St Louis Continues Pushing Violent Games Law
Thanks to Frictionless Insight for pointing to a St.Louis Today article indicating officials have decided not to give up on trying to outlaw the sale of violent video games to minors, despite a recent tide against their effort. As a CNN article explains, ".. [the original] ordinance, passed by the St. Louis County Council in 2000, requires children under 17 to have parental consent before they can buy violent or sexually explicit video games or play similar arcade games", but this was struck down as unconstitutional on June 4th, with a judge citing the First Amendment and the protection of free speech. The County has now set a petition for review, saying the courts "set too high a standard" for proving a link between videogames and violence. The saga continues..
However, I think there's still a link there. Clearly people who like violent video games over otherwise-equivalent games must be enjoying the violence. So violent video games serve as a magnet to these violence-prone people, which skews the statistics of the anti-gaming nuts. Perhaps a wiser use of our money would be to establish a national DNA database of these whackos that are spending their free time pretending to kill people--it'll save time when they eventually do murder someone.
Thank god I live in the City of St. Louis. I keep hearing about this kind of strange goings on out in the County. The last time I heard about anything this crazy was when they tried to ban MTV in St. Charles County. That didn't last very long, though.
I have kids too, though. So, of course, I'm a concerned parent. But, as Bart said unto Lisa, "How can you expect to become desensitized to violence if you don't watch it."
Perhaps a wiser use of our money would be to establish a national DNA database of these whackos that are spending their free time pretending to kill people...
No, no, you've got it all wrong. "Wackos" pretend to kill people while watching a computer screen. "Whackos" pretend they're having sex with people (usually sexy women) while watching a computer screen.
GMD
watch this
Next, are they going to try writing a law to restrict children from seeing movies with an R rating? I know theaters voluntarily enforce MPAA ratings, but last time I checked, it wasn't law.
What are they gonna do next. How bout The No luod music law. I like video games. Like StarCraft and Diablo 2. They're a bunch of poops. I'm glad im well away from that state. math.random*(((Grrr)))){}
Hardware is what you kick, Software is what you curse.
Would you pass a similar law for books? movies? television? Why be media-specific?
Oh, and that game those punk kids play, you know the one where they pretend to have this war, you know? and they're trying to kill everybody on the other side so they can capture the king? That seems pretty violent too.
Yep. I can definitely see where they're coming from on this. I mean how much more scientific do you have to be in order to take away people's rights? What does the court want, an actual scientific study or something?! I think the court just doesn't place enough value on a good anecdote or a seemingly plausible supposition. If the court insists on more evidence than that, then they might have to actually make an effort, and its even possible that the study might not support their position! (although, granted, that's not likely, depending on who they hire and how much they pay)
It's not enough to bash in heads, you've got to bash in minds. - Captain Hammer
I live in STL County, but being a bunch of years over 17 I don't care... I have been following this videogame violence stuff since the mid 90's, and what it comes down to is if the parents think that violence and content will ruin their children's minds they have the right to say "no". What I don't understand is why with the ERAB Ratings ON THE GAME PACKAGE why they dont make a decision for themselves instead of going for legislation... I suppose that could be asking to much for parents...
Well, we do have a similar laws to keep pr0n out of the hands of minors.
We have only anecdotal evidence at best that this is harmful to kids. (Unless there was a study wherein they showed a bunch of pr0n to a bunch of kids...and that's messed up).
Why do those who feel this is different, feel that way?
Could violent games be to potential murderers like pr0n to the potential rapist?
Discuss.
requires children under 17 to have parental consent before they can buy violent or sexually explicit video games or play similar arcade games.
From the sounds of things so far, slashdoters make this sound like a bad thing.
Guess then you don't care for the same rules applying to movies either. By this logic little Johny should be able to see M an XXX rated movies.
...is not in St. Louis County. St. Louis is its own entity. St. Louis County consists of suburban St. Louis.
No TiVo and no caffeine make me something something...
'[SOAPBOX]
And another thing, I hate when kids do crazy stuff and start killing people, and people blame everything, video games, music, etc.... when the problem is most likely rooted at the home.
[/SOAPBOX]'
-Look lively. LOOK LIVELY!!! --Mr. Shmallow
Quoting from the article:
"... playing the game "Doom" didn't make people start shooting at Columbine High School, Fischoff said, but it could have influenced participants to wear trench coats like characters in the game."
Not sure what version he's seen?
But by your own argument you support this idea. If it's good to monitor gamers because they like violent games you should be all for monitoring minorities for their culture of violence.
That or you don't understand sarcasm.
On Wall Street they say "buy low, sell high" On the pad we say, "buy high, sell high" Isn't that somehow better?