Slashdot Mirror
California Passes Violent Games Bill
TecnaDigit writes "Today, after sitting on the bill for nearly a month and constant political pressure, Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Assembly Bill 1179, the bill that would prohibit the sale and rentals of violent video games to minors. Again, the Entertainment Software Ratings Board and the Video Software Dealers Association (VSDA) are challenging the bill. According the the VSDA, the bill is faulty in that a game is decided whether or not it is 'violent' by juries, and different juries could have different opinions on what is defined as 'violent'." Commentary on GamerGod.
If parents cared then we would not be in this whole entire mess.
Which is precisely the point. Too many parents don't care. Most of them do, but there is a minority that's way too anarchic with their children. I don't have much of a problem with organized anarchy, but it doesn't really work for raising children.
The real solution would be to find the parents that don't..well..parent, turn the kids over to child protecive services and then a loving adoptive family, and castrate the parents. (Hopefully if you catch the parents while the child is young enough, it won't be too traumatic.) And then monitor the child in case the bad parenting is genetic.
The very existence of the need for a government agency of child protection is proof that there are parents who don't parent.
Let the parents decide what is too violent and what isn't and be done with the whole thing. If parents cared then we would not be in this whole entire mess.
You know, as much as I agree with you and as stupid as these laws are, we don't do ourselves any favor by devoting the public debate to this stupidity.
The video game makers do themselves no favors by fighting these laws either. They just rally the rabid religious nut jobs pushing these laws in the first place while giving grandstanding politicians (*cough* Hillary *cough*) a chance to prove how much to the "center" they are. Do they really think that Mom and Dad won't buy the games anyway?
Every minute of coverage this gets is a minute less that the Iraq War gets. Or that the Karl Rove leak gets. Or the energy crisis. For pity sake -- give the religious nuts the illusion that such a law would make a difference and let's get the public debate back to something that actually matters.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
Kids will get their hands on games the same way they get their hands on alcohol and cigarettes: by finding a store too lazy to card them, or just getting an over-18 friend to go out and buy it for them. The first option is by far the best, because word-of-mouth spreads fast among kids with a desire to purchase age-controlled products; this means that the wealth of the newly-attained business will pay for any fines the government can hand down. The second option is the fatal flaw in any situation: there will always be some older guy you know, or some uncaring 20-year-old outside the store that will do it for you.
I think not
What happens when little Jonnie using his parents credit card places an order online for the latest release of quake, doom, halflife etc. can the retailer be held accountable? What if it's done though an online auction and/or across state lines? Couldn't Jonnie just take the buss to Nevada and buy the game there?
It seems to me that this law will be very ineffective.
Terminator 3: rated R
Collateral Damage: rated R
The 6th Day: rated PG-13
End of Days: rated R
Eraser: rated R
True Lies: rated R
Last Action Hero: PG-13
Terminator 2: rated R
Total Recall: rated R
Red Heat: rated R
Running Man: rated R
Predator: rated R
Raw Deal: rated R
Commando: rated R
Red Sonja: PG-13
Terminator: rated R
Conan the Destroyer: PG (this movie was practically a live-action cartoon, btw.)
Conan the Barbarian: rated R
So, there you have it, his history of action movies, spanning over 23 years. He's got one PG under his belt, and three PG-13s. I have seen every one of these movies, and the only one I might dispute the rating for is maybe Last Action Hero. "Appealing to adolescents" is so vague that I can't possibly hope to dispute it (porno appeals to adolescents too!), but clearly his movies were restricted from adolescents.
I don't think that's ironic at all. What's hypocritical to me is that he ran on a platform of being fiscally conservative and (fairly) socially liberal. He said on national TV that he didn't have a problem with homosexuals getting married, but when he had a chance to do something about it, he shitcanned it, and now this. Too rich to be bought, indeed.
People who oppose this bill are anti-family
That's one of the nice buzzwords used by Republicans and the religous right to discredit people in debates, but WTF does it mean? How can somebody be "anti-family"? Does that mean you wish for divorce? Spousal abuse? I hate that fucking term and it needs to get it's own Goodwin's Law.
this has nothing to do with the sale of these types of games but with the right of parents to control what comes into their homes. If a parent sees nothing wrong with the game they can buy it, end of discussion. People who oppose this bill are the types who gripe when movie theaters card for an R rated movie
And parents need a law to control what comes into their home? How are the kids going to buy it unless the parents give them money? And what happens exactly if they do buy it and the parents don't approve? They can't take the damn thing away? That's what my parents would have done -- no laws required.
And I am one of those people who complains when I get carded for an R-rated movie and I refuse to show my ID. If they refuse to let me in (hasn't happened yet) then I'm going to get a refund of my money. As an adult I think I've earned the right to enjoy a movie without being carded. Besides which, this type of nanny state attitude leads to some pretty ridiculous occurrences -- like when I got carded at Wally-World for buying "Peacemaker", but not for buying beer the next day.
This bill has nothing to do with the games but seeks to reinforce the concept of parental control. Period.
My parents managed to have control without needing the state to enforce it for them. This bill has nothing to do with parental control and everything to do with the culture war and grandstanding politicians looking to impress people. Period.
I want peace on earth and goodwill toward man.
We are the United States Government! We don't do that sort of thing.
No, the truth is that violent people seek out violent video games. Just as pyromaniacs seek out fire. Banning violent video games isn't going to do anything about violent people except force them to get their fixes some other way. If all else fails, they can create real actual violence.
I miss the days of violent and decadent R-rated action movies. I grew up on these things. I must have been 5 the first time I saw Predator and Die Hard. *sigh*
After all, I am strangely colored.
Wait, is this Arnold Swarzennegar we are talking too?
.... but we can't control everything a kid comes in contact with. The current games are labelled (which just means they sell better). But I just look back on how violent people were before TV and video games and have to wonder why the world wasn't cured of all evil back then.
Unless he repents all his movies -- which were mostly aimed at the same kids this bill is designed to "protect" -- isn't there a mental disconnect?
I saw "Collateral Damage" -- and it was "sorta fun". But this violence filled fantasy has nothing practical about solving societies ills, other than the timeless virtue of killing a few innocent bystanders as long as you "get the bad guy".
Anyway, I'll agree with everyone saying "parents"
If people really want to reduce violence, then they'd be better off improving kids diets in the schools. Perhaps giving courses on conflict resolution. And, paradoxically, martial arts or fight training. People who feel threatened, angry, or weak will get more violent. I don't see how a video game would change this other than in the most empty life.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
I agree that violent crime has gone down.
Heck, I hope in twenty years, we still have kids healthy enough to get in fights -- instead of overweight, asthmatic wimps.
If there is any big issue, it would be with gang violence. Often these kids come from single parent or two over-worked parent homes where their is little parental involvement. I was just talking to a police officer who deals mainly with gang violence. But, we can't just change these parents by making lofty moral comments or more severe criminal punishments. Realisticly, these kids are societies problem.
Society has chosen to ignore these kids. There aren't many places for kids to hang out and be kids that isn't going to cost parents time and money. Since we already know these parents won't or can't be part of the solution, we need to find something (and pay for it) for these kids to do. Otherwise they are going to be hanging out in prisons and costing us a lot more.
The problems with gangs goes beyond the statistics we might see. This is creating a new culture not part of society and disenfranchisement. I also would be concerned about statistics. There is a built in political incentive to "reduce the number" of crimes reported. So, where I don't "feel" teen violence is getting worse -- I don't know if the reported rate is in line with the real rate of crime.
>>"ad space available -- low rates!!!"
Off-topic slightly, but let me just say, nothing helps one program in C++ like a couple grams of shrooms. Everything just....flows...
When cryptography is outlawed, bayl bhgynjf jvyy unir cevinpl
You probably shouldn't assume this man is over 30. If he's my age, his parents might have been worrying about Vice city, or GTA3, or Quake 2, or Doom (came out over 10 years ago).
The whole problem with the recent witch hunt of video games is that they have been as violent as they are now for quite some time. Lawmakers are just now starting a war against video games to get parental approval while they are passing non-parental notification for abortions, or skewing the definition of a "family" by allowing civil unions or marriages for non-traditional relationships.
Your representative is no longer serving your interests, why cant you see this?
"And we have seen and do testify that the Father sent the Son to be the Savior of the World"
1 John 4:14
Let's say you're a guy, someone else's kid runs up to you, slugs you in the nads, and runs away laughing. Wouldn't you think a simple ass-beating is in order? Congrats, you just decided on something for someone else's kid. Seems a little hypocritcal to me. Either way, if you give your 7-year old son Grand Theft Auto for Christmas, then wonder why he's calling your wife a bitch and slapping her on the ass, you're an idiot. Just like every other product that you research, his food, his toys, clothes, you should be researching his video games too!
-- Game Developers: Stop porting badly-textured games from crappy console systems!