Persian Rug Philosophy Session

There's a chance that violent video games may increase the risk that gamers will treat real people as poorly as they treat simulated characters. The fact that games like Grand Theft Auto and Manhunt affect overall ability to empathize is almost accepted fact.
    To the utilitarian, this hurts those who may be affected by video game-inspired violence, for the Kantian, this fails duties to treat our fellow human beings with respect, and to the Aristotelian, it degrades moral character.
I believe this all to be true, and therefore, believe ultra-violent videogames to be immoral. (Although I myself do not have an automatic negative gut-reaction to them.)
     But if we look at the issue from a practical standpoint —not just whether or not the action is immoral, but whether or not it should be allowed- other concerns emerge. From a utilitarian standpoint, we must look beyond the balance between possible harm caused by the games and the pleasure they give to the players- there is a third factor, which is the negative impact on society's greater utility that would result from banning this particular expression of free speech, and what that might mean for other similarly violent recreational past-times, like competitive sports, movies, and all kinds of online activities. Even something like a very violent painting or a Persian rug (or other antique rug) that depicts violent images. How far does it go? Living under a government that bans such activities for our own good is not worth the possible security we might gain from doing so.