Parents Ask If Videogame Rating Bill Necessary?

Thanks to the Zanesville Times-Recorder for its article discussing why some parents are questioning recent moves to legislate on the availability of violent videogames to minors. John Sellars, a local Ohio parent, says of his children: "I watch what they play and I decide what they play. I don't think it should be up to the lawmakers to decide, it should be up to the parents." A local videogame store owner is also quoted as arguing: "The game manufacturers rate each game, like they do movies, and parents will tell their children 'No, that game's not for you'", in a relatively rare counterpoint to recent violent gaming-related legislation attempts.

Comments

The Real Question

[superyooser]

Parents should be asking if videogames are necessary.

Re:I thought I felt a draft...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Who would expect a Mario game to involve sex, drugs, and grotesque amounts of gore?"

I anxiously await the release of "Mario & Luigi: The Brooklyn Years" and "Koopa Syndicate: Streets of Mushroom Kingdom" :)

Re:Lack of Understanding ...

[Rick the Red]

I don't need a "M" rating on the box to tell me games like Max Payne and Halo are not for kids - the cover art tells me that. Same with "NC-17" movies. When an "E" rating means it may not be suitable for kids, so I have to preview it anyway, it's worthless to me as a parent.

OK, while we're going down this path, I have a further rant: What's the point of the TV ratings system and the so-called "V chip" if news and ads are not rated? I've seen ads for TV shows I don't want my kids to watch (shows that are on after 9:00 because they are not for kids) running during the so-called "family" hour -- ads complete with violence and sex. But they're ads, so they're not blocked.

Frankly, I'm not interested in any rating system that isn't so finely grained that I can tell the TV to block Jerry Falwell and allow Dr. Ruth. Hell, I'd pay $1000 for a device that insured I'd never have to see Jerry Falwell again!