Slashdot Mirror
Illinois Gov. Seeks Violent Video Game Ban
Foobar_Zen writes "Gov. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois has apparently decided to build on past "wins". He seeks to impose legislation that will prohibit the distribution, sale, rental and availability of mature video games to children younger than 18. Breaking of this law would be punishable by up to one year in prison or a $5,000 fine." From the article: "The Illinois Retail Merchants Association blasted the governor's proposal as a way for retailers to become "the violence and sensitivity police for the state of Illinois." Update: 12/16 21:14 GMT by Z : Lum's take on this over at Broken Toys is excellent.
I'd like to see how this is handled if some kid downloads America's Army...
I'll turn into a supernova and burn up everything. Well I'll turn into a black little hole and you'll turn into string.
Nothing makes Religious Right voters happier than a proposal to censor things.
I will kill you
If I, as a parent, decide that my under-18 child is fit to play the game, buy it (since the store can't sell it or rent it to him/her) and give it to him/her, am I breaking the law?
Who are they going to procecute if someone plays one of those *bad* games online where you don't even install it.
Won't anyone think of the children?
Officer Tempenny....he'll take care of this
It's time to vote a new moron out...
~S
... than doing the job of parents?
I eat crayons
...makes me want to punch someone in the nose.
Pennsylvania already has this "law" in place. They card people who look under 18 when they buy R rated movies or "M" rated video games. Since I was always able to buy them (turned 18 before the legislation), it hasn't been a problem, but if you're underage, it's easy to get them.
Isnt Ban and Not selling to 17and under to different things? I'm all for a 10yr old not buying/renting a Mature game, just like they shouldnt be buying/renting a R movie. Chris
"Blasted"? Poor choise of words, IRMA.
I guess we know who's next on the Governor's world-o'-peace-love-and-fluffy-bunnies-or-else hitlist.
The Governor of Illinois has been the victim of a carjacking.
The Governor's car has been stopped by a young male who walked fearlessly in front of the car, flipped the governor off, pulled him out of the car, and muttered "don't blame me, blame society" as he drove away.
I don;t see the problem with this legislation. It's just like the R rating at theaters, or the fact that kids can't buy tobacco until 18, or beer until 21. I certainly woulnd't want my kids to (at age 9) walk into a store and buy GTA 8: Be a Porn Star. When he's 18, or I decide to buy it for him.. fine.
-Guns kill people like spoons made Rosie O'Donnell fat-
Please stop using the word Mature.
The games are adult oriented, but they are not Mature. I see no maturity in DOA Volleyball.
Kids don't buy games, they warez them. This is a broken solution to a problem that doesn't exist.
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
"We already place limits on alcohol, tobacco, even adult movies. It's just logical that video games, which are so heavily marketed to young kids but many of which contain adult images, should not be available to young people or to minors," Ottenhoff said.
Ok, I see the connection with adult movies (and I'm talking about porn, not R rated movies) but I cannot see how they think this can cross over into alcohol and tobacco territory!
Alcohol and tobacco are PHYSICALLY HARMFUL. You can die from alcohol and tobacco. You *cannot* die from abuse of video games... Explicit or otherwise.
On a personal note: Yes, video games showing full frontal nudity or realistic depictions of death (and when I say this I mean watching actual video clips of people being tortured, decapitated, etc) should be looked into as we do with movies... But video games showing a completely unrealistic depiction of human characters (as real as video games are looking they are still not 100% on) in a fantasy world should be treated as such.
I thought that as we matured as a society that this type of conservative bullshit would cease. Perhaps we are regressing?
In communist Illinois, Duke Nukem Forevers YOU!
the poster used a very misleading title. he is not banning violent video games. he just wants to give some guys an NC-17 rating. regardless if you agree or not, don't post an inacurrate and a flametory title.
The Illinois Retail Merchants Association blasted the governor's proposal as a way for retailers to become "the violence and sensitivity police for the state of Illinois
Maybe it's not just the kids who are being affected...
I don't see anything wrong with requiring a consumer to be 18 to purchase a game marked mature. I think it's a good idea to require proof of age when purchasing games marked AO or Mature by the ERSB.
If anything, this puts responsibility back onto the parents. You can't blame you're kid shooting someone on video games if the parents have to buy them for them.
Breaking of this law would be punishable by up to one year in prison or a $5,000 fine.
So, how big is the penalty for kids going to a NC-17 rated movie or buying hardcore pr0n?
Why is one so much bigger than the other?
And let the kids get out and get some fresh air.. It wont prevent psychopaths go out and kill people, but at least he wont get to kill a whole generation just by walking into a computer-cafe :)
Absolutely ridiculous the way video games are the scapegoat for this generation.
Remember Judas Priest , Ozzy, et al being sued back in the 80s because their satanic lyrics caused all of the problems with young kids today?
Remember when it was Dungeons and Dragons?
The people are idiots though, if the movie and recording industries can police themselves (MPAA ratings / "explicit lyrics" stickers), whats the problem with the (incredibly coherent) ESRB rating system?
And once again, games are created for and marketed to adults, primarily 18-40 year old males. Just go google for any statistics (Nielson, etc) on who plays/buys games if you dont believe me.
The "think about the children" argument is a red herring. This is all about appeasing Hollywood by helping eliminate the competition. Pure pork. And politicians think it's win-win because it'll get them a lot of "cranky old bitch" votes.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Is there actually any conclusive proof that violent video games lead to problems in kids?
I am suprised these laws don't already exsist. When I was young, it was damn hard to find a playboy or anything fun.
I think what they should try and eliminate is the violence in video games. There have been studies in universities which shows links between playing video games and being violent. Humans learn by watching, and do we really want young kids learning from video games?
And I expect some will say "It must be the parents who decide what their kids can do". To them I would say, check out the lower middle class where both parents work, and the kid has nothing but a tv set and playstation.
Rosco: "If brains were gunpowder, Enos couldn't blow his nose."
I'd like to see a specific definition of "mature game".
The /. one that is. Ban? What?
Hello, how is this different than R-rated movies today? Mature games are intended for a mature audience and you better believe we shouldn't have 8 year olds playing GTA3 unless their parents approve of it and buy it for them.
What's the crazy backlash to this? It's absolutely sound to set up laws prohibiting sales of these games to minors (just as it prohibits sales of pr0n to minors).
If parents choose that their kids are mature enough for said games then they'll go and buy it for their kids. If not, then kids won't be playing games that they likely aren't ready for.
-Nic
what's the problem with that? They do the same thing at movie theaters, restricting anyone under 17 not accompanied by parent to see R rated movies. I don't see how not selling games rated M to kids under 18 is an issue. Sure the retailers are gonna bitch, they would be losing a small amount of business. How many kids will then wait outside a gamestore and ask an 18 yo to get them cigare - um a game? It is a good idea, but don't know how well it will work . . .
This is not banning violent video games. Repeat after me, this is not a ban on violent video games. The games are still legal, they can still be bought and sold, this is not censorship to repress violent video games. This is a prohibition on selling them to minors. This is just like having minimum age requirements on buying alchohol and tobacco products or seeing R rated movies. They're proposing a fine for merchants who sell something to minors that the minors are not supposed to have.
This is not a ban.
Didn't some federal judge already shoot down a similar law in another state recently as unconstitutional and discriminatory?
- Just my $0.02, take with a grain of salt, your mileage may vary.
"We already place limits on alcohol, tobacco, even adult movies. It's just logical that video games, which are so heavily marketed to young kids but many of which contain adult images, should not be available to young people or to minors," Ottenhoff said.
Methinks he subscribes to different logic than I.
The answer, of course, is to do nothing - allow the Invisible Hand of the Market to continue to do its work, driven by parents' enforcements of what little Johnny can and can't buy.
-ZOD-
Treat them the same as if the same scenes were in a similarly-themed movie for sale or rent.
If your state allows anyone to buy Clockwork Orange - Uncut, or Debbie Does Everybody, then treat games the same way. If your state has age restrictions on the movies, then do the same for similar games.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
There's a link to a blog about how this guy is Satan's brother-in-law, and then the submitter accuses him of trying to "impose legislation".
At least here in the South[1], our state governor doesn't "impose" legislation on us. He tries to get it into legislature to vote on, and our legislature is composed of _elected_ officials. I've heard it's a similar story up north. I don't know why the submitter has a hard-on for disparaging his governor, but it puts his entire summary of the issue into doubt, since he's so obviously biased.
Leave out the personal attacks, guys.
-Erwos
[1] OK, we're not really culturally part of "The South", but Maryland _is_ below the Mason-Dixon line.
Plausible conjecture should not be misrepresented as proof positive.
Isn't the idea behind the rating system is that minors would need parental consent to purchase and play the games? The reason that there isn't more governmental regulation of movie ticket sales and DVD sales and rentals is because the industries themselves have shown due dilligence about enforcing their rating systems.
If the gaming rating systems is perceived to be a joke, the government WILL step in.
Like my comments? Try my podcast: http://www.baldmove.com
NY Times had an article today about how the game ratings are useless. Parents buy the games regardless of the ratings.
My stock micro-rant on this topic is mostly just a quotation.
- Now that eighteen-year-olds have the right to vote, it is obvious that they must be allowed the freedom to form their political views on the basis of uncensored speech before they turn eighteen, so that their minds are not a blank when they first exercise the franchise. And since an eighteen-year-old's right to vote is a right personal to him rather than a right to be exercised on his behalf by his parents, the right of parents to enlist the aid of the state to shield their children from ideas of which the parents disapprove cannot be plenary either. People are unlikely to become well- functioning, independent-minded adults and responsible citizens if they are raised in an intellectual bubble.
Any elected government, be it Democracy, or Representative Republic, or otherwise, owes it to their constituents to allow unfettered access to ideas and information, praiseworthy or critical. To deny a citizen the right to know their own world is to deny them identity.--American Amusement Machine Assoc. v. Kendrick No. 00-3643 (7th Cir., March 23, 2001)
[
So now you can work in a slaughter house at age 15 but it's illegal to buy video games depicting the killing of animals until age 18.
Do they seek a ban on violent video games?
Or do they seek to violently ban video games?
I hope they clear that up before issuing orders to law enforcement.
Quantum materiae materietur marmota monax si marmota monax materiam possit materiari?
Don't the neoconservatives understand that today's violent youth did not become violent from playing a couple of violent video games? Look at China. Its government outright bans pornography and severely restricts violent video games. Yet, Chinese youth are morally bankrupt -- supporting human trafficking, supporting the rape of Tibet, etc.
When the neoconservatives wake up and support minimum standards of living for even the poorest of the poor, then there will be a sharp drop in violence among youth. Look at Europe. It has minimum standards, and violence is a fraction of what it is in the Colonies.
Our fair governor has done some worthwhile things since taking office, but more often than not he doesn't. He likes these safe pet causes, and everyone who's never played a video game knows they're dangerous. So Blago gets to look like he cares about youth, and those who might pitch a fit about it are too young to vote.
What these people must realize is that many violent videogames e.g. WWII games are based on the real world, even if just for entertainment's sake. GTA reflects high crimes in a fictional city that highly resembles some of the US ones. Of course, these aren't meant to be taken AS fact and never really are. One of the major misconceptions about violent videogames is that reality is based on them and they have an overwhelming influence on children over reality, but this just isn't true. The first violent game I remember playing was Doom, but that didn't make me want to go out and shoot people. Videogames are based on reality, not the other way around
Hey, you've got to love a state where the Republican candidate for the Senate gets in a sex scandal with his own wife! (That'd be Seven of Nine, by the way, for those unfamiliar with the story.)
What I'm listening to now on Pandora...
As a resident of the Chicago area, I have to say, it seems like Blagojevich is out to destroy business in Illinois. First raising the tolls for truck drivers, and now he's about to cripple the video game business in Illinois!
This guy has had tons of static from the Illinois Congress regarding many issues such as passing the budget and getting medicine from Canada! I hope they fight him tooth and nail on this one too.
Plus, this will hurt more than just video game retailers. What about arcades? Is he just going to put an age limit on who can get in there because of game violence? Most of the people in arcades are under the age of 18 anyways.
IGB: More fun than eating oatmeal!
(During muder trial)
Phillip: So in summation: find Terrance innocent....or else he'll kill you!
(Jury gasps)
Phillip: Just kidding! Daaaahahahahaha!
It would be cool if it didn't suck.
Please explain to me how this is a ban. I'll still be able to go to the store and purchase GTA: San Andreas, even for my 9 year old son if I like, yes?
Innmate #1: Agrevated Assult on a police officer. Lawyer says I'll be out in 9 months. You?
Innmate #2: Doin 12 straight for selling Halo to a 17 year old. Apparently, he was planning a lan party.
Somebody tell me why we would ever need to put people in prision over this?
Twelve year old kids should not be renting, buying or playing games like GTA or Manhunter.
Anyone remember Sheriff Nick Navarro? Two Live Crew, Citizens of Florida, and The United States Supreme Court certainly remember. He reduced crime significantly by arresting record store owners who dared sell that filth as well as club owners who dared book the Two Live Crew!!! It's Your Birthday... It's Your Birthday... It's Your Birthday!!! Gov. Rod Blagojevich of Illinois has apparently decided to run for sheriff!
I think it's a good idea to require proof of age when purchasing games marked AO or Mature by the ERSB.
Are there really any games rated AO? They seem to be far more scarce than NC-17 films...
I think one guy logged 48 straight hours in a Net Cafe before falling dead in a bathroom. I think he forgot to eat or something.
God spoke to me.
It seems to me that this "mandate" by a 3.5 million vote victory for Bush has translated into the beginnings of Neo-fascism by the right. While this article is scary, it's no where near as bad as this one.
, 11 710,1369643,00.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/arts/features/story/0
We're on the wrong track in this country. First and foremost, no president ever recieves a "mandate" of any sorts, let alone when he wins by a fairly small margin (we're talking 3%, not 30%). A president is elected to work for the will of the people, not elected and then given carte blanche to do what he wants based on the theory that "since he won, that means the people want him to do whatever he wants".
Right now gays of today are becoming the Jews of 1930s Germany. Their rights are slowly being taken away by the government doing subtle stuff like banning gay marriage, promoting heterosexuality, denouncing homosexuality, and refusing the promote anything that has a "gay" theme to it (read the article I mentioned above).
Since people seem to not have a problem with the early steps of persecution of gays, the net is ever-widening to encompass more people the government deems "threatening". Also up on the chopping block are the 'immoral' (FCC Gestapo-esque policing of the media and legislation such as this article).
Normally, this is when I say "wake up and get active", but voting democrat for the next 10-15 years is pretty much just electing a Republican bitch. You could vote for another party, but indepenants won't work until influential (read: the rich) people start thinking that. I could say "we need to get out there and fight for OUR country", but then you'd simply be labeled as either 'unpatriotic' for not mindlessly following our leadership, or worse yet, a 'terrorist'.
So in other words, we're fucked.
I don't see a problem, per se, with limiting sales and rentals of M rated games to children under 17, as the "M" rating is equivalent to an "R" for a motion picture. But, I think that a year in jail for renting a kid a copy of the new Prince of Persia game is a bit harsh. That said, there is no way that this law, even if it passes, will get past the courts, since it's so poorly written. Here's why: In Criminal Law there are what is known as "Strict Liability Statutes". These statutes are written to basically regulate the flow of traffic, commerce, and modern issues that were introduced after most of the common law was already laid down. See, most actual crimes require an act, and a criminal state of mind. The Strict Liability Statutes are the exception - they require only an act. This law is a Strict Liability Statute. The courts have said on numerous occassions, that if a piece of legislation is going to get rid of the mens rea (criminal mind) component of a crime, that piece of legislation needs to have a very minor punishment (usually a small to moderate fine) that will attach no "stigma" to the one violating it. Well, a year in jail is a pretty major "stigma" to have to bear. Dumbass legislators have, on many occassions, tried to pass these Strict Liability Statutes with long jail sentences, and almost always, they've been overturned. This bill is doomed before it's even signed.
Damn, and I had 'em 5 minutes ago! That'll teach me to use my mod points up so fast! :-(
I tried for 5 years to come up with a clever sig...only to realize that I am not clever.
In the 80s, it was eeeevil Rock Music and Rock Music Videos!
(to get the reference, click "Frank Zappa on Crossfire")
The fundamental issue remains the same: Who decides? Who controls what we see/hear/think/do?
There will always be some lowbrow who insists that they should decide, they should control. The sad part is often those same lowbrows get elected/appointed to public office.
Yeah, that's a brilliant plan.
Maybe they're weeding out the compitition for EA?
If you want to stop the regulation of the gaming industry and you live in Illinois, then please, look up and write your representatives. Let them know who you are and what you believe.
r esscrit.asp
http://www.elections.state.il.us/dls/pages/DLSAdd
Don't complain if you don't plan on acting.
This is not a perception that many people are prepared to accept. A recent survey revealed that while eight out of ten adults could identify three or more Top 40 rap musicians by their photographs and four out of ten knew the relatively obscure fact that chopsticks were actually invented by immigrants in American mining communities in the 1800s as a way of differentiating their restaurants, only three in ten understand and properly apply the rating system for video games to their children.
If you accept the premise that video games, like other media, have some influence on the people that enjoy them it is a simple step to recognize the need to limit the access to those who are least likely to experience harm from it. Perhaps violent games need to be moved behind the counter, or only sold in adult-only forums (such as online stores that accept only checks/credit cards). Or maybe the answer is simpler -- make the games compatible with the V-Chip systems already present in our television sets.
Try not. Do or do not, there is no try.
-- Dr. Spock, stardate 2822-3.
....
Boy who cried wolf, meet gamers who cried censorship.
Where the game is totally unplayable for the first month?
There is positives to be said for Funcom though, they later offered me all their expansion sets if I'd get back to playing with them. I declined, but its nice of them to be a good company.
God spoke to me.
"The answer, of course, is to do nothing - allow the Invisible Hand of the Market to continue to do its work,
The invisible hand of the market would have 16 year olds consuming vast quantities of hard liquor and probably driving around afterwards. Not that this doesn't happen anyway but imagine if you weren't impeded by the need a fake id as a kid, I probably wouldn't even be here.
What if Digg added local news and a Slashdot inspired comment karma system? ---
http://houndwire.com
Does that mean I'd be in trouble for letting my kids play a game that some old lady decided was too "violent"?
Ratings aside, I play the games and make the decision on whether my kids should be playing it.
There are M rated games that my 10 year old likes that I have no problem with him playing (Dead or Alive, Mortal Kombat series), and some that I do (GTA). It's more about language and content than violence to me, and so far as I care, it's my decision.
I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
Retailers are not supposed to sell them to people under 17 but have been blamed for lax enforcement.
So make them enforce what's already there. Why waste the people's money creating more confusion. Is there the same kind of law in the books for purchasing or buying a ticket to a movie? I wouldn't complain if a current law were extended to include video games and other media purchased from a store.
The release states that the two proposed bills (one for violence, one for sex) will ban "the distribution, sale, rental and availability of violent video games to children younger than 18" [emphasis mine]. Are they going to charge parents who don't keep their "M"-rated games in locked gun-cabinet-style safes with making these games available to minors?
I can say that I could see one of my kids being able to handle violent games, and the other not. How I enforce that, I have no idea.
In general, though, I am well against government taking away parental responsibility.
Jerry
http://www.syslog.org/
Uummm.. Can you say practicaly unenforcable? The only way anyone is gonna get fined is by a kid buying the game, a parent getting pissed and then wrongfully placing the blame on the retailer instead of the kid. Just take the game away! Not everything is someone else's fault!
What is your penile percentile?
1. Knock down the door of a meth lab and charge in to who knows what?
2. Bust up an illegal dice game behind a convenience store and spend the rest of the night processing prisoners?
3. Respond to the little old lady who says the guy next door is smoking pot on his back porch?
4. Arrest 2 kids and a GameStop clerk for a transaction involving GTA III?
5. Roust some hookers and get a free blow job?
Meth dealers have guns and paranoia, but pot smokers usually bongs instead of bullets. Apply the same logic to the other examples, you can stay pretty busy locking up people for victimless crimes, stand tall on a "law and order" platform and not get your ass shot off when you knock on a heroin dealers door.
Now apply this to lawyers, what's more fun and profitable....
1. Trying to explain that Brutus the Biker is not a rogue drug dealer but a misunderstood chemist who "accidentally" created a profitable batch of Crytal Meth?
2. Defend a 16 year old who got caught with a black market copy of Postal 2?
3. Do anything besides Satan's evil bidding because you are a scum sucking lawyer?
See, just a bunch of gestures, everyone looks busy, the prison system and lawyers keep the cash machine churning and we lock up more citizens and charge more people with nuiscance (sp?) crimes than almost any other country in the world.
Time to move to Europe. I've been giving this serious thought now for a couple of years. I've done so much research on this, visited my target area, found a company that is willing to hire me should I move, and all the requisite background. Europeans tend to enjoy a largely better quality of life than Americans, ahve better working hours, etc.
America is becoming a police state faster than I thought. Under president Bush, we're becoming as bad a China.
Sure am glad he's working to reduce the deaths caused by violent videogames, however it is that that occurs. Wouldn't want to make any legislation that further restricted the free trade of the guns THEY ACTUALLY USE TO KILL PEOPLE.
Maybe this will help curb the number of 13 year olds who think it's cool to be annoying as hell with the voice chat in Counter Strike.
everyones a fascist... and to say something worthwhile: "...to children younger than 18" hmm...I bet this governor is a 50 year old child.
1001100 1100101 1100001 1110110 1100101 1001101 1111001 1000010 1101001 1110100 1110011 1000001 1101100 1101111 110111
In the UK, we already have a similar system. Some computer games are rated by the BBFC (the violent ones - non violent games are not usually rated by them), and are given the same ratings to those applied to films and videos. Although the system is not perfect, it allows for some degree of control. As an example, games such as Manhunt are given 18 ratings, with Quake III getting a 15 etc. Of course, this still doesn't stop the occasionaly press frenzy over violent games and children (...suspiciously familiar in tone to the "video nasties are corrupting us" 20 years ago...)
The laws only apply to sale and distribution - for example, it's illegal for a minor to buy an 18 rated game, but it's perfectly fine for their parents (if they think it's sutiable) to buy it on their behalf, and them allow them to play it, as you suggest.
Seriously, this is pure gold. Games that involve killing people in a pretend universe = bad. Games that actively advocate killing people for a living in the real world = patriotic?!
adam b.
Although I agree that kids should NOT play mature games like grand theft auto, it should not be a criminal law that is enforced by the government. As it is, video game ratings *could* be arbitrary. I think it should be like the way movie theaters stop kids from watching rated R movies - it's not a law, but universally any theater you go to will enforce it.
prohibit the distribution, sale, rental and availability of mature video games to children younger than 18
How exactly is this a bad thing? Children under 18 do not, and should not, enjoy the same rights as an adult. They can't buy liquor. They can't buy cigarettes. They can't buy a gun. They can't buy an X-rated DVD.
Why should video games be treated any differently? Some games are simply "adult-oriented" material.
If a product is rated M, it shouldn't be available to a child unless their parent expressly approves of it and purchases it for them. The only thing this law does is create a penalty for unscrupulous video game dealers who have a no-ID-required policy on video game sales.
The same kind of laws exist regarding the sale of alcohol, tobacco, firearms, and pornography - and for the exact same reason. You can't rely on the respective industries to self-regulate sales to minors.
to get their sex and violence fix....cause all those years of your parents and your parents' parents playing those games have created generations of subhuman immoral monsters, right?
Sehr geehrter Toilettenbenutzer!
Once you pop, you cannot stop... After this you will have to control:
...
- Television
- Video Rental
- Paint Ball
- Red Rider BB Guns
- Ping-Pong (butt's still sore from when I was young)
-
Someone mistakenly blamed this on the religous right but I think it's obvious that it is from the "More Government Is Better" crowd.
I wonder if the violence would be reduced or eliminated if pro athletes stopped taking steroids?
None whatsoever?
So there is no violence in Half Life 2 then right?
Six year olds should definately be allowed to play it without parental consent then huh?
I think you've become numb.
I personnally think this is a good thing.
M rated games are meant for mature audiences and children should not be permitted to purchase them.
I've heard rumblings they are thinking of implementing the same thing here in Ontario and I see no problem with it. If you think your child should be able to play the game then you can go rent/purchase it for him/her.
I don't believe that violent video games lead to violence, but they do desensitize.
Read the blurb and article again but use your brain this time. The punishment is for the person that sells the games. Not the one that buys them.
as long as they don't limit it to one type of media. That is, if they want to do this for games, also do it for movies, books, TV, newspapers, etc.
Since only games are targeted, this is either a case of "let's ban what we didn't grow up with" or "let's target one industry that doesn't contribute anything to our campaigns - that ought to teach 'em".
MPAA ratings are not government controlled. It's strictly voluntary.
SNACKS ARE AWESOME
It will never pass. I don't know anyone under 18 (besides people who just don't play computer games) that don't own or have played a non-mature rated game. It just won't happen. I'd be in big violation of the law if they spread it to South Carolina.
Let's sneak across the border to Indiana to buy DOA:Extreme Beach Volleyball! Heh heh *snort*
The invisible hand of the market has been telling people that drinks and cigarettes will make them attractive, popular and sexy for a hundred years, at least. All the age restrictions have done is to insure that the children of today have a nice unhealthy attraction to them (mixed, of course, with a little self-loathing, so that you'll keep consuming even when you know the things that they seel are bad for you). Age restrictions make the games more desirable, because they're forbidden to them; those kids that have them will be more pouplar than those who don't, thus making the unhealthy connection between forbidden games and popularity. Since these laws depend on parents having complete control over their children's lives (like the drug ads say), a state of reality which exists only when the children are in the womb, they can't stop kids from getting them if they want them - they only stop good kids from getting them, while reinforcing the implied connection between the things kids of that age want (happiness, popularity, confidence) and the things that these people are selling. Is it any wonder why we can't deal with sex or alcohol in a mature way? This will be no different.
You can't simultaneously tell people that something is great and will do all of these neat things for you and then tell kids, "But you can't have this." and expect them not to want it. Doing this makes sense if you can enforce it without making something else worse; since I don't think they can, and the lure of the forbidden will only make these games more popular while making it harder for parents to deal with, I don't think this makes sense.
So do minors have absolutly no rights anymore?
Did i miss the part in the constitution that says Freedom of speech, expression, religion, the press only if you're 18 or older. Oh, yes that's right, it's not there because the freedoms in the first amendment apply to everyone whether they're 14 yo or 84 yo.
Listen i believe some things should be restricted to minors like alcohol and cigerettes which have PROVEN harmful effects on everyone who uses them, but a 15 yo who plays GTA:SA for a few hours isn't going to make him drunk, damage his liver or lungs, give him lung cancer or even make him more violent. (I don't care what the pychologists and their extremely flawed, inconsistent, baised and weak studies have to say.)
Millions upon millions of kids are playing these so-called evil ultra violent video games with no negative effects whatsoever. It's only an extremely small handful of them that are influenced or imitate the acts they're playing in the games. This leads me to believe that there are so many other issues and problems with the child that you have to take into consideration then that it was just the games themselves that caused it. It's not like the kid was perfectly normal and happy kid to being with and the game corrupted his mind.
I've said this a before and i'll say it again: Government should have no role in deciding what media is suitible or unsuitable for minors. Those decisions should be left up to parents themselves. It doesn't matter whether it's GTA:SA or the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles or even Harry Potter. Government should have no business in deciding what's inappropriate for other people and their children.
A gamer died from exhaustion in South Korea. Another gamer died from exhaustion in Taiwan.
Video games can cause seizures.
I'm against censorship, but unforunately your argument doesn't hold.
People will find the strangest ways to die and to get sick.
Just because it CAN be done, doesn't mean it should!
This has already occured in the movie industry, with just about every movie coming out now being PG-13 or less. Developer's will start neutering the content of their games just for a goddamn T rating.
Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, Duke Nukem, GTA....
These are the games I grew up with....
And boy, they have been such a negative influence...Just last week I went on a murderous rampage killing 10 runners in orange jumpsuits with my car.
GOURANGA!!!
Let parents deal with this issue, not the law. If your kids can handle games like this, and you can have a dialogue with them, let it go....
Unfortunately the tinfoil zealots don't even read the summaries anymore, much less the article. That's why they've glossed over the fact that it's about restricting to minors, not banning them entirely. That's why they're also so quick to blame it on the religious right wingers when in fact it's a Democrat initiative. They read "Seeks violent video game ban" and they turn on anti-government, anti-US, anti-Bush, anti-everything mode and go apeshit. Not to mention it's just some governor's proposal which probably doesn't have a snowball's chance in hell of passing and they are already acting like it's set in stone.
I used to play Duke Nukem when I was 11 (way too young, now I think about it!). It didn't make me want to go out and shoot people with an RPG.
Then one day my mum threw a fit because I was still playing on the computer, and hit me a few times (in the kind of way parents shouldn't). The next day a kid at school was taking the piss for some reason, and in my imagination I did pick up an RPG and blew him away. Obviously there were no RPGs to hand so I did the next best thing - I broke his nose. (How do I know this is related to my mum's incident the previous day? Well I hit him in exactly the same way she hit me.) I'm quite proud to say, now, that that is the only time I've ever hit someone.
Now, some years later and majoring in psychology, this confirms exactly what the research shows - children exposed to violence on TV (or in games) have more knowledge of violence, but aren't inherrently more violent. It's only with an extra factor, such as when a model is either shown as being rewarded for violence, or as getting away with violence that violence in real life is repeated. This is known as vicarious reinforcement.
(Posed AC for obvious reasons...)
Our fine IL Gov. Rod is just trying to get his name well-known across the nation. Its so obvious that he has political ambitions larger than being the IL gov. He constantly flails at supposed BIG NATIONAL ISSUES hoping to strike a nerve with people. There's this issue, the importating of drugs from Canada, etc.
Its just one pathetic attempt after another so that when he tries to run for president, the country is already familiar with his name and his being on the "correct side" of these issues.
Yes, I voted for him. I thought he'd be slightly better than this, but he was the best choice at the time. Oh well, hopefully next time around we'll have some good choices.
I think its a good decision to forbid people to buy violent games if they are under 18 years of age.
However, most of the time, the parents are the ones who buy the games for the kids and not because the kids wanted the games, but because the parents are gamers themselves and want to play too.
Just about every mid 30's parent grew up playing nintendo,atari and other computer/gaming systems.
Back around 1988 we had this neato thing called a nintendo, it was quite addictive, everyone had one. We would play with it for hours and hours, in fact there were games that would keep us glued to it for an entire day. (we're talking 12-15 hours)
Anyways,this damn nintendo thing kept us from doing our homework and stuff like that and finally after the parents figured out why this damn nintendo thing kept us from leaving our rooms, they put an end to it, they finally had to take this damn fucking nintendo thing and lock it up until we did our homework and other chores. The only way we could get it back was by doing our chores. I do recall that in the first stages of losing the fucking nintendo privileges, the parents would take the controllers away, not the nintendo, therefore what we would do was, borrow a controller from a friend and play secretly. This only lasted only a week or two and sadly our damn fucking nintendo zelda,double dragon,kung fu days were over. These were crazy days back then, only the survivors of such an era would understand.
I won't get into the "my friend borrowed my ninja gaiden cartridge and won't give it back" story
But it all comes down to this, if your kid has a video game system or computer, you must have some type of idea as to what he plays and when he plays with it. its called "parental supervision"
Is that as soon as anyone turns 18, they'll stop wanting to play M-rated games?
I've got more mod points and GMail invi
"A federal judge in July struck down Washington state's ban on selling some violent video games to minors, calling it a violation of free speech because it banned violence against police officers but not other depictions of violence, and too broad because it was unclear what games would fall under the ban.
Last year, a federal appeals court struck down a St. Louis County, Mo., ordinance that required children under 17 to have parental consent before they could buy violent or sexually explicit video games or play similar arcade games. A similar ordinance in Indianapolis was struck down by a federal appeals court in Chicago."
Let's not blow our gaskets folks, this is just one zealous governor's idea. It has little chance of ever really existing as a law. Though in principle I don't see why a video game retailer should sell to minors if the game is marked Mature. I think the punishments outlined in this example are too harsh and the application to broad, however.
it is already store policy for everywhere that sells video games in my town to have to provice photo ID proving you're over 17 to buy or rent any game rated M.
walmart, zellers, EB games, Radio shack, they all require ID to buy the M games.
this law won't change anything, as the stores already require it to cover their butts from a lawsuit. but the main problem is that the parents of junior don't look at the game before buying it for them, then they scream that the game is too violent.
you're the parent! do your job! don't expect the goverment to do it for you!!!!
upon the advice of my lawyer, i have no sig at this time
Perhaps one day the USA will mature enough as a society to no longer view nudity in the same league as violence. I for one don't care whether a child of mine sees people without clothes on, but I'm dismayed by a lot of the violence that goes largely unchallenged.
Both sides of the aisle don't like this. I, personally, wouldn't pass the law. But it is within the rights of a state to do so, as long as they don't prevent a parent to buying it for a minor.
Except for ending slavery, the Nazis, communism, & securing American independence, war has never solved anything.
yeah, it was id who caused Columbine, ok maybe Hollywood and Woody Harrelson share some of the blame
Why not fine the parents of deviant/violent kids when their kids partake of mature movies/games etc. without supervision? (That would give a whole new meaning to "It's 10:00 p.m., do you know where your children are?" wouldn't it?)
People complain about the Patriot Act, but this is about as Orwellian as it gets folks, the state is passing laws that make sure MERCHANTS dictate your children's behavior...a good state mandate would be that the parents are responsible for their kids behavior when it's all said and done.
You gotta make something explode to really understand it...examine all those tiny particles while they're still on fire.
How about banning crappy parents who don't monitor or care what their kids do.
/.ers complain that by default Windows users have root access. So users can install spyware or whatever the hell they want without the Network Admin knowing. How many /. stories have there been about fixing somebody's computer on the network and finding hundreds of spyware programs.
The preferred method is for the default to not allow the user privledges to install those programs, and for them to ask permission from the network admin to install something new.
This legislation is basically doing the same thing for parents. The store by default won't allow the child to purchase something potentially the parent doesn't want them to have, though the parent can still buy it for them.
D6 63 0D 70 89 81 BB 8E 7B 7C 5F 5D 54 EA AB 73
link HERE
The laws written for the rights of children and the protection of them were written before the invention of things like, video games, the internet, hardcore pr0n (no not debbie does dallas) HAHAHA, horse pr0n, and other explicit materials. When are people just going to start realizing that you (as a parent) aren't going to be able to watch your childs (children under 18) every move all of the time. I'm sure they go to school, hear things, chat about things, and learn things from their peers that you probably don't want them to know. Times change and all you can do is sit back and watch as you get older, and kids are doing the same damn things you were doing, just with better technology and at a younger age because of it, or you can spend your whole life trying to fight it. But the same end result is going to happen. People like Tipper Gore, and those other phsyco wives will always fight, but for what. Now with the advance in the internet (that gore invented HAHA) and file sharing technology, any kid with friends can download the latest eminem album with their favorite P2P program. I'm 27 with two kids and I had to realize a few years ago when I saw my 3 year old picking up computer skills faster than you can say Osh-Kosh-B'gosh, that soon he will learn how to get around all the content filtering, site blocking, and child protection I have on my home network and soon will be looking at pr0n more than I do.
Realize it, or spend your life fighting it. It's your choice. Let people be. But I don't agree that the government should tell me how to raise my kids. I don't need the government controlling that part of my life as well.
Thank you Patriot Act ! ! ! ! !
If they really want to limit the sale of mature video games to minors there isn't much wrong with that. The problem is the current rating system really isn't very useful for actually determining what games are good/bad. A lot of the blame for this belongs on those who seek to flat out ban violent video games. The rating system was created to appease them. So it will overrate everything to keep people happy. The problem with this is mature has become a catch all category. Halo 2, Doom 3, Half-Life 2, the GTA series, and Manhunt are all in this category. Some of these games have a lot more questionable content than others. They probably need to stratify the rating system better and possibly something like this could work. As long as it does not inhibit the purchase of games by anyone over 18 and does not interfere with a parent's judgement.
At this point, the blame shifts from slightly being retailers' fault to being solely the parents' fault for not supervising computer use.
Rod Blagojevich has proven to be both anti-American and an enemy of free speech. He's obviously trying to kick up a little dust and get himself noticed. Parents should be monitoring video game use, there are plenty of great games for kids but if a parent isn't monitoring what's going on then it really doesn't matter even if you do have a government intervention such as Rod Blagojevich is proposing. So it's useless as well as an affront to free expression. Rod Blagojevich ought to be tossed out of office, Illinois allows for Impeachment of the Governor.
(see Section 14)
Regular Meta Moderators are not more likely to get mod points.
I'm not sure how the fines compare.
free speach
Did you mean: free speech
"Come on, 'Rod', it's the only education we've got."
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
There is a large market for violent entertainment and so long as there are politicians there will attempts made to legislate it. Be it TV, comics, movies or pumpkin carvings. Just keep in mind the average age of those writing the legislation and how out of touch they are with anything moderm when you view their attempts to "think of the children".
Street Fighting Man was banned by the BBC and now the Stones frontman is SIR Mick. Ozzy was going to consume your children alive with catsup, now his family is sitcom fodder. There is always something for everyone to get in an uproar over and it's rarely as dangerous as it is portrayed. The fact that the evil Led Zeppelin is now used to try to sell me a Caddy shows just how accurate their perceptions are.
Except Puff The Magic Dragon. That pot-smoking commie threat was real!
[insert sig file here]
Oh man, did you see that thing on Fox the other day about the car chase though downtown American Cities? The A.C.P.D. were chasing a couple of guys who stole a car in Urban Ghetto, and they were driving all over the place. They cut through this guy's backyard in Suburban Housing Development, and were tearing all around Industrial Area knocking over big vats of chemicals and pipes with steam coming out. It was awesome! Violence Rocks!
Hell, I'd commit crimes if it meant I would become an innmate!
Judge: I hereby sentence you to 6 months hard drinking.
The political machines do NOT want informed citizens. They don't want them here and now any more that Lenin wanted thinkers in the beginning of the Soviet Union.
An informed populace is a THREAT to any political machines.
The people are supposed to think what they're told to think and no more. (Watch what happens to 'informed consent' laws now on the books. You're already losing your right to go bankrupt, your right to sue and your right to opt out of anything. Soon you'll be naked before your maker, pinned by a solid steering column through your chest.)
They have the right to kow-tow the politicians, pay their taxes, unless they're rich, go to wars they didn't know about in places they'd never thought about and to die.
MSBPodcast.com The opinions expressed here are my own. If you don't like 'em... Think up your own stuff.
I don't have a problem with this; it forces parents to act as gatekeepers. I'd prefer if there was a consistent scheme for rating content that parents already understood, but it's not the industry's fault if parents are too lazy to read the pamphlet explaining the ratings while waiting in line to buy GTA for their 6-year-old.
This won't stop uninterested parents from handing the kids any game they want to shut them up. Nor will it stop overprotective parents who would just run violent game discs over with the car before giving them back to the kids. This will, however, allow interested parents to be certain that kids are able to play these games when the parents, those ultimately responsible, deem the kids ready.
According to the headline, though, this is no ordinary ban on computer games, this is a VIOLENT ban! Illinois is joining forces with Dr Evil and seeking to violently ban all the video games in the world! Bwahahahaha!
It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
Hey Idiot! While your at it ban TV. Might as well ban movies too. Perhaps books, the radio should be banned as well. Have we banned the internet yet? no. Ban it too. Idiots. Why do you leave the rest of the world alone and go live in a damn cave with your fingers pluging your ears and read a bible.... idiots... Sure you have to have some regulations and whatnot but give me a freaking break.
The max penalties, if applied, seem a bit extreme. Going with the assumption that it is the clerk that pays the fine...
up to 1year in jail or a $5000. Jailtime for selling a violent video-game? A bit much don't you think.
Now the obvious response is "don't sell the game," but I don't doubt that in some retail chains there is an unspoken onus to sell as many games as possible, or "sell what you can" which might otherwise result in a poor performance rating for employees.
There needs to be a financial penalty against the organization, not the guy at the front counter. If the desk-jocket gets the company nailed with a fine one can be assured that he'll be shortly unemployed, so it should be a deterrent to both company/employee in that case.
There's nothing wrong with this, and it *should* be enforced.
Umm, yeah, you see the problem is YOU ALREADY HAVE THIS authority. YOU are the parent. If your child goes into a store and buys a videogame that you do not approve of then how about TAKING RESPONSIBILITY for your child and disciplining them for doing so. Do NOT, I repeat DO NOT, ask the Federal Government, State Government, or anyone else to raise and be responsible for your child and his/her decisions. That is YOUR job - not anyone else's.
If you don't want your 9 year old to buy product X, explain to them why not and then explain to them what will happen when they disobey mommy and daddy. Then, and this is crucial, actually discipline them for disobeying. You know - spare the rod, spoil the child. But under no circumstances should it be MY responsibility to raise your child for you. I wasn't there at conception so your child is not my responsibility. Teaching your child YOUR values is not my responsibility. Making sure your child doesn't buy videogames they want because little Johnny down the street has it is NOT my responsibility.
The responsibility for raising your child lies squarely with you.
Dream as if you'll live forever.
Live as if you'll die tomorrow.
~Anonymous~
bull. find me one nursury rhyme that is 2 hours of straight death for no reason ala deathmatch... if you think about it for more than .25 seconds the astounding bullshit of what you said jumps out at you.
Society banning sale of certain items to minors, is ok I guess.
But giving someone ONE YEAR IN PRISON for selling videogames to minors... Somehow I start to understand why America got so many people in jail.
6 months just wouldn't be a strong enough deterrent ? People accidently selling videogames to a minor are so evil, that we need to lock them away for a whole year to prevent repeat offenders ?
Forbidding children from doing these things (sex, drugs, alcohol) through the government hasn't made the problems these things create go away. Since alcohol, cigarettes, and sex all appear in advertising (either implied or explicitly), kids are simultaneously getting two messages: 1) Sex (or alcohol, or cigarettes, or video games) will make you happy/attractive/popular. 2) ...but not for you. If making something forbidden has made fewer people want it, I'd like to know. Mostly, these policies and mindsets lead to people unable to deal with the things they want in a reasonable matter (or to know why they want them) - they deal with their desires subconsciously because the conscious knows the law, but the subconscious controls the desires, and usually wins. They can't analyze their desires, can't understand them, can't find reasonable ways to deal with them - they must either obey or disobey. Once people decide to pursue these desires, they are unlikely to be sensible about their actions, because people don't consume happiness in moderation; the rational that tells them when to stop has already been discarded and is out of the game.
The law will likely be hard to enforce (or, if actually enforced, will pull resources from enforcement of other laws). The law helps create more demand for violent games while being unlikely to hinder access to them. Kids that obey the law (or their parents) won't get the games, but those that don't will find ways to get them, and become more popular in the process (by providing access to the forbidden for others), thus ensuring an unhealthy feedback loop. (forbidden things will get you what you want, but only if you don't think about what you do want).
Finally, if parents care, kids are probably less likely to either want to play the games or to disobey their parents (if they have the money to do what they want). However, if they believe the gov't will prevent their child from gaining access to the games, they may not deal with it, and they will be hit with something they didn't see coming. Parents that don't care won't be able to stop them from getting the games (and aren't dealing with it now). I don't see this law being able to do what parents haven't been able to do before.
Those of us who don't have children still have to deal with the messes laws make of them. Making things forbidden to some and desirable for all only ensures unhealthy habits (and a society unable to deal reasonably with its desires) for years to come, the consequences of which are a "gift" to all.
Duh.
Gotta watch out for the blue states and their Democratic governors.
of downstate Illinois is actually Red. Cook county from which "Hot" Rod Blago is a Democratic Machine product, does not represent in any meaningful way, the rest of the state. Yes, there are some isolated "Blue" areas around the University towns and the St. Louis Metro East, but look at the map below. See this article in the Chicago Sun Times. See also the 3-D map.
Blagojevich's main interest here appears be to position himself for national office. He ran on a platform of "It won't be business as usual." He was right. It's worse! Downstate state workers are being laid off while others are being hired in Chicago. Family and friends make up a large proportion of the higher paying jobs and appointments being handed out. It's a blatant power grab by the "Chicago Democratic Machine". The mayor's office in the capital, Springfield, was won by a Democrat with a large war chest provided by Chicago interests. And so it goes.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
While I don't agree with a full ban, I do agree in the rating system as a quide line. This proposal from what i read, isn't banning the games outright, but limiting sales to minors. I for one don't agree that it is the job of the sales department to verify age. Think of how long it would take to get a game if they had to ID everyone in the same fashion as alcohol, every person who looks under 25 has to be IDed. More what you should be asking is why aren't the parents in line with them. I mean come on, I am full willing to sit down with my duaghter and play GTA3:SA right along with her. If you are so worried about your child being messed up by a video game, then obviously you didn't raise them well.
I don't see the need for this. It is the responsibility of the parents to monitor their children and accept responsibility for them.
That being said, nobody said that they want to ban games. Governor Rod Blagojevich has suggested that he intends to fine retailers that don't enforce the video game rating systems by selling overtly violent and sexually explicit games to minors. He's related this to selling alcohol to minors. Movie theaters are held responsible if they allow minors into R and X rated films, so why not hold the retailers responsible for selling mature/adult rated games to minors?
The American news coverage of Iraq is already self-censored. I doubt you can sugar-coat the situation much more than the media already has. Having the news come almost entirely from reporters who are embedded with the troops is possibly the worst conflict of interest possible; let's see you give an objective news repotr on people who you spend 24/7 with and who are in charge of keeping Iraqi insurgents from killing you.
Try watching BBC News, ITV, Deutsche Welle, or even Xinhua (*gasp*, more objective news on Iraq from a brutal totalitarian regieme like China?), and you might get a better story of how things are going.
The newspapers in American seem to be doing a slightly better job.
Was this intentionally omitted by the story's submitter? Was this version of the story specifically selected by the editor because of this omission? Or was the summary edited before post? Lies, damn lies, and Slashdot selective reality.
I'm supposed to fear and demonize people who don't want an aging titty on during the Super Bowl when Gore, Lieberman et al have been trying to ban music and video games for years? Please.
I don't understand the attitude displayed on this topic. If you have an R18 film containing sex and or violence, you expect that selling it to a 13 year old will get you fined (if anyone finds out).
Given that video games have ratings as well (or should be rated) what's suprising about people wanting to enforce those ratings? It seems an exactly analagous situation to me.
how stupid the general North American group think is -- politicians are just a duller reflection of such.
Think about it: If the guy next door goes out each morning and kicks the carp out of his dog and the dog in turn bites some neighborhood kid who just wanted to pet him, are we going to solve the problem by banning attack dog training?
The absence of any sort of violence in our society is impossible. We may stop video game violence but we will never stop the news. People who have had the carp kicked out of them will always find some inspiration for a means of biting back -- all this does is change themes.
When are idiots like this guy going to realize that the problem is the kicking???
Mod me up, mod me down, flame me, praise me -- whatever you do, you help prove I exist...
Once again, when a Democrat dones something stupid, they are spared the indignity of having their political affiliation mentioned in the slashdot article. ALL politicians do stupid stuff - can we just have a policy, like a newspaper, where if a politician is named it lists their state and political affiliation? It's easy....
Sen. Joe Smith - Maine (R)
see?
Thanks.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur
Someone who writes some sort of comedic adventure game like Sam and Max should go for the I rating.
God spoke to me.
How is this different than the laws the controll movie ratings? In many states its a misdomeaner to sell a R rate movie ticket to someon under 17.
WWhats needed is a group of video game designers to create group that provides a rating system for video games. If a video game were a movie and it would be rated R then the video game, perhaps, should also be rated R and retailers would check for ID, just like they do for beer and cigs.
...If I had a railgun for everytime I heard...
Oh wait.
This guys is a crack pot. I live here in Illinois and the crap that this guy tries to pull is ridiciolous.
Other than his ban on Violent Video Games, he also is upping the rates on tolls. Illinois is 1 of 5 states that have tolls. The tolls were supposed to go away after the express ways' were paid for now they are a great source of revenue.
It Blowgoivitch plan to double the rates on tolls to 80 cents if you don't own an I-Pass.
I guess this democrat should take off his tin-foil hat and actually do some work.
Why should we make legislation to enforce what parents want their kids to have?
We, as a society, don't want kids to have smokes, booze, or pornography, whether or not a given parent cares. We can show ill effects from kids drinking, from kids smoking, and from kids watching pornography. Yes, we can very often show those same effects with adults, but adults are allowed to screw up their own lives for the most part. Games we haven't demonstrated a real effect on the kids, and we haven't made any strong casual links to society.
It boils down to some parents don't want their kids playing these games, and the parents are getting the law to enforce it. It is a slippery slope argument in it's very nature, which doesn't make it wrong inherintly. Moving the precedent from what is known to be harmful to what some people just don't like is a real change in policy.
Never confuse volume with power.
It's too late to save youth from corruption. They were already corrupted during the previous generation.
Every generation tries to protect the following generation from their own corruption.
FYI: The governor is Democrat from a blue state, not a Southern Bible thumper. Last I checked conservatives don't have any problems with guns.
No non-christian holidays at all.
Heck, make it a federal felony to be non-christian. Jews, buddhists, hindus, muslims, etc. are unwelcome in the USA. (Well, we're already there with muslims eh?)
Mandatory christian spellca^H^H^H^H^H^H^Hprayer in school. Any kid caught not praying is sent to guantanamo bay.
Environmentalism is a federal offense.
Only american built automobiles are allowed. Importing foreign automobiles is a felony.
Mandatory assault rifle ownership. Grenades and C4 optional.
English is the only allowed language, anyone caught speaking a foreign language is to be shot on sight, then dragged for 10 miles tied to the bumper of a truck.
By law, employment opportunities are awarded in the following order: first to whites, then to asians, hispanics, other races. blacks are always last. Anyone caught violating this law will be publically lynched for being "un-american".
No one may get abortions for any reason whatsoever, including rape, fatal birth defect, or if it would kill the mother.
Sex for any reason other than purely procreation is strictly forbidden, anyone even suspected of the slightest enjoyment of sex shall be imprisoned for life. Also, sex in any position other than missionary is forbidden.
Any husband caught cheating on his wife is to be publically flogged. Any wife caught cheating on her husband is to be publically shot.
Homosexuality carries a mandatory death penalty.
Discussing birth control of any kind except pure abstinence is a federal crime.
Women may not get any education beyond grade school, and may not get any job other than secretarial. Preferably they stay unemployed at home, in the kitchen, barefoot and pregnant.
Darwinism is a crime, anyone caught teaching evolution in schools is to be imprisoned for life.
...and Blagojevich is a fuckwad.
Maybe not as much as the outgoing Republican Gov. Ryan, whose administration was nearly as corrupt as that of Richard Nixon's (selling licenses in exchange for bribes to people who can't even read English, anybody?), but he's close. Besides, this is Illinois. If it doesn't turn up that Blagojevich's administration is corrupt in some way, I'll be surprised.
Democratic Gov. Blagojevich is a governor who wanted to seize -- by force of government -- all the casinos in Illinois in order to pay down our multi-billion dollar state debt. Yes, he's such a pinko that he wanted to literally steal the casinos from their current private owners for state use. Instead, we have casino taxes high enough such that the state technically owns more of the output of the casino than the private owners do.
Blagojevich thinks letting off-duty and retired cops carry concealed weapons is OK -- but not the citizens. In fact, he wants *more* restrictions on the citizens' right to bear arms (which is codified in our state constitution even more-powerfully and clearly than the U.S. Constitution, BTW). Yeah, way to create an unequal society there "Rod". I'm just *sure* former and off-duty cops won't abuse their power. *rolls eyes*
The only thing Blagojevich has done right is not raise taxes; a considerable accomplishment for a Democrat, I admit, especially since we have merely a 3% flat income tax - one of the lower state income taxes in the nation. That, and he's defied the federal govn't and is working on getting prescription drugs reimported to the state (at least on that point, the Democrats like free trade...). I remain indifferent about his stance on flavored condoms.
But in Blagojevich is still a fan of bigger government. It doesn't surprise me that he wants to restrict the right of the people (including children) to gain access to the "distribution, sale, rental and availability of mature video games to children younger than 18".
Blagojevich fails to recognize the responsibility of parents to ensure that their children are not misbehaving. He wants the nanny-state to take care of our kids; not us, the individual adults who borne them.
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
...but not many.
" What is wrong with a 14 year old kid seeing Nudity?"
Under the right circumstances and reasons, nothing.
"Sex and Nudity are two completely natural things."
Not after people like you are involved.
"But we let them see alll sorts of crap footage about wars for oil with real people dying".
As oppossed to the fake people dying in games like Grand Theft Auto. Oh, but THAT'S ok, huh?
"I know some kids who can handle so called "adult" material better than most adults..."
No, you don't. Just because you hang out with witless adults is no excuse to subject kids to porn.
"So in the USA: WAR=good SEX=bad"
Only to tinfoil hat wearing idiots...like yourself.
I truly hope no child is ever saddled with the burden of having you as a parent.
Life is hard, and the world is cruel
Won't someone think of the children over 18?
Of course, most people over 12 wouldn't think of themselves as "children." You can trust someone to drive a car (14 where I came from, to start learning) but don't trust their exposure to information? Bah.
sig fault
Uh, no. Even though the "5000 BCE" lore origin is unverifiable, chopsticks were known to exist in China, Korea, and Japan by the Middle Ages. Cite One. Cite Two. Cite Three.
The English term "chopsticks" was a pidgin term used by Chinese railroad workers, IIRC. This is probably where the 1800s myth first came from. (They did invent the fortune cookie in that era, however.)
Those who complain about affect & effect on
"If you're 18 or older and you're a grown-up and an adult, that's your business," the governor said. "But I don't believe that my 8-year-old daughter has a constitutional right to cut somebody's head off in a game that she plays."
I live in Illinois and have been for three years, so I have the right to say that this is total crap. I think what he fails to see is that as a parent he needs to not only monitor what his child buys, but teach himself along with his daughter the difference between virtual and real. Children aren't stupid, tell them that in a video game it's not real and that in real life it's not okay to hurt people. It's that simple.
<I>Under the governor's plan, the proposed fine for violating the bans would be a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison or a $5,000 fine.</I>
Wouldn't it be psychologically scarring to put a minor in prison? Wouldn't it be cruelty to put a parent in prison for buying a game he/she feels their child is responsible enough to play?
I know who I'm -not- voting for next time around.
"I'd rather stay here with all the madmen, for I'm quite content they're all as sane as me..." ~ David Bowie
The headline says "Illinois Gov. Seeks Violent Video Game Ban." A ban implies that these games can't be made or sold anymore.
So you read the summary...and find out all he's doing is imposing fines for sales to minors. The games aren't being "banned." This is no different from the movie rating system.
There's no ban in place. There's just enforcement of the existing ratings system. A non-issue.
Hey, if a parent wants to train their child to become a better killer, what right does the government have to interfere in that natural order?
--
make install -not war
Shouldn't the government be working on more importand issues, ie terrorism, theft, murder...I just think making it harder to bring i gun to school would be more efficiant in stopping school shootings then the stopping of playing games, come on it's just a game.
Well...I live in Illinois, and I'm 17. Though I will be 18 in a few months, and therefore, this will not really effect me, I see a large problem with this. number 1) This is going to result in students in college who happen to be 17 going to the store to buy a game, and then being denied, while their 18 year old friend can buy it. If you are mature enough to be in college, you are mature enough to buy an M-rated game. 2) This is going to end up like rated-R movies. 18 year olds are just going to end up buying games for people they know, similar to how some 17 year olds buy movie tickets for their younger friends. This is just simply uninforcible.
That being said, if you were to actually read the Constitution, you would see that a law like this does not even come close to violating the First Amendment. See for yourself:
This is a proposed law from a state legislature, not Congress. You may be able to make an argument that it is in violation of the 14th if you can establish that playing video games is a basic human right. In that case, you had better hope the judge is a /.er.
"Millions upon millions of kids are playing these so-called evil ultra violent video games with no negative effects whatsoever. It's only an extremely small handful of them that are influenced or imitate the acts they're playing in the games."
Millions upon millions of people smoke cigarattes, yet only a relatively small number are currently dying of lung cancer. That doesn't mean tobacco has no effect on a person's health.
Mathematics is made of 50 percent formulas, 50 percent proofs, and 50 percent imagination.
he was screamingly funnny actually.
/. moron. like you.
anyone who thinks he was being serious is obviously a clueless
He's also an idiot. And what he's doing is conservative bullshit.
I live in Illinois, and generally we've had a lot of Republican govenors. We may be solidly a blue state (thank goodness) but Republicans have held the govenorship more often than not in the last half of this century.
Our last govenor, a possibly (unconvicted) corrupt wangler of campaign contributions and also a Republican, was the best govenor we've had in my lifetime. He went against his constituancy, his party muck-a-mucks, and the powerful industry of criminal justice in Illinois to free or at least stay the executions of everyone on death row here.
(Yes the justice system is an industry -- jailing people costs the government a lot of money, and that money goes in peoples' pockets. It generates jobs, it generates political careers (how many govenors start out as state's attorney?), and in the Chicago police force, it's generated a powerful, corrupt union which encourages its members to vote as a block. Oh, and that industry also frames people.)
Now that's a good govenor. One with convictions. Though in a year or so, he may have one more... I'd vote for him again in a SECOND.
We need jobs and education in this state. Instead, we have a spineless, not very clever democrat who's worried about the republic vote outside of Chicago.
I'm a Democrat. Blagojavic is a worm.
the fundy's push for more power and control once again.
should read: "The Illinois Retail Merchants Association blasted the governor's proposal as a way for stores to become "the violence and sensitivity retailers for the police state of Illinois." we apologize for the inconvenience.... no, wait. we don't.
A bullet may have your name on it but splash damage is addressed "To whom it may concern."
who feels that he is too good to move into the Governor's Mansion (you know, where Abe Lincoln stayed while he was governor?) in Springfield.
if a piece of legislation is going to get rid of the mens rea (criminal mind) component of a crime, that piece of legislation needs to have a very minor punishment
The scope of the crime that results in a jail sentence will probably get restricted to reckless failure to check the purchaser's state-issued ID. Isn't recklessness a valid mens rea to hang a jail sentence on?
not all of my [co-workers] are as strict as I am ... and with the unrated movies... you'd better be able to prove that you are 18+ to me
Do you require proof of adulthood even for somebody who is trying to rent a direct-to-video children's title that was never rated by MPAA because it was never released theatrically?
What about movies, or the TV media? How many people have gone on a killing spree from a video game vs from movies, or actually seeing a war?
...even if he, successfully, passes the legislation.
In my personal experience, the more you try to control this age group, the more they will rebel. My prediction is that soon after said legislation would pass, record number of teen "mature video game players" would appear in Illinois.
Besides, compared to alcohol and drugs, I think that video games are pretty tame... don't you??
Cheers,
- Hawkeye
"...The smart and lazy ones I make my commanders." - Erwin Rommel
I've been working at an Illinois Target store for extra holiday $$$, and our stores screen for M-for-Mature video games automatically. Which is to say, when one is scanned at the register we're supposed to ask for a date of birth and the register calculates it to make sure they're legal. Minimal enforcement, but like cigarettes and alcohol, it depends on the seller's cooperation to enforce it.
What cracks me up is that we ONLY screen video games (well, that and certain OTC medicines). I frequently scan through CDs with "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics" labels and R-rated movies, but the register could care less how old the purchaser is for them. So apparently it's okay to sell kids CDs with cop-killer lyrics or movies with violent content, but VIDEO GAMES with the same content is a no-go.
Okay, this is the most stupid thing ever. We should be preventing 12 year olds from buying these games. Not 18 year olds. Does anyone here understand how mature the average 18 year old is? More than half of 17 year olds (source) have had sex! Does anyone really think this is going to change anything? Get out of my country with your conservative bullshit, please.
hey!
- Warrior fighting an insurrection
- Intense violence
- Primarily consists of shooting and killing aliens
- Graphic descriptions of player's death
Ummm.. Did I miss something or is Halo 2 a text adventure?
Master Chief is walking down a hallway...Master Chief is suddenly attacked by the Flood on all sides! He cries out in vain, unable to lift his rifle as his body is annihilated instantly! If only you'd taken a left in Hallway 3... (F)rag (C)amp out (R)etry (Q)uit
---
WARNING:Slashdot karma not redeemable in the afterlife.
I live in michigan and we already have something like this i belive, i remember the first time i was rejected to purchase a game it was when mortal combat gold first came out for the dreamcast, not only did i have to find my dad to buy the game, but after i handed him the money he told me my dad had to hand it to him, after he was id'd and the man typed something in the register. I personally thought it was the most dumb thing, but i supose since i can't buy a movie at miejers, i might not as well be able to buy a game. I also think you should be able to purchase a video game a 16, when you can drive yourself to the store why should you have to have your parents buy things? Also, does anyone know how old you have to be to go overseas and fight in iraq, i'm guessing before you can purchase video games.
Yea...I just started to look at this because I have one 16 and one 19 years old.
I was pretty astounded at the violence of 2 games and told them they couldn't play them at my house because I thought they were too violent.
But - I would never want the state to do my parenting for me. It's absurd, in my opinion, that they would want to play these games - but more absurd is to think of a state regulating what they play.
Americans claim their country to be based on freedom, the freedom of speech and expression etc. Just for the record: Playing video games isn't expressing anything except your submission to gaming companies. Thus, the good old US of A can place any kind of ban they so please on you :)
The idiotic laws of US of A. Yet, in California (other states too?) you can trial a minor as an adult. You can join the Army even before 18 and a lot before 21. So you are okay at 19 to murder people not even for your own will but because somebody told you so (gosh! by this reason Charlie Manson would be a US decorated Hero) and you are not able to drink legally or vote (which will give you a chance when it comes to on what desert you could die). Sick sick sick.
http://www.accountkiller.com/removal-requested
How about the ransom-like toll increase:
"You...buy an I-Pass or pay double you pay now!"
No TiVo and no caffeine make me something something...
For the crimes he committed against American liberty in Congress (gun prohibition being among the most serious), Rod Blagojevich has, in my opinion, earned the death penalty just about a dozen times over.
Proposing to throw people in jail for selling Unreal Tournament or Doom 3 to a 17-year-old just adds to his litany of crimes.
That he continues to sign his death warrant is of no surprise.
I had to provide my driver's license at K-mart to prove I was 17 in order to buy Halo 2.
I think it should be done that way, it's up to the actual business to determine what they want to do.
Otherwise, it's backseat parenting which the government has no right to do. It's like outlawing spanking your children. It's stupid.
the question of who gets to decide what is "violent".
IMO, if you do want to restrict "violent" video games, use the industry ratings system and the ESRB to decide what is "violent".
If there are people who dont think the ESRB is getting it right (i.e. making games with a lower rating than they should be), go complain to the ESRB.
First Libermann and now this guy. Two Dems trying to censor video games. Yet everyone on slashdot just assumes it's a conservative.
...if this law goes into effect it still won't prevent minors from getting their hands on "mature" rated games. It's called "Mom...Dad...I want GTA San Andreas for my birthday" Most sales reps are aware of "secret shoppers" to monitor their activities so they would already be smart enough to wait for mommy or daddy to walk in rather than risk getting written up or fired for selling ot to junior.
Yeah, and that too, unfortunately...
The IL Toll Authority -- which was supposed to be disbanded like 10+ years ago -- takes the phrase "highway robbery" too literally.
Is Capitalism Good for the Poor?
I mean, if parents can't decide if their child should live or die, what control over their offsprings' lives do they really have? That damn state, meddling in the affairs of the family again...
James Tiberius Kirk: "Spock, the women on your planet are logical. No other planet in the galaxy can make that claim."
The question that comes to my mind, though, is should a clerk who sells an M rated game be punished as this plan proposes?
From the article: Under the governor's plan, the proposed fine for violating the bans would be a Class A misdemeanor, punishable by up to one year in prison or a $5,000 fine.
I can see where some would want to limit a child's ability to buy M rated games (though I'd have to wonder where the child got the $50 to do so in the first place, if not from their parents)...but I cannot see punishing an 18 year old high school kid making minimum wage as a cashier with jail time for selling an M rated game to a minor. That is excessive...especially since the parents of the child who buys the game would not be punished, nor would the child.
Voices--Art, Poetry, Photography
Being patriotic - or, at least, pretending to be patriotic - is apparently the latest trend. I've seen cars and trucks with literally 8 or 10 of these magnetic "Support Our Troops" ribbons stuck to the back of them. And it makes me sick, because I know that some greedy profiteering motherfucker is making millions of dollars selling these things.
Remember just after 9/11, you'd see commercials on TV selling flags? Within a couple of weeks, there were all sorts of competing flag commercials. "Order now, and we'll throw in a second American Flag for just $4.99!" Then there was actually a 30 minute infomercial selling giant flags that mounted into the back of pickup trucks.
It was disgusting. These people weren't patriots. They'd never been in the business of selling US flags. But now, all of a sudden, patriotism was "hip" and they saw an opportunity to make a shitload of money. So overnight, thousands of places started selling flags, hoping to make a buck.
These magnetic "Support Our Troops" ribbons are no different.
If you want to support the troops on your car, go to Hallmark (or wherever), buy yourself a spool of yellow ribbon, and make your own loop. Don't go putting yet another 5 bucks into the pocket of a company created solely to profiteer off the combination of fear and faux patriotism sweeping the country.