In message <[log in to unmask]>, Blake Thompson
<[log in to unmask]> writes
>The second option here would not so much 'limit' tv violence; it
>instead puts the responsibility of limiting the access of children to tv
>violence upon parents, rather than legislators or regulators.  This is by
>far the most sensible route.
 
Parents limiting access... or parents interacting with children about
access, and how they react to what they see?
 
As a child I found being told 'No' completley irrisistible - whatever it
was immediately became more attractive.
 
Actually, as an adult too...
 
Surely it's more important for adults to engage with younger people on
how they view, rather than what they view?
 
Not challanging you, just throwing into the pot the biggest thing I
found missing in the 'questionnaire'.
 
 
 
--
Morgan
 
"Nunc demum intellego," dixit Winnie ille Pu.  "Stultus et
delusus fui," dixit "et ursus sine ullo cerebro sum."
 
----
To sign off SCREEN-L, e-mail [log in to unmask] and put SIGNOFF SCREEN-L
in the message.  Problems?  Contact [log in to unmask]