The author assumed a causal relationship between the violent contents in the movies and the crime rates in the cities. Based on this assumption, the author further concluded that those legislators paid no attention to such issue, since a bill regulating the movie market did not win the majority. Nevertheless, the author’s logic had some flaws, and therefore, the author’s conclusion was not solid.
First of all, the author made a presumption that the violent contents in the movies caused the increase of the crime rates. Nevertheless, a positive correlation does not guarantee a causal relationship. It might be true that the increase of violent behaviors in the movie and of crime rates happened simultaneously. It is possible that the movies reflected the phenomenon of the society. Additionally, there might be some third-party factors caused the increase of the crime rates and violent content in the movies. Without ruling out other possible explanation, the author cannot safely assume that the violent contents in the
…show more content…
The author did not rule out other possible factors that might stop the pass of the bill. For example, whether the constitution allows the legislator to establish a board to censor the movie? As we know, the constitution guarantees the right of freedom of speech in the United States. Therefore, the reason that the bill failed to pass could be that the bill was against the constitution. Moreover, the author implied that by limiting teenagers from watching movies with violent content can help improve the situation. Nonetheless, such assertion is not buttressed by any evident. For example, what if most of the violent crimes were committed by people over 21 years old? If that is the case, the bill would not be helpful at