Slashdot Mirror
A Delay in the Michigan Violent Games Law
TecnaDigit writes "The ESA and the VSDA have achieved a small victory in the case against Michigan Senate Bill 416. According to Game Daily Biz, Michigan Judge George Caram Steeh (who himself seems a bit skeptical of the bill) passed an injunction holding it for consideration. In other words, while the bill is under examination it won't be passed into law. Originally, the law was supposed to commence on December 1st, 2005. Though the battle for this case is far from over, it is a bit of silver lining."
stop blaming your ping times for getting fragged, legislature!
These parental government initiatives seem to be something both Democrats and Republicans can get behind. Isn't bi-partishanship great?
Socialism: A feeling of discontent and resentment caused by a desire for the possessions or qualities of another.
So now kiddies will get to experience the magic of Christmas through violent games once again! Yay!
Seriously, stupid law.
Argh.
Is it still killing them if they're ghosts? It's questions like that which must keep politicians up at night.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
This judge needs to be careful with what he's doing. Before he knows it, a savvy opponent could latch onto the (obviously false) notion that he's not "for the children" and ride it right into his seat on the bench.
I propose we do something in advance to combat this ever-increasing problem. A new Godwin's law of sorts. You automatically lose any argument if you utter the phrase "Think of the children." If you say it while waving your arms around in apocalyptic chicken little fashion, you automatically get shot in the face.
I know I'm preaching to the choir.. but anyways, isn't this what game rating are for?
I mean, come on. You can't buy porn until your an "adult" and yet.. parents buy their children these games that are labeled for 18+?
Personally, I don't think their is a problem with it, however the label is clrealy being not used (who's fault is that for not reading?).
Next step: Taco Bell and it's health (or lackthereof) in food.
Although, on the flip side, a parent might say "well, I can't read *every* warning when I go shopping" and they would be right -- I mean, how often do you really read those EULA's?
hmm... so what to do... what to do...
I don't see how "ultra violent" (like say... Doom 3 or GTA) isn't labeled like porn and guns. Well, guns aren't as serious where I'm from; Everyone and their pet fish has one (Texas here, baby -- oh yeah).
True Story: I flung a frisbee in a neighbors lawn (at night time) and he ended up jumping out of his house with his side arm pointed at me (I was 12 at the time and though it was more funny than dangerous).
Land of the free baby...
"Do or do not. There is no try." -- Master Yoda (Half man, half muppet)
Following the set path here one could also say that the tobacco industry has absolutely no responsibility in selling an addictive stick of rolled tobacco that causes cancer, heart disease, and more.
Just like gun manufacturers don't have anything to do with people dying from being shot.
In both cases, a parent could have stopped this from happening.
I don't see how.... But I guess the important thing here is to establish that you can peddle whatever wares you wish since there is no responsibility attached in doing so.
So why isn't crack legal? Or asbestos walls? Or cars with defective brakes? Because they impact performance, just like the level of nicotine in a cigarette has little to do with the fact that it eventually kills you - as long as its' your choice. That sounds good. But is it?
You are free to do what we tell you, is another way of expressing these thoughts.