charge, and lets them immerse themselves in a world away from their own, which might not be the best place at a time in their lives. Jones also believes that violent media are a positive influence on children because it lets them vent out their natural rage. Jones makes some good points. For example, he says that his son was scared of climbing a tree at school. So he introduces him to Tarzan, a story full of good plot and a protagonist that is quite skilled in climbing trees. His son loved these stories and so decided to take after Tarzan and climb the tree. However, some children might take the messages of stories the wrong way, putting themselves too deep into a story and taking unnecessary risks, such as trying to fight off a wild animal they are no match against (this is an extreme example). They would only end up hurting themselves because they believed that they were strong like their favorite superhero. All in all, his essay is a very convincing one and I can most definitely agree that violence is not always a bad thing for young people, but beneficial.

"Violent Media is Good for Kids" Exercise 2.1

1. Jones thesis is to argue that violent media isn't bad for kids, it actually helps them. To restate his thesis, violent media provides an escape in which kids can rid themselves of their natural aggression from adolescence.
2. Jones provides arguments to back up his thesis, such as a superhero role-model can give a kid strength and make him brave. Children need a way to vent their emotions and by allowing them to read these stories, imagine themselves as heroic crime-fighters, and act out battle scenes playfully with their friends helps them develop into kids that will interact with others. All kids feel rage, so if they let it out in a safe way they can utilize it to combat challenges in life.
3. Other arguments say that violent games lead to a violent life. He says that it is true that some people do take influence from these games to become violent, but it's much more likely for a child to grow up "too passive, too distrustful or themselves, too easily manipulated".
4. Parents try to protect their children from the influence of violence, but they also need to remember that the influence also helps them become self-aware and feel like they have influence on the world.

Exercise 1.3: Structured Argument Revised

The use of bottled water is a controversial topic. Some people claim that converison to tap is easy, it just doesn't taste too good, sometimes depending on what chemicals the town puts in the water. Others, however, believe that in this economy if spending more money for bottled will let people keep their jobs, then it should be done. While both sides of this issue have merit, I believe that the real solution is to convert to tap water. It may cost people their jobs, but overall it will have a good effect on the earth so that in the future we will actually have an earth.

Exercise 1.2: Structured Argument

The use of bottled water is a controversial topic. Some people claim that bottled water is expensive compared to tap water, so people should use tap water and save themselves a large amount of money each year. Others, however, believe that the arguments against bottled water aren't too convincing. They say that the refillable water bottles get moldy and dirty from overuse. While both sides of this issue have merit, I believe that the real solution is to convert to tap water, no matter how inconvenient it may be to some people. It costs less and produces less waste on the environment.

At Issue: Structures/Elements of Argument Answers

Article: "An Immigrant Writes"
by Arnold Shwarzenegger

1. What is this essay's thesis? Restate it in your own words.
"We can have an immigration policy that both strengthens our borders and welcomes immigrants." The immigration policy should include more security on our borders as well as welcoming immigrants instead of kicking them out
2. List the three arguments that the writer presents as evidence to support his thesis.
- To secure the borders, 12 million people would have to be deported, costing $230 billion.
- After 9/11, the border security is at a greater need than before.
- A mere fence or wall will not stop someone who really wants to cross over them.
3. Summarize the opposing arguments that the writer identifies. Then, summarize the writer's refutations of these arguments.
- Immigration is a theory only talked about on talk shows and Capitol Hill.
  = Immigration is an issue all around us, with immigrants walking around with us in schools, hospitals and workplaces. 
- "In a free society it is not possible to have border security"
  = It would cost too much ($230 billion) and too many (12 million) to secure the borders.
- There was less security before 9/11.
  = Since then the borders are in great need of security, and the federal government needs to provide the help to do it.
- Sound bites, symbolic gestures, walls, and fences are a secure border.
  = No man/woman who is determined to cross will be stopped by these.
- It is a felony to cross the border.
  = 12 million working immigrants and others unemployed do not deserve to be punished for trying to make a living.
- There should be no interference in other countries.
   = If we help the economic growth of other countries there will be greater security in our own.
4. Restate the essay's concluding statement in your own words.
Although it may be difficult, it is Congress should be kind to the immigrants as well as control our borders.

Article: "In Praise of Tap Water"
New York Times


1. Restate the editorial's thesis in your own words.
People should rethink the effect of all the use of water bottles is having on the environment.
2. List the arguments the writer uses in paragraphs 1-3 to support the thesis.
- The recommended amount of bottled water a person should drink in a year costs $1,400, while the same amount of tap water costs 49 cents.
- The amount of fuel it takes to make and transport the water is very bad for the environment.
- If more people don't support tap water, we may lose it.
3. Restate the editorial's concluding statement.
The planet will make a real turnaround when the consumers turn to tap.
4. Do you think that the writer considers enough arguments against his position? Can you think of others? Try to refute each of these opposing arguments.
The author could use a couple more arguments to refute against. The fact that water bottles are more convenient is definitely a big issue for people. But what people need to understand that sometimes convenience needs to be given up for the health of the planet. Some argue that more water companies are putting tap in their water. This still doesn't eliminate the buildup of waste from the un-recycled water bottles.
5. Paragraph 5 does not present arguments in support of or against the writer's position. What is the purpose of this paragraph?
The purpose of this paragraph is to show the progress that this issue has achieved, no matter how small it is. It shows people that they can contribute as well.