Some people claim that violent video games cause violence in children, but there are also people who say the opposite. Violent video game critics argue that violent video games trigger school shootings and youth violence. Defenders of violent video games argue that violent video games do not cause violence among young people, but rather provide a healthy opportunity for children to explore war and violence virtually without introducing them to the real world. So what is true, even though I favor one side, they both have very compelling claims. Both sides use different means to persuade people, mostly with facts they have tested or researched by others. The scammer tried to persuade people to keep this in their minds by using repetition, because they always use the phrase "violent video games are violent" and keep repeating it over and over again until you are bored and it sticks in your mind. The way the pros persuade people is by using facts and statistics, because they always explain how what the pros say is bad about violent video games always proves them wrong. They both have different ways of persuading you, but both are good at it, but the difference is that one always proves the other wrong. Both sides use good examples to explain what they are saying. A good example the pros use is they said "the FBI said playing violent video games was on a list of behaviors associated with school shootings" which is a good example because they are trying to say the FBI said it that way. must be true. This example fits them perfectly because the FBI has said that school shootings and violent video games are associated. An example from the text in the middle of the paper......the argument and always proved the other side wrong. The negative side gave a better essay because they used a lot of facts and logical things instead of the pro side who used a lot of emotional examples and a lot of unproven research. A good example that the scammers brought to my attention was when they stated that "video games allow young people to experience issues like war, violence, and death without real-world consequences" because they essentially have says kids can experience things without going to jail. Personally, I don't think violent video games cause violence among young people, because if they did, there would be a lot more school shootings and more bullying, but that's not the case. case. The crooks had a better editorial period because they always contradicted what the other side said and that's why I side with the crooks./