Slashdot Mirror
ID Required to Purchase Games
CsiDano writes "The Ontario goverment has finally taken action and made a tangible move to make it harder for kids to acquire violent video games by requiring an ID to be presented with all game purchases." From the article: "Normally, only feature films would carry an R rating in Ontario. But Consumer Minister Jim Watson says it's time game retailers played by the same rules. They'll face penalties for letting kids under the age of 18 access adult games. Ontario is not alone in its crackdown. Manitoba and Nova Scotia have also taken steps to make it harder for minors to access violent video games."
do this kin of thing voluntarily... I had to show my driver's license to purchase Quake3 off of WalMart's $10 rack about 8 months ago...
Actio personalis moritur cum persona. (Dead men don't sue)
...I remember being in line for Halo2 on November 8th at my local EB, and the line outside kept getting smaller as they prevented the kids from entering. It was great. ^_^
No really though, it's a good law, and i'm glad it's in place... The stores around here (Richmond Hill, in southern ontario) are doing a fine job *actually enforcing the law*, which surprised me.
Newsie, Moderator, www.tauniverse.com
If I found my kids playing the new GTA I'd be pissed. It's my responsibility to know what my kids play, but i also want to know game shops aren't selling stuff to my kids behind my back.
Some of these games are developed for an adult audience. Developers should then be confined to sell them to an adult audience. If Rock Star wants to develop for kids, then they can sell to kids.
...being put in the /. category of "Censorship"?
After all, the games aren't banned from publication, or from purchase by adults.
I take second place to no one on civili liberties issues, but let's not waste our thunder on fighting for "license" in the name of "liberty".
This is no more censorship than preventing small children from accessing porn.
Just you wait, some hapless worker at a games store will be at the business end of an Angry parent with a screaming kid who wants to buy Halo 2 with a note from mom or dad saying "Please let Billy buy this game." I had this issue once as well. A kid wanted to rent a game, I said no. He left, called his mother who then called the store saying it was alright that he get this game (M rated game, lots of fun and violence etc.) I told her no, that wasn't acceptable. She freaks out on me till I ask her if she calls the corner store to let her son buy her smokes? Or does she call the liquor store to let her son buy her booze? It was fun, but till the parents realize what is going on, we'll see.
the WHOLE idea behind the rating system was to make games MORE violent and MORE adult for people who were older and could understand what they are playing.
i would not let a kid play GTA:SA, nor would i let my kid smoke or drink. GTA:SA is for adults, no question.
is it bad for you? No. But just because something is not bad for you, does not mean that you should have it without question.
bottom line is, it all comes down to lazy parents. plain and simple.
The ESRB also, I just remembered, has their own method of dishing out fines as well, though in their case, it's to publishers who misuse the ESRB rating system. As a few examples:
If a publisher advertises a T, M, or AO game to another market - i.e. if they show GTA as composed mainly of crackers and sunshine, where you can drive around a lush city environment and interact with many diverse persons, as a wonderful learning experience for kids, it's a $10,000 fine every time. If it is shown they WILLFULLY do so (i.e. if they should have obviously known they were violating the rule), it's ANOTHER $10,000. That being said, this fine would encompass the entire marketing campaign, not every individual ad. Fair enough.
Less-major-but-major infractions include not displaying a rating icon, displaying a rating icon that has not been officially assigned, failing to disclose content ('thanks for the T rating, but I forgot to mention our game has graphic nudity') face corrective action on the first infraction within a 12-month period (starting on the date of the first infraction), then a $5000 fine, then a $10,000 fine.
So for anyone who is going to say 'yeah, but who says publishers are going to follow the ESRB guidelines?' or 'but what if they lie?' - penalties can be had. Eventually, they could face a situation where the ESRB refuses to rate their games.
Either way, if a game's packaging violated the ESRB guidelines (if it lied, was incorrect, or was missing the rating, for example), and judging from the other issues that arose at EB, I would imagine most retailers wouldn't display or sell the product until they got replacement product or packaging. It's big stuff.
The law is fine. I'll agree with it, sure. Don't let children under the age buy a game that someone has determined is unsuitable for them.
Most children will get their parents to buy the game anyways, especially since most children don't have the $60-$90 for the game in the first place. This law is different from the law preventing children getting into R rated movies, since there is usually someone checking ID at the door. This law is different than the law preventing children from buying alcohol, as it's illegal for them to have it (or illegal to buy it for them, or give it to them).
I mean, whatever. They're under the legal age, so it's not like this is one of those laws that could get out of control and somehow prevent me from buying video games. Or is it? The trouble with Ontario is it's lack of photo ID. You can't use the government-issued photo ID health card, and if you were born here, and don't drive, you don't have any photo ID.
It's not uncommon for 18, 19, or 20-somethings to not have a driver's license.
As someone who rarely gets carded, except in expected places such as the casino or liqor store (even this is pretty rare, and The Beer Store has never, ever carded me), it bothered me when I was carded buying GTA:SA. I looked at the clearly not of age girl at EB requesting of me, the clearly of age person for ID. She told me they were IDing everyone (which, as I then observed, they were).
The obvious joke was when children came in with a parent, ran to the shelf, grabbed the game, handed it to the parent, and then the parent got carded. What's the use, at this point?
I hope that made the parent take a look at what they were buying for their kid. Things like that should make the parents ask why & them check out the game before letting the kid have it.
Smile - things could get worst
I've seen stores ask for ID, and refuse to sell games to kids in the UK, albeit on an erratic basis. Certainly, if you're under-age and want to buy an 18-certificate game in the UK, your best bet is to go to a town-centre store on a Saturday afternoon, when the crowds are at their thickest and the queues at their longest. I've never seen somebody IDed when the store is heaving and the staff run off their feet. However, I've seen staff ask for ID and refuse to sell games quite a few times, when the shop hasn't been so busy. I've also seen staff speak up in cases where it's obvious that a clueless parent has been trying to buy a game for their child that might not be suitable (I've seen this twice with GTA: San Andreas). They don't refuse to sell the game in these cases... they just warn the parent. Most of the time, the parent puts the game back on the shelf.
I don't have any particular problem with this. Moreover, I can't really see why this is categorised as "your rights online". In no way does this infringe on the right of adults to spend their money as they choose. If parents think their kids should be able to play any game, then fine, the parents can buy the game. If parents think some games are unsuitable, they can have confidence that stores won't undermine them.
Ever since the Carmageddon fiasco (for which we must all be eternally grateful), the BBFC hasn't been able to get up the nerve to ban any game outright in the UK. When I look at the situation elsewhere in Europe, particularly Germany, I feel very, very glad that I live here. The USA seems to be similarly fortunate. I think that having some age controls on games is a very small price to pay for this.
Sadly in some American cities the kid could be 5 or 6 and their parent still wouldn't be old enough to buy the game.
The thing about raising kids properly is that it doesn't happen just by osmosis or whatever. Parents should censor certain things from their children; a game like GTA or Manhunt, where the player does things that many find morally obscene, would not be good for children. "Good parenting" doesn't "prevent kids from being influenced" by the game; good parenting is preventing children from getting rewarded (by the game) for doing things that are morally objectionable.
Once your kid has been properly raised, to understand right and wrong, and internalize the morals you wish to impose, then your kid will be ready to play a game such as this. But until that time, you HAVE to censor such a game, or else the kid WILL be influenced by it. It's up to the parent to decide when the kid is ready, not the video game store. So that's why we need such a law.
Society routinely protects children from things they are not ready for. We have child-labour laws. We have laws preventing kids from buying cigarettes or liquor. Did you know that (in Ontario) it's legal to give your children wine at dinner? Even though they can't drink wine in any other circumstance? As a parent, you need to know if your children will be able to drink responsibly; if they can't, you shouldn't give them the wine. That's parenting.
Anyway, as to whether or not the government should be in the business of enforcing morals, the problem is that it's nearly impossible for parents to totally protect their kids from the "evils" of society. In many cases, the government is able to impose some rules that help protect children without infringing on adults rights and privileges. Why SHOULDN'T the government help out in that case?
You contradict yourself: I can understand for things like cigerettes and alcohol, but for a fuckin' game with some fake pixilated violence, Come On! Leave it up to the individuals themselves and the individuals parents and ONLY THE PARENTS, when it comes to their children. This law gives me the power as a parent to keep an eye on my kids better. It does not stop any kid from buying anything. To disect your first point: I'd appreciate it if you did not make those judgements for MY kids. If you want to have your own and allow them access to those games, go for it. I will not criticize you for it. There are many games on the 'Mature' list that I would allow my kids to see. That is my right (and responsibility). There are many games on the 'Mature' list that I would NOT allow my kids to see. This is my right (and responsibility).
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year