To be entirely up front, let me state that I am a gamer and a parent. I grew up playing games of all types, and retain an omnivorous appetite; I'll play anything. I don't necessarily believe that violent games induce violent behavior. At the same time, I do think that it's important that parents filter what content their kids experience. Despite what the extremists might think, these two notions are not at odds with each other. There is a synthesis to be had. Let's break down the issues and see what's at the heart of it all.

First, it's important to understand that the audience for video games is both seasoned and experienced. Over the decades that electronic entertainment has been around, we've grown from simple twitch-based gameplay into a wide range of game types and genres. If some of these games are violent, it's because they speak to some need or desire for us to experience that sort of stimulus. They cannot simply be dismissed as catering to some depraved and aberrant personalities -- clearly, players of many demographics enjoy these titles. Rather than a blanket ban, which obviously hasn't worked, more time and effort should be spent on understanding why people enjoy violence in games. The key to this understanding is rooted in catharsis.

Catharsis, coming to us from the Greek word for "purification" or "cleansing", refers to the process by which strong emotions are evoked in order to purge the spirit of negativity. The implication derived from this is that by experiencing moments of terror and sorrow from a safe distance -- say, by watching a movie or playing a video game -- we can resolve our inner conflicts in a therapeutic manner. By doing this, we emerge stronger and well-balanced, better able to deal with the pressures of daily life.

Proponents of the idea that games are not art clearly do not share this viewpoint. In fact, some take it a step farther and claim that violent games actually train people to commit crimes. By putting the action in the hands of the player, they say, games actually influence a person's predilection toward violent acts. To prove this, they cite cases where real world violence was committed by a person who later blamed his behavior on a particular video game. In their zeal to punish the guilty -- which they see as protecting the innocent -- they take the path of least resistance by pinning all responsibility on the external, rather than the internal. By blaming games for a sociopath's actions, they blind themselves to any true understanding of human nature, thus paving the way for future tragedies to occur. The concept of personal responsibility is the key element at work here.