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."
"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.
Another Victory for us parents who want to raise our kids without endless regulations and laws. It is my job to make sure my son does not have access to games I think are not suitable for him, not the store. So far this has worked out quite well.
Well done legislators!!
"Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, make violent revolution inevitable" - JFK
I think the reason that video game violence gets more attention than other media violence is because of the way we intereact with video games. Or rather, that we do interact with them, rather than passively watching. A parent concerned about their child and violence will probably be less concerned about their child watching a person murdered in cold blood than about their child actually performing the murder in cold blood, albeit in a virtual sense. In video games, the player is not just watching the violence, but participating. This makes games all the more threatening to folks who feel violent media is a danger. Thus, laws against video game violence get more press than laws against movie or television violence.
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.
It's not, really, and a quick check on Google will find that Leeland Yee is backed by a couple of special interests himself, in areas where much of the "what about the children?" and "violent media is corrupting our youth" comes from in the first place.
If lobbying groups working on behalf of the video game industry were responsible for this bill's failure, then it's probably more a story of one lobby against another than they'd like it to appear. On the other hand, if the failure was not the result of some lobby, it makes the whole comment that much more of a joke.
-PainKilleR-[CE]