Well I being 14 (almost 15) have been playing violent video games since i was 5. Not even lying. It started with mere mortal kombat violence and transgressed into Grand Theft Auto Violence. Now most parents dont want their kids playing games like this for simple reasons. 1. They think it will rub off on their children 2. They dont approve of the "message" it gives 3. They have their own "Reasons" (which to me means that they dont have one its just their decision and if you try to get out of it they will just say "Because i Said so." Well look at me. Violence didn't rub off on me. I hate fighting simply for pleasure. I only fight to keep myself from getting hurt, or to get people to leave me alone. The message that violence gives is the only possible reason i believe that parents should no approve of their children playing violent video games. Now i believe that once you are 11, you can handle things like Call of Duty and Mortal Kombat, however those guys at Supreme Court think its 18 (or somewhere around that im not sure of exact details) and up. So back to what i was saying. Violence didn't rub off on me. As i was talking to Tmac about in PM earlier this morning im a very smart kid. I dont read books unless i have to, but I am taking a summer school class of cold fusion and im only in 7th grade! I understand science, whereas my brother, who got the message of violence into his brain too much, is a straight D student, doesnt read period, and dresses like a gangster. So I can see where the supreme court would not want children playing games like this, but there is also a side that it doesn't matter if you do or not. What do you guys think?