Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Illinois Game Law Passes

Posted by Zonk on from the nothing-better-to-do-apparently dept.

The Illinois law banning the sale of violent games to minors has passed another milestone. The Illinois House has given the law an okay, meaning both the House and the Senate have passed the law. It now moves on to be signed by the Governor. From the article: "... supporters insisted the government has a duty to help parents shield children from violence and sexuality. 'Don't let them become the monsters that we see in these violent games,' Democratic Rep. Monique Davis said."

1 of 105 comments (clear)

  1. Where's the sense? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    help parents shield children from violence and sexuality

    Newsflash: Everybody has sexuality. Everybody has a penis, or breasts and a vagina. Sexuality isn't something you *shield* people from. Sexuality is something you encourage kids to become familiarised with. It's something you educate them about. It's something you nurture to maturity. This maturity, and confidence in sexuality, is part of being civilized.

    Violence, on the other hand, is in a totally different ballpark. You aren't born weilding a weapon, with blood on your hands and murderous intent. The absence of violence is part of being civilized.

    Why is it, then, that American culture is accepting of displays of violence in movies and on TV, but the hint of a nipple in a game or TV show is so scandalous? Fucking insane.

    Common sense and reason allow one to distinguish between theatrical or game violence, and real life violence and death. I see nothing wrong with playing violent games as long as one has developed those rudimentary mental faculties, hence age restrictions are somewhat sensible.

    The same applies to sexuality versus perversion. Young minds should be taught about the human body and sexuality, and nudity as not beingn perverse in itself. The perversion of sexuality is something young minds would benefit by being shielded (age restrictions, again, seeming somewhat sensible) from until they are able to distinguish between the two.

    My point is although there *can* be seen to be valid motive behind restrictions on both violence and nudity, but the generally accepted reasons are completely turned on their heads and turned into pure emotionalism and sensationalism. Why, oh why, are people so fucking stupid?