If you've read the article, "Group Cites Growing Video Game Violence," from the Associated Press, then you might have had the same reaction that I had. The article states that nearly half of all kids between 8 and 12 play video games labeled "M" (for players 17 and older.) That is the same as letting your 3rd thru 8th grader go to an R-Rated movie, unattended, because we certainly don't sit there and monitor their reactions to video games.

Here's what I don't understand...If there is a chance that playing violent video games or letting your kids watch violent programs might cause your kids to be more violent or more aggressive (and I say "might"), then why even take a chance? I am not some prude mom who only let's her kids watch PBS, nor am I an advocate for any type of censorship. No one wants the government to decide what we can buy or watch. But if there is a potential risk, doesn't it make sense that we should at least err on the side of caution? Would it really hurt our kids if we didn't let them play or watch these things?

When we parents heard that immunizations "might" be linked to autism, there was a revolt against vaccines. When we heard that talc was linked to respiratory illness, we stopped powdering up our babies' bottoms. And when we heard that exposing our fetuses to classical music "might" give them higher IQs we were suddenly strapping headsets to our bellies. So why not the same heighten precautionary approach to violence?

I have a theory which is borne from my experiences with my 9 year old son. He is at an age where he is asserting himself in a much stronger way. Fighting with him, whether I'm trying to get him to do something or not to do something can be very exhausting, and on some days I have a hard time finding the energy. I'm probably not alone. My theory is that when it comes to making decisions for their kids based on "what's best for them" that parents often choose the easy way, and battle over video games is not on the "easy" list.

If you want to skip shots, no problem. The kids will probably thank you for that. Want to go without powder? Fine. There are other alternatives, anyway. Care to strap a headset to your belly? What's the fetus going to do? Have a fit? But tell your kid that he/she can't play that sexually themed shoot-em up game, now that's a different story. You might actually have to work at that one.

Look, so you don't think I'm too bitchy, I know that as parents we all have to pick our battles. I say that all the time, particularly with 3 kids. You just can't fight them on everything. But we're talking about something that "might" make our kids more violent and aggressive. Isn't that important enough to enforce a limit? Keep in mind, the stat says 50% of kids between 8 and 12 are playing video games for 17 and older audiences. I might be less fired up if that percentage were only 10 or 15, but half of us are doing this? Can't we do it better than that?

One things for sure. I'm certain you will all find it reassuring to know that 50% of today's youth, and tomorrow's leaders, are learning how to kill with one shot and urinate on the dead bodies, at least in a virtual world.