Slashdot Mirror
Courts Block Washington Violent Game Law
Thanks to Reuters/Yahoo for their report that the enforcement of a Washington state law, designed to restrict the sale of violent video games to minors, has been postponed. U.S. District Judge Robert Lasnik blocked enforcement of the law, set to start July 27th, and to impose fines on anyone selling games to minors depicting violence against 'law enforcement officers', saying: "Plaintiffs have raised serious questions regarding the constitutionality of House Bill 1009 and the balance of hardships tips in their favor." Doug Lowenstein of the IDSA praised the move, praising "..the judge's finding that games are a form of protected speech like music and movies", but the Washington Democrat politician sponsoring the bill suggested that "..any injunction would only be preliminary and that.. the case [will] go to trial." The saga continues..
Who cares, it's never coming out anyways =(
But how many more times can these types of bills be defeated? It'll only take one to get through, and we head down the slippery slope...
Disclaimer: The above comment was made while under the influence of too much coding and not enough sleep.
Score : -1, Redundant
In other news, sales of Vice City are up 3%.
from the article: "It has very little bearing on the final outcome of the case," Dickerson said.
so there you go. just a bump on the road to a world of games where cops are invincible juggernauts.
I'd like to say hooray as this isn't a good law to keep on the books.
I'd also like to slap all the idiots who helped this pass.
And, I'd like to make a comparison: What happened when the movie rating system came out, and was this treated the same way as the video game rating system is now at first, then becoming law?
I will now redundantly add my name to the end of my post. You know, in case you forgot me or something.
Seriously, can we go back to using TV as a scapegoat for the results of bad parenting? It's not like there's anything good on.
to impose fines on anyone selling games to minors depicting violence against 'law enforcement officers'
So it's legal to sell games where you blow away Ma and Pa Kettle but don't dare kill a cop in a game or it's illegal? Since when did law enforcement become some sort of sacred cow? Hmmm... I wonder if 3D Realms will have to re-do Duke Nukem 3D, recall that you could kill pigs in cop outfits in that game.
Trolling is a art,
Is keeping violent games out of the hands of minors really a bad thing? I don't believe violent games make people any more or less violent than they already are, but some games go to the extreme, and I really don't think putting in an age restriction is a bad thing. If the kid really wants the game, he can gladly go into the store with a parent, and they can buy it for them if they think their child is mature enough for said game. Think of it like pornography, sure kids can get it online for free, but legally there is an age restriction. Now I don't think some 13 year old boys checking out a penthouse will become raving serial rapists but there are age laws put in place, and for a good reason.
What is the likelihood that the final verdict overturns a preliminary injunction? Are there statistics on this?
If I had to guess I'd say they're slim. Already the judge has determined that the 'balance of hardships' tips in favor of the plaintiffs, in other words, even if the state had the right to prohibit the games, the judge thinks prohibition hurts society more than it helps.
Think about the children!
SCO employee? Check out the bounty
This just in. Bill 1009 has been found battered and beaten on the house floor. When asked what happened witnesses said they saw nothing, and they would be out of town that week.
What? Screw preventing people from selling video games to minors--what about banning saled of Windows to minors? Surely that's far more damaging than Halo or Half-Life.
Mikey-San
Karma: +Eleventy billion (mostly affected by watching Celebrity Jeopardy)
IDSA: We don't like piracy!
Slashdot: Boooo!
IDSA: We like violent video games!
Slashdot: Yay!
So... do we like IDSA?
So you're saying that just because they make a product (like the makers of whipped cream) they should be responsible for the actions of the user (accidents caused by huffing the nitrous oxide in the can)?
I will now redundantly add my name to the end of my post. You know, in case you forgot me or something.
You hear over and over about how bad these video games are, yet any loser can go and buy a gun. Such a gun culture seems to be at the heart of the problem.
After all, I doubt the British are likely to return after all these years..
Aren't there enough screwy laws already? Do we really need another one for the books? (And exactly how will this be enforced? Kids still manage to get cigarettes.)
I don't think it is the games that need to be looked at as opposed to how much interaction the kids get at home from the parents. It appears that quite a number of these kids that go off the deep end tend to have parents who didn't check up on them enough to make sure everything is fine.
!@#$% whole-grain cereal. When I want fiber, I eat some wicker furniture. - G. Carlin
As the offspring of a law enforcement officer myself, I have mixed feelings about this. I find any kind of game which involves flaunting a disrespect for the law somewhat disturbing. On the other hand, a lot of laws don't deserve our respect and a lot of cops shouldn't be issued the badge. But... I myself will not play these kinds of games. I prefer games RPGs where you go out and slaughter demi-human races and accept without question that they every "thing" you are killing is evil and where the ends justify the means. Yay NWN!
The saga continues
I actually read it as, The rampage continues...
Yeah, I am going to hook myself up with hookers, slash people's head off, steal drugs, carjack, and take out the Mafia as I steal my way up the ladder in Vice City.
Seriously though, it is good to have a judge (or judges) that respects freedom of speech, because as the most people other thread have suggested, games of this nature does not promote violence, in general, if there is good parenting and all. Lawmakers should not be restricting games, parents should educate their children on things of this nature (much like sex, and everything)... unfortunately, I don't see too much of that happening..
Parents, please educate your children, be responsible and so they will learn to be responsible, and use your good example when they grow up.
Please direct all bug reports to
Is that too little to ask to save innocent life, I ask you?
WTF was this modded Flamebait? i think it makes sense.
Restricting the sale of games with a very specific kind of violence like this? Only against law enforcement officers? Sounds to me like cops are just afraid of 14 year olds playing Grand Theft Auto grabbing some guns and blowing them away. That Doug Lowenstein guy is right; games ARE free speech, and to be restricted in such a specific manner is ridiculous. It's just the narrow definition of the law that bothers me. Violence against pregnant women? Sure, beat the hell out of them with a baseball bat. Punch a cop? Uh-uh, we're not gonna let you do that, son.
to impose fines on anyone selling games to minors depicting violence against 'law enforcement officers'
What if that law enforcement officer was tried and convicted of a capital crime?
Since the game wouldn't let me advance, I shot my seargent.
They sent me to the brig.
Would the United States fine itself for allowing me to kill an army personel?
After all, the Army could be used as law enforcement in a police state.
STILL....
Let me get this right.
Violence, where we invade a country and kill its patriots is alright.
Yet its not ok to vent violence on a video game?
Oh I get it, the government wants people willing to join the Armed Forces.
If we had FDR style work programs researching cures for AIDS and cancer, we'd solve unemployment... But we'd allow skilled people a work option outside of the Marines. Yes I know CMU grads who enlisted out of suicidal depression at getting no job.
I love America, and I respect the armed forces, but theres some major shit going wrong in our nation. We need to stand up against liability lawyers, insurance/credit agencies, banks and all forms of corruption.
God spoke to me
The problem with out society is everyone wants to blame someone else. Parents need to take responsibility for the way they raise their kids. You don't want your kids seeing violence, keep them away from it.
Parents have the option to decide what their kids do and do not see. The government needs to stay out of it and leave the option in the hands of the people, where it belongs.
LordBodak's journal.
I'd really like to hear an answer to this particular age-old question, myself.
Although having a game where you shoot cops can leave a bad taste in some peoples mouth, along with brown nose induced halitosis, we have these freedoms guaranteed in the constitution. Okay maybe not killing cops in games but freedom of expression and the pursuit of happiness.
Some have fun acting out in games and/or some don't even differentiate between the skin on an in game model. This world is becoming so overly protective of things that were trivial in the past. No there weren't cop killing games back in the day but we did parade dead criminals around for public viewing back in the day. (John Dillinger).
We are a violent society and so our games reflect that. If someone becomes so influenced by a game that it makes them want to kill an authority figure then it was bound to happen anyway. All these people need is an excuse. This is the day and age of no personal responsibility. If I spill McDonalds coffee on myself and get burned then it's their fault and my ass it getting paid...CHA-CHING!
I don't practice that shit because I believe I am responsible for my own actions no matter how stupid or utterly sexy they may be:D The point is you cannot legislate personal responsibilty and you cannot prevent the other guy from seeing what you see as offensive or disgusting. The people who pursue these laws are an amalgamation of fear and self loathing epitomized. Just because your kids a total fuck up don't tell me how I'd raise mine if I had access to see them...you drink a case a day and sing show tunes in the front yard naked and you aren't allowed to see your kids...wtf is that shit?
In closing this is all a loosely related DRM package. Pretty soon we'll have no choices, no freedom, no music (unless it's on a public kiosk only access by submitting a DNA sample and $100 per sample), sex in a petri dish, and nothing but customized infomercials.
FUCK THAT!
You aren't free to do anything, until you've lost everything.
These violent video games which portray violence against police or other figures of government need to be banned immediately. They, like guns, have absolutely no place whatsoever in civilian hands. Ban and confiscate all of these games now. Imprison those who don't turn them in, and and use force against those who resist. It's for your own good people. Support the government and all laws (except the constitution) at all times. These games glorify terrorism, BAN THEM.
play "cop and robbers" anymore, ...
well maybe not ... but "robbers" will not be allowed to run (unless players are 14+ y. old).
Don't you know it is now both immoral and criminal to think beyond the next quarterly report?
But let anyone intimate that violent games might be bad, and listen to the squealing: "NO THEY AREN'T!!!".
You can't have it both ways...
That's why you always see National Guard troops keeping the peace after a disaster - National Guard troops are actually controlled by the state, not the feds.
As for using the unemployed to cure cancer or AIDS - face facts, dude: some folks are idiots that are too stupid to keep a job. Do you really want someone too dumb to flip burgers conducting medical experiments?
But neither do I say that people do not have the right to depict such things, or make them into video games. And everyone has the right to buy such things, if they want them, and to sell them, if they desire. We cannot legislate morality, because it loses the virtue of being voluntary, and ceases to be morality.
I intend to teach my children that violence is always a terrible thing, even when it is necessary (I am not saying that it is not necessary). I hope that they will choose not to partake of such things, but I do not wish for a law to make that so.
point 1: People have to take responsibilty for THEIR actions.
Point 2: Parents HAVE to be prepared to be involed with their kids lives, and not blame 'the evils of the world' for their kids actions.
Question: What is more believable?
a) A kid plays a video game, where they 'shoot people' over and over, until they think 'hay why not try this for real', and shoot up their school.
or,
b) A kid is forced, day after day, to go to a instituation where they are mentally, physically, and even sexually abused, where the 'responsible adults' do nothing, and even encourges it. Until the kid figures 'hay, my lifes hell anyway, why not take some of 'em with me'.
??
ID required to buy wipped cream??? Yikes. I'm glade I don't live in your world.
My Paintball Pics
I don't think it's a slippery slope, but an ongoing battle. I suspect this issue won't be settled, in any meaningful sense, for decades.
Sick :-)
SB
It's old. The more humans I meet, the more I like my cats. At least they are honest.
braindead moderators, get your ass out of your heads, its called HUMOR
Damn you liberals! I make a legitimate point about CORPROATE RESPONSIBILITY, otherwise a highly relevant subject on this "blog," and yet it gets labeled "Troll"?? Come on, show some respect for the dead, or at least for the point of view of teh concerned parents like me.
COLUMBINE WAS BAD PARENTING PLAIN AND SIMPLE
how do you NOT know your kid has a gun, you have to be a moron to not check up on them. It's your resposibility as a parent to do it.
you know I grew up in a inner city school, and if someone had a problem , the teachers knew, the parents knew and more importantly they made sure YOU knew they where there. They checked up on you and made sure you where ok.
reading everything I ever have on Columbine and what do I see, ever single person not caring cause they had other things too worry about. thats why it happened not video games.
Im sorry but I played doom and quake and wolfenstein from age 8 on, a) my dad was there both cheering me on for kicking nazi ass, and to make sure I understood it was a game. and b) never once though it would be cool to do in real life
im sorry, but your post is just flame bait imho
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
No, the government needs to stay out of capitalism. Issues like this are most certainly the repsonsibility of the People via their elected Representatives.
They're trying to use the "minor" word to ward off the First Amendment; as every censor knows, the courts will give lots of latitude in restricting what minors hear and see.
But they inadvertantly invoked an opposite talisman, that of political speech. A restriction against violent games can be argued to be one of those permissable "time, place, and manner" restrictions, particularly when applied to minors. But a restriction against games with violence _against police officers_ is viewpoint restriction; the viewpoint that cops and other authority figures are scum who ought to be shot is obviously not one most people would want minors exposed to, but it IS a political viewpoint, and thus should be subject to full protection, even for minors.
I seriously was about to type in the same question.
I have to think the "good reason" is that America's traditional puritanical values stem from well... Puritans.
Think about it-- so many of our American western-european ancestors were sexually-repressed, religiously fanatic paranoids.
The fear expressed by the uptight shoe-buckling fundies have over the years resulted in everything from the Salem Witch trials to burning Rock 'n Roll albums to Pat Boone. Blaming the world's problems on skirts that expose the ankles or video games or rap music, and yes, even 13 year old boys checking out a penthouse, is all the moral remnants of pointed, freaked-out people who escaped to the New World for religious freedom to convert the natives, plunder the land, and form a country that would inevitably lead to the RIAA.
Pharmaceutical companies make billions of dollars a year selling drugs for diseases.
What interest do they have in curing diseases?
I think disease research, energy aquirement, food aquirement, and some other issues should be directly researched by the government.
Private corporations aren't always looking out for the best of society, and if you haven't looked around we are experiencing economic problems. Practically every college grad I know has a shitty job or can't find work.
But to some people, Capitalism is Jesus. Especially if they're rich themselves.
God spoke to me
Oh yeah, this is so true!
I disable sigs...do you?
If they can ban a video game that depicts killing a cop shouldnt they ban it from all entertainment? Does anyone actually believe this could save a cops life? I know, lets ask a few cop killers and see if a video game was the deciding factor.
"At first, we thought it was just another snake cult."
is that "our kids are bad, and something is to blame." Violent video games are just the something du jour. It boils down to the fact that parents, legislators and teachers are trying to deny the fact that they are clueless when it comes to the rash of violent incidents involving teenagers. They must rally to some cause, else they would be forced to look to themselves for answers and solutions. Introspection and awareness are anathema for most politicians and many teachers and parents. It is so much easier to find something to blame. Better even when they find something to blame, like the video game industry, which doesn't have a well-established lobbying effort in Congress and the state legislatures.
This bill, or one akin to it, will eventually be passed. First, in a state legislature, and then, when the shootings and spree killings continue, by Congress. There's too much momemtum to it from those in power.
The intriguing (and possibly scary) question is this: when this bill is made law, and the killings don't stop, what are these cowards going to blame next?
You are kidding, right? There's a British guy I know living in Dallas right now. Right now!
Anyway, you mentioned a problem, what exactly is that problem? Oh nevermind, you are an Anonymous Coward and hence have nothing to really say.
My blog can kick your blog's ass
Wake up, its 2003, and while we do have a share of idiots, we have more college graduates than ever. In fact machining jobs are looking for slavers there, not just burger flipping slavers.
Our unemployed are skilled, and many are very intelligent. It takes a degree of intelligence to not take a burger flipping job, when you know you're better than that.
Old debatists used to talk about why poor men owned no land, while real estate barons owned more than they ever need. Back in the day, real estate barons would say,"People need an education." Well we still have real estate barons, and people do have educations now.
God spoke to me
hope this helps
I know from my own anecdotal evidence that children are adversely affected by violence they are exposed to. Violence can be as innocuous as name-calling in family-rated cartoons. Or it can be as brutal as sexual abuse by a parent. Either way, a child learns the violence will act it out. My own two young children are only exposed to a tiny amount of violence compared to most children (we do not have a TV, and we very carefully select their movies and games), but still they both play with guns and swords. My wife and I try our best both through example and through our words to teach them to be gentle and loving... and at the same time not to shelter them completely, but it is a real struggle. Seeing their personalities and behavior change as a result of environmental violence is a real tragedy.
Regardless of any laws, either rational or irrational, parents have the first responsibility to their children. However, being a parent in a society which does not support parenting makes the job almost impossible to do properly. Laws might be able to help...
Helping with organizational effectiveness is our job.
Hey wouldn't it be better if there was a game that splattered gamers, hackers, junkies, and other politically correct targets. The only shooters were sneaky upwardly mobile polititions? Now that would be a killer game! The ultimate goal would be to gain enough voter brownie points to be elected to congress.
OH THE SHAME I fell off the wagon and use sigs again!
If this law survives the courts, does it mean fragging Stormtroopers would be off limits? And SW Galaxies had such a bright future.
-1 troll
All the law's going to do is encourage piracy, since kids can't get violent games via legal means.
Mod all my posts down by 1.
Make completely off topic remarks.
Some people take their hard lined politics too seriously.
God spoke to me
During the time of William Shakespeare, the same whinging moral moronity groups were condemning the theatre for spread of evil in society.
The more things change, the more they stay the same. The sooner idiots learn to take responsibility for their own actions the better.
and the werewolves came...
and they ate him...
and they drank his beer...
I don't think its wrong for people to take their prescriptions. Maybe I am an idiot, because I don't understand your argument at all.
My argument is pretty easy to understand:
Sell drugs, make money.
If you cure disease, then pharmaceutical company no longer makes money.
Theres actually copywrights, and patent lawsuits protecting information about diseases because of capitalism.
If there was governmental funding, then information would be shared freely, and focus would be aimed at the cures.
Of course, countries are the same as people in a marketplace. If you cure AIDS, you can't sell drugs to foreign countries. The only thing curing AIDS would do is raise foreigner's opinions of your country... But that doesn't buy guns.
God spoke to me
Bad parenting wasn't the only thing that caused Columbine.
An endemic problem of systematic abuse was allowed, even encouraged, at the school for decades.
The high population of evangelical christians at the school felt it was their god-given right to both physically and verbally assault anybody who wasn't a mindless clone. The school authorities allowed this to continue and eventually somebody snapped.
You kick a dog long enough, don't be surprised if you get bitten.
and the werewolves came...
and they ate him...
and they drank his beer...
I find two glaring problems with this bill.
8 _new_antievolution_legislation_1_23_2002.asp)
One, parents should be in charge of their kids, not the government. With more parents off to work, there is less time to ensure that kids have proper guidance and development. This same problem arose during WWII when Dad was at the front or in the factory and Mom was often in the factory too. Latchkey kids spwaning gangs (Zoot Suit Riot, 1943 or 44 in Los Angeles), elevated teen pregnancy rates, runaways, etc. These reports sound familiar to anyone who studies modern urban youth would find the same problems back then. Lack of parenting, whether due to necessity or greed of the parents or whatever else, is the main cause behind the "moral decay" in this country as well as the vast majority of school shootings.
Two, solving the problems by attempting to legislate morality is both ineffective and dangerous. It is ineffective because the dealers are not going to police themselves if demand is high enough and the stores that sell copies under the table or without ID will prosper, potentially putting the rest out of business or causing them to discontinue the product in question altogether. It is dangerous because it sets precedent for allowing a faction of society to dictate its morality on the people who believe that good intentions will result. Remember, one mildly conservative in the Washington State Senate tried to prevent the teaching of evolution on the basis that it conflicted with Declaration of Independence. (http://www.ncseweb.org/resources/news/2002/WA/97
Thus the potential exists of such a group not only legislating its morality on the rest of the country (Christian Conservatives are trying to do this piece at a time in several states on abortion, science education, etc.) but also to enforce their views in a legal sense*. Note recent laws proposed or passed by AG Ashcroft, Senators Santorum and Representative DeLay et al.
*Democrats are not innocent of this either, but the tend to use "security" and "equality" as their preferred excuses for violating civil liberties.
As long as there is a Second Amendment, there will always be a First Amendment.
The more often you have laws against guns, the more often the criminals you encounter will have them and the less likely the innocents will not! Criminals, by definition, are those who break (gun) laws after all...
Read the sig...
As long as there is a Second Amendment, there will always be a First Amendment.
You can kill as many pig-cops as you want, but aliens warp in and punish you when you kill the hot chicks.
Best. Game. Ever.
It's nothing but crumpled porno and Ayn Rand.
You, sir, are what some refer to as a "fool". Whether you're a misguided one or a malicious one remains to be decided.
The theater can use the force of the state to back them up when they "kick the minor out". That's because of those pesky little things called trespassing laws. A private business can ask you to leave the premises for any number of reasons, and violating their rules of entry would place high on the list of available ones. A sports team or playhouse might ask you to leave if you try to sneak into seats that are more expensive than the one you paid for. Not that I disapprove of doing this, because, as they say, "It ain't cheating if you don't get caught." Regardless, the reason you're being removed is because they have the right to ask you to leave.
This, though, does not mean that the movie ratings have "the force of the state" behind them. There is no state or federal statute to deal with minor entry into an R-rated movie. So, as I said, you're a fool. (Note: X or, in web parlance, XXX!!!! movies, on the other hand, prohibit minors by force of law.)
Will kids still be allowed to rent these videos from stores? What's to stop them from getting past the law by renting a restricted game (or having a friend rent) from a store like Blockbuster, burn a copy, and return it?
I'd just like to say, your sig amused me. I can only hope you meant it as a joke, but in any case it made me laugh (as well as make me glad I live in Canada.... but that's another story). In any case, I don't mean to say "right-wing is always wrong" or "left-wing is always right", it just amuses me when "right-wing" pundits or "left-wing" pundits start spouting things off in an undisguisedly biased manner -- the only people they will possible "sway" are the people who already agree with them, so it all boils down to a pointless exercise in ego, or more likely intra-community self-assurance. One of the reviewers on Amazon commented that it's also amusing to read Micheal Moore, but he wouldn't take historical lessons from Moore or the author of the book you are promoting.
On another note, your use of the ultra-capitalized uber-patriotic "Real Americans" also made me chuckle. Kill the COMMIES! RAH RAH RAH!
Goodday, and may everyone feel free to mod me into oblivion.
I am against it (the bill), but I want to make sure that my points for my arguements are valid.
Zagreus sits inside your head, Zagreus lives among the dead, Zagreus sees you in your bed and eats you in your sleep.
only outlaws will have video games!
i say we make it a law not to let stupid laws pass. whos with me!?
...makes no sense. If the proponents of this law believe - as they apparently do - that virtual violence causes real violence, why on earth would they stop at protecting law enforcement officers therefrom? In my day, it was women and children that we sought to protect from violence: In fact, I thought that's what we invented police for to begin with!
Not to mention space aliens: imagine the war that might get started one day, if the first emissary of the Galactic Federation to land on Earth gets his head blown off in an FPS-inspired, xenophobic killing rampage.
Gentlemen! You can't fight in here, this is the War Room!
While it is good, some game makers will continue to even more violent and more distastful games; and issues like these will come up again.
"..the judge's finding that games are a form of protected speech like music and movies"
I agree totally with this statement. What I don't understand is why this means the law is invalid. How is this law any different than laws regarding R-rated movies? Video games are being compared more and more to movies so it follows that they should be treated more like movies.
-> Fritz
Spooooon!!!!!
What about Max Payne? There you play a COP whose day gone bad and kill "bad guys", is that OK?
+1 Funny (sarcasm)
Yeah, dancing without a permit there is illegal too, but according to the city, TAPPING YOUR FOOT is dancing.
Change is good, but not in a wallet.
Thoughtcrime. Thinkmaking a Party member an unperson without upsub is plus ungood.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
The intent of this law is to stop kiddies getting their hands on CopHunter Xtreme, right? It's not to allow parents to decide, because the State has already a priori decided that CopHunter Xtreme is bad. So, put your legislative balls where your preaching mouth is. Ban all traffic to minors in these games.
Yes, you heard me. Make it illegal to give a copy to, or allow a minor to play, CopHunter Xtreme. Ban it in the stores, ban it in the home. Give the SWAT teams a break from saving stoners from themselves, and have them kick down doors and drag Susie Homemaker screaming into the street for all to see. Bad Susie! Little Johnnie was sneaking into the basement to play his daddy's copy of CopHunter Xtreme, and you didn't stop him. Bad Susie!
Remember how we sneered at the Soviet Union for making its citizens spy on and denounce each other? How we scoffed at their culture of denying personal freedom, personal choice, and even the opportunity to accept personal responsibility.
Now we have retailers who are responsible for their customers going nutso after playing games. Tobacco companies are held accountable for the health effects of a product that the government still refuses to ban. Gun makers are sued for allowing people to uphold their Constitutionally protected rights. Bartenders are held responsible for their patrons' drunk driving. Stores are to blame for ice forming on their sidewalks. We make manufacturers pay (and pass on the bill) to the tune of $350 billion a year for not making their products idiot proof. What's next? Hey, let's go after librarians for not reporting when people take out seditious books. I mean, after USA PATRIOT we can find out anyway, so what are those spectacle wearing subversives doing trying to cover it up, huh? That's wasting valuable State resources, right there.
ACLU, get with the program. When the state creates or allows laws that make anyone responsible for the actions or potential actions of another, that's a priori infringement of their liberties right there. Lower courts aren't dealing with this. Legislatures aren't dealing with this.
Let's take it to the Supremes. Let's make it clear once and for all, that you and only you are responsible for your safety and your actions. Warranty not included, disclaimer not necessary.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
For more information on the McDonalds coffee burn, which shows that it was not your average frivolous-lawsuit-demonstrating-the-need for-tort-reform, go here.
Give life
(Personal Responsibility doesn't pay out as much as the Lawsuit Lottery(TM) or Nanny Government Peace of Mind.)
--
Power to the Peaceful
A cop who protects individual rights is a hero. A cop who violates individual rights by enforcing drug laws or the anti-violent-game law recently blocked is nothing more than a priest with a billy-club and deserves to be targetted.
If you're wondering why... think insurance. and if you want to dismiss that as a silly excuse, if you were at one of these venues where three hundred people got squished stampeding for a locked exit would you be one to blame the promoters for negligence?
Nah, you would likely be yet another libertarian calling some sleazey lawyer who's phone number you got off a TV ad.
deserve's got nothing to do with it...
The minute things started to get out of hand where they might potentialy hurt others, or more importantly themselves, the Principal and Vise Principal ( who are actually my bosses now 6 years later) went right in called them all out of class and their parents and they sat down in the auditorium and discussed why everyone thought they could potentially hurt themselves and what is making them express their problems in a such a way.
you know what happened... aside from one or two who ended up dropping out cause mommy and daddy had money they all eventually realized that what they where doing was stupid and many of them actually went to seek help.
That how schools should be, teachers for the most part but able to intervein when they see a major problem comming through and prepared to do whatever is neccisary to make things work. Yes teachers are not supposed to be parents but in my city they have to be, because more often than not they see the students more than their parents ever could because everyone is middle to lower class and I had friends who's parents worked 60 hours a week.
Now I wont play the religion card, cause even though I feel religion is a major problem in us advancing as a species, for a lot of people they need something to beleive in and religion fills that void. Likewise Im not entiarly sure that you could pin it on religion because its not just that, the attitude of people from that area is MUCH different than say my east coast attitude.
The biggest thing you have to pin it on, is morals. And its obvious in that football driven society, they are lacking when parents and teachers allow such negativity and hatred for a fellow man to exist.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."
that minors CAN AND DO have restrictions on rights??? Minors can't enter into a legally binding agreement without the consent of their parents. Minors in many places must adhere to a curfew imposed by the local government. So why can't the State legislate laws governing what minors are allowed to purchase on their own?
I don't understand what people's problem is when it comes to states giving parents another tool to police their children.
to outlaw this color scheme...
Just because you toothless English have pissed on the torch of morality doesn't mean that the rest of us have to follow you. Gun ownership is a central tenet of a moral society because it is immoral to say that a human being can't own a gun. I could be wrong but I believe that there are even Bible verses where Christ basically says the same thing. You know, Jesus Christ? That guy that you people have made your sworn enemy with your gun bans, hidden cameras, and your national health care?
Those of us in decent countries still follow His principles, and the most basic principle is the right to own and use a gun. Your ban of guns in your country has not done anything to stem the tide of violent petty crime. An uncle of mine was recently mugged and nearly beaten to death in London. Had he been armed, he could have shot the mugger and killed him.
Columbine had nothing to do with bad parenting. Columbine was caused because these kids were the social outcasts and constantly teased an harassed and insulted and degraded every day in school. Add to this the fact that we love to tell kids that there is no life beyond high school and that you are going to be this way for the rest of your life and you will be hated and made fun of the rest of your life.
Anyone in this situation will eventualy snap. I should know, I nearly was one of these kids who snapped. I was lucky to realise that I was borderline, and that if I continued to go to middle school I would have hurt myself or others. I got myself comitted.
My parents did a wonderfull job raising me, but I know damn well, that if I had wanted to shoot up the school, I could have gotten all the weapons I needed, and they would have never known a damn thing.
Perhaps Harris and Clebold familys were bad parents, but I doubt that was the only cause of this. Bad parrenting might have caused them to do it (they didn't listen when they asked for help), but the idea was in their heads long before bad parenting had something to do with it.
If you want to stop school shootings and the like, Find the pricks who harass and tease others and "educate" them on how it's wrong. Don't just tell the harassed kids that it will get better some day.
I love violent video games. They kept me from hurting someone when I was in middle school. Once school was over I could go home, load up quake 2 enable cheats and blow things to bits with the rail gun. It made me feel much better.
I live in Washington and this is a huge relief to me. I hate the idea that a kid who wants to play GTA:VC can't because he isn't hold enough. Gimmie a break?
Just last week I observed an owner of a video game shop NOT sell GTA to a 13 year old because "If I sell you this I can get in a lot of trouble." As it turns out the law wasn't even in EFFECT yet and won't be for some time.
The ignorance of people amazes me. Just because you hear about a new law on TV does NOT mean you have to follow it, yet...
This site has the original code: http://www.comics.dm.net/codetext.htm
I post this as a reminder of an event the comic book industry is still trying to recover from. If we aren't careful, this is where video games could end up.
Let me see if I have this right: It's not the problem of the parent telling john whacksoff not to hurt people without a good reason (self defense). No sir it has to be video games. Humans are violent by nature (Fact: in all of humans history the longest continued period of peace was about 3 years). The question is: How do humans decide to express their violent programing in a HEALTHY way. Well let me tell you: It aint running around with guns (despite what them people from Las Angles California US will tell you). No sir nor is it beeting someone to a pulp despite what Titan Sports's WWF says. No it has to be lets wach violent video game and hurt eachother. Has it accord to parents part of the human condition is at least a little violence? This MUST rest on the shoulder of parents to explain to kids: You are vioelent by nature, this is a list of how to express it, this is a list of how not to.
How about less time law-making, more time talking to your children?
Word Axis
Yes sir we've got trouble, ....DANCING!
right here in Indiani City,
With a capital T that rhymes with D
and that stands for...
Life immitates art far too often.
--- I wish I could hear the soundtrack to my life. That way I'd know when to duck.
Look, I hate censorship as much as anyone. I think that, as an adult, I have the right to choose what I put into the brain and my body. Children, on the other hand, are protected until such a time as they are deemed able by society to make choices. We don't let 5 year olds watch porn. Junior High kids can't buy Hustler. High School kids can't get into the XXX movie theater. Why is keeping GTA - Vice City or the topless BMX game out of the hands of a 7 year old such a big deal? How is that any different than keeping them out R rated (and above) movies? We should be doing this. We've already decided that these things are not fit for children in other media formats (print, TV, film, etc.). If they aren't fit for children in a static print format or moving pictures, they certainly aren't fit for children in an interactive paticipatory format! Example - Blockbuster rents movies and games. My 11 year old nephew can can't rent an R rated movie there, but he can rent a game like Panty Raider????? Where's the sense in that. 2 cents, Queen B
HDGary secures my bank
After watching "bowling for columbine"
and see'ing that kids in other countries play the same games, watch the same movies, listen to the same music, But the murder rates are much lower.
The one thing that was different between the US and the other countries (is not gun control) is that the news doesnt report so much woe and grief.
thats pretty much the main difference. What really bugs me is so many people want to control guns, but in canada about half of the people that are old enough to own a gun, do, and the murder rate is freakishly low.
We have seen that living things are too improbable and too beautifully "designed" to have come into existence by chance.
"Law enforcement officials?" I guess that would include violence against the Gestapo (hell, it's in their name: the 'stapo' part stands for state police).
"I'm sure i'll be modded down but.." = Overrated
I think the point to remember is that the age they want to restrict them to is when minds are IMPRESSIONABLE. Up until around 18 any human mind is still developing, what it results in is the culmination of everything it has experienced until then. Why is such a bad thing that a child is not given violent games to play until he/she actually understands them?
"Guns _don't_ kill people! Bullets do! Guns just get then going really, really fast!" -That's my Bush
NightWulf if you're still following this thread, please reply. If you don't believe games affect real-world violence, than why do you believe in any age restriction at all? (same for sexual content)..
I ask not to be a smartass I am genuinely interested as I have no definte opinion on the issue and want more POVs.
email:andreworld@NOSPAMhotmail.com
BTW I am 19, and as far as I can tell, quite a ways from having kids, so something along the line of 'think of if it was your own children' doesn't really sync up for me.
how do you NOT know your kid has a gun, you have to be a moron to not check up on them.
Oh, and how are you going to find that out? Go through their room every night? Strip search them before they leave the house and after they come home every day? Even if you do all of those things, there's no guarantee that a child couldn't hide something in the garage or attic.
Keeping tabs on every second of a kids life is just as bad parenting as letting them do whatever they want.
What would actually be better is to not have guns in your house PERIOD, cause at least around here (NY area) you have plenty of ways to keep a gun if your a hunter and not have to have it enter your house (gun clubs, lockers at shooting ranges for guns etc.) I know its a much different culture out there from the east, but still after so many gun attacks taking place in middle america, I would think people might see the point already.
"Slashdot, where telling the truth is overrated but lying is insightful."