The government should control the amount of violence in films and on television in order to decrease the violent crimes in society. In what extent do you agree or disagree?
Whether the government should regulate content that showcases acts of brutality in television operas and movies, is a matter profoundly debated. There are views in support, and against this notion.
There is an overwhelming support in favor of the idea of imposing restrictions on showcasing of violence in movies and TV shows. This heavily relies on the belief that the way content reflecting savagery is glamorised and presented in an attractive manner, it is bound to inspire many viewers, especially youngsters, to emulate such portrayals, and practise it in their real life.
Moreover, many a time, human behaviorists have observed that humans are equipped with innate qualities that support animal instincts, wherein violence is considered to be a necessary survival technique. It is feared that programs, like WWE match telecasts and films depicting blood and gore, tend to trigger those ancient responses among humans, who react accordingly and commit acts of savagery. Therefore, monitoring and imposing limits on such presentations could help bring down the number of illegal acts.
Having said that, there is a lobby that rejects the former opinion. They claim that unlawful activities have existed ever since humans appeared on this planet, and this event took place millions of years ahead of the introduction of modern means of entertainment; hence, putting the onus on the new modes for rise in acts of lawbreaking seems to be quite ludicrous. It is suggested that the government should not take this step: it will do little to help.
In hindsight, even though the suggestion demanding state intervention in regulating content showcasing violence to regulate criminal activities seems valid, I feel that this may not fetch desired outcomes, since unlawful acts rely on the perversion rather than inspiration. Thus, I do not subscribe to the statement.
