Slashdot Mirror


Kmart To Card Buyers Of Violent Games

AbbyNormal writes: "Cnn.com is reporting that Kmart(R) is now going to start carding kiddies who buy violent games (based on the ESRB rating)." Reverend Raven adds a link which paints Walmart's name on the wall of shame as well. All the more reason to buy games from local stores or on the Web, at least from places which don't bend to pressure from overzealous state attorneys general. On the other hand, industry 'guidelines' which mainstream retailers follow as if they were law seem better than actual laws doing the same, sort of like 7-11 being free not to carry pornographic magazines.

5 of 281 comments (clear)

  1. PSsssssst. by AbbyNormal · · Score: 5

    Mister...here's a fifty, could you get me a copy of Solider of Fortune?

    --
    Sig it.
  2. Re:Now... by Xentax · · Score: 5

    If K-Mart decides they don't want to sell any product to a minor, I believe that's their right. Discrimination laws (including those based on age) are all aimed at adults, as in 50 vs. 20, not 20 vs. 12.

    Whether such law even applies to sales from a private company (as in, non-government -- I know K-Mart is publicly held), I'm not sure. I would think a store can say "We don't want to sell gummy bears to Blondes because they're too air-headed already" if they want, but maybe that's illegal...

    Bad PR is what keeps such activity from occuring, by and large.

    Xentax

    --
    You shouldn't verb words.
  3. This is why ratings were CREATED, people. by generic-man · · Score: 5

    I'm over 17 and enjoy playing games of all types, violent and non-violent alike. The ESRB ratings were created so that parents and merchants could be aware of which games were not meant for children. For years, the ratings were blissfully ignored by arcade operators (who put games like Soul Calibur, rated "Life-like violence -- Strong" in public view) and merchants (who wouldn't want to risk losing a sale because their customer is too young). I'm glad that a corporation is stepping forward to make sure that the ratings are actually put to their stated purpose.

    Call it censorship if you'd like. Say it's Big Corporate America trying to say what's right for Our Children. (Don't worry, JonKatz will say the same thing soon enough.) Threaten to boycott K-Mart if you're really that active about it. This is just a realization of the ratings system, much like a young kid can't go into an R-rated movie -- assuming that the person behind the counter knows to card.

    This will be an annoyance, but it's something that parents have asked for. The world doesn't revolve around whiny Your-Rights-Online activists.

    --
    For more information, click here.
  4. Why is this wrong? by |DaBuzz| · · Score: 5

    I don't see why this is a big deal. The ratings are there for a reason aren't they? Just like movie ratings, why shouldn't game ratings be enforced by those retailers who want to? I don't see any federal or state authority forcing K-Mart to do this, they simply feel it's responsible and that's their right.

    Wal-mart asks for ID when I buy an R rated DVD (I'm 27 mind you) and I have no problem with that.

    People seem to want to give CHILDREN all sorts of freedoms but the simple fact is, if you're not 18 ... you're not an adult and like it or not, you can't get whatever you want or do whatever you want.

    If I were a parent, I'd much rather drop my 15 year old kids off at a theater that ENFORCES the ratings knowing that if by chance my kids do want to buy tickets to an R rated movie after I leave, they won't be able to. The same goes for stores that enforce game ratings. As the parent, *I* should decide if they buy things that are not age appropriate. If I want them to get the "M" games, I'll buy them for them ... that's called parental control, more people should practice it and the more help parents get from voluntary actions like what K-Mart is doing, the better.

    Suggesting a boycott or "wall of shame" in these cases is just ridiculous and makes it seem like this story was written by a 14 year old who's mad he can't get Soldier of Fortune without his mom knowing.

    If you want to be an irresponsible parent, fine ... but as far as I'm concerned, K-Mart is doing the responsible parents of this world a favor by giving them yet another safeguard to make sure their kids don't buy what they don't want them to have.

  5. Re:God forbid someone look out for my child by demonhood · · Score: 5

    It is your job to watch out for your child, not a retailer's. If you raise her well, with a relatively moral upbringing, then by the time she is interested in "inappropriate stuff", she'll be able to handle it or simply choose not to purchase it.

    I find it somewhat amusing that people try to use age limiting ratings as such firm barrier against corruption. They assume that you restrict your child to certain material for 17 years of their life, and then suddenly they're mature enough to deal with it on their own when they hit that magic birthday (be it 13, 18, etc..). I don't know about you, but I don't recall a "sensitivity and impressionability" switch being turned over when I hit a certain age.

    You can't expect your child not to be exposed to certain things in life. It just isn't a reasonable expectation. Instead of applauding retailers and perpetuating the American trend of transferable responsibility, perhaps people should sit down with their children and talk to them instead. Educate them on what is out there and what some of their choices are.

    To get back on topic: even if a child does buy a game recommended for (M)ature audiences, shouldn't the parent be aware when it is being played. I don't know too many kids that buy ultra-violent/sexy games and then play them in the basement so their parents won't discover their devious side. But maybe I just don't know enough kids.