Slashdot Mirror
California Violent Gaming Bills Fail To Advance
Thanks to Reuters/Yahoo for its article discussing the failure to progress of two California violent videogame bills, since they "failed to clear a committee of California's state Assembly, killing them for 2004 unless the committee changes its mind." However, "One bill, which would expand the definition of 'harmful matter to children' to include certain types of violent games, received a favorable 5-1 vote, while the second, regulating how some games are displayed in stores, got a 3-1 vote" - but "both needed 7 votes in favor to be approved." Bill sponsor Leland Yee has released a statement claiming: "I am deeply disturbed that money ruled the day here in Sacramento... Rather than protecting our children and giving our parents a tool to help raise healthy kids, the multi-billion dollar entertainment industry was allowed to shoot down necessary legislation."
How is this any different from other special interest groups? We see laws shot down by the movie industry, by the NRA, by Grandmothers Against Rubber Sheets, and no one says anything at all.
When the law concerns video games, however, it's "a tool to raise healthy kids" and "necessary legislation," and the media makes a big deal about the bill's failure to pass?
Heck, as far as I know, the video game industry wasn't even fighting the law. I haven't heard any stories about Nintendo and Microsoft sending lobbyists to the California legislature to tell people about the joys of gaming.
Seems a bit unfair to me...
Goo goo g'joob.
"Retailers would have also been responsible for clearly displaying signs explaining the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB) ratings system."
Aren't they pretty self-explanatory already?
"In fact, the video game industry's own representative admitted she would not allow her child to play the games that the legislation targeted." (Leland Yee)
That shows that a *parent* already is deciding what to let her kids play. Isn't it supposed to be the parent who has the power to decide? If so, then what useful purpose does the legislation serve? If the legislature is hoping that lazy parents will somehow be "empowered" by the legislation, I think they'll be disappointed by the results. Then again, I suppose they can continue to use parental laziness to justify further legislation.
This makes it more obvious than the entire move was just a political ad. Im afraid money has won moral today, vote for me anyway! yeah right
Ok muddy issues aside, if you are an actual conscerned parent heres a fact for you: The M rating is the equivalent of the R rating in movies and just like in movies There are a lot of titles that dont really desserve the rating and they are quite a few that actually desserve an stronger rating like A (Nc-18 X Adult only) rating (manhunt, gta3 in some cases , the suffering, doom 3) want to know which one is which? Easy! stick around and watch your kids playing! stablish as a rule that all games must be watched by the entire family (or at least by you), before you decide if is ok for them to play or buy. (if possible rent before you buy) problem solved! Read the manual, watch the game for at least half an hour, if after that theres something you find suspicious (the manual mentions hookers but you havent seen any) ask the store clerk they ussually know which games are really violent and which ones are not. EASY as that! You are the one who provides your kids money for buying games and therefore you are in charge of what they have, not CNN not the government YOU!
Go ahead MOD my day!
More opinions here