Thursday, September 20, 2007
Johnson v. Hillary
Johnson's argument was that video games are actually a good part of children's lives. He feels that Hillary's argument is wrong because it is only focusing on one video game and the violence that it involved with it. Johnson opposes what Hillary is saying by providing facts and statics of way he feels that video games are good for the development of children and teenagers. he also states the fact that today's video games have just replaced the games of past generations. Johnson is giving all possible reason for his argument and justifying playing video games.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
What is your reason for believing that Hillary is only focusing on one video game. In the article it says that the study is on the effects of video games on children. To me it seems like she is attacking more than just grande theft auto.
Post a Comment