By now, you've probably all seen a PG-13 movie that contains violence. You couldn't have even batted an eyelid at the violence. Violence in movies is common these days. We are used to it. A recent survey by Ohio State University professor Brad Bushman even found that violence in movies has doubled since the 1950s, and for PG-13 films, gun violence has tripled since 1985. Some say that this will have a negative impact on our society. society and that the MPAA should change its rating system so that violence is a permitted theme only in R-rated films. Yet their claims contain no evidence that media violence harms people in the real world. Violence in movies does not have long-term negative effects on our society, proving that the MPAA should not have to restrict violence in PG-13 movies. Recently, the MPAA has received complaints about how it rates films. To give you an idea, there are 5 basic ratings for films: G, PG, PG-13, R and NC-17. Today the issue is between PG-13 and R. The PG-13 rating means Parents Strongly Cautioned and R means Restricted and if you are under 17 you must be accompanied by a parent or guardian . People complain that violence shouldn't be allowed in PG-13 movies and that they should be as tough on violence as they are on other themes. The MPAA often emphasizes that it does not control films and instead assigns warning labels so that parents can choose what they want their children to watch. Joan Groves, director of the MPAA's ratings board, said parents often object to language used in films because of the violence and that "they feel they are getting correct information about violence." . So what makes people think violence in movies is a bad thing? Well, a key factor is that people are concerned about the societal assault on the media. This has become a serious problem lately. It's the same as blaming violence in movies. Recently, more than 230 independent academics wrote an open letter to academic journal editors asking them to refrain from publishing statements linking media violence to societal aggression. Cinematic violence doesn't negatively impact our daily lives or harm anyone, so why should the MPAA have done it? change their grading system. Instead of harassing the MPAA, they could simply prevent their children from watching a movie if they don't approve of it. You can't blame a movie for one person's actions. People decide how they act, not a movie. When you make a decision, it's entirely up to you. A movie doesn't force you to go out and hurt other people. You make that decision. We cannot attribute the bad choices of others to violence in films.