Is the video recordings act a morally legitimate law?

Thesis:

The Video Recordings Act was brought about in 1984 to censor, regulate and ban films that were seen as being immoral; containing images such as pornography and violent behaviour. The law was sought to protect society from this, as these so called video nasties introduced imitable behaviour, and attracted a youth audience. The Video Recordings Act enforced age restrictions and banning of films. However, there is controversy throughout the topic of the VRA being a legitimately moral law. Some argue that the VRA protects a certain amount of society. The VRA were set up by the conservative government and therefore it holds the traditional, middle class views of how moral society should be. Whilst others believe that the VRA does not protect society, and that it should be down to individuality and choice. In my opinion the VRA is a moral legitimate law as these video nasties were being viewed by vulnerable audiences that could commit an imitable behaviour. I believe that the VRA are legitimate and moral for banning and censoring films as age restrictions only account for a particular part of society's vulnerable groups. Video nasties were produced on VHS, meaning that anyone could purchase and watch these films.
The teenage audience that these video nasties were attracting, was because of the controversy and status that came along with the viewing of the film. Therefore if the VRA were to only age restrict these films, I believe the youth audience would view these films in another way, and therefore be even more attracted to them due to their further restriction.