National Review Defends Gaming

The National Review has a piece up entitled National Born Regulators, in which they lay out the problems with legislator decision-making processes when discussing videogames, and lay to rest some of the most common misconceptions around gaming. From the article: "Those games are the exception to the rule. The vast majority of video games sold each year do not contain intense violence or sexual themes. The Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB), the video-game industry's self-regulatory labeling body, places ratings and numerous content descriptors on almost every game sold in America today. These ratings and descriptors are remarkably detailed and displayed prominently on all game cartons, making them easy for parents to evaluate."

Comments

Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice

[stlhawkeye]

National Review is basically a conservative think-tank. It's amazing what people steeped in theory come up with when there's no voters to satisfy. Only readers. And people who read think tanks are (typically) more interested in ideas and debate than demagoguery (although, admittedly, not always). Look at what a conservative publication says - "family values, shmamly values, no more government interference, it's not necessary." How do you think Republicans in Congress would vote on this, though? 100% pro-Family Values pro-regulation, 100% voter pandering.

It gets harder and harder to defend these people every year as they shift away from free market economics and individual self-determination and towards more big-government nanny-state big brotherism. If only the Democrats had the guts to step in and fill the void instead of likewise pandering to its base...

Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice

[QuantumPion]

Contrast: National Review with National Review Online, the latter being a den of ultra-racist, mysognistic, violent and depraved lunatics (see also: Little Green Footballs, FreeRepublic).

You mean like Cynthia McKinney, who punched a security officer (who politely tried to stop her from walking through a security checkpoint without identification) because he was a white male? She's pretty racist, mysoginistic, violent, and a crazy-go-nuts. Oh wait, she's a liberal democrat. Nevermind.

Re:Compare: Conservative Theory vs Practice

[otis wildflower]

If only the Democrats had the guts to step in and fill the void instead of likewise pandering to its base...

Never happen.

At least the Republican party has Giuliani, Bloomberg, McCain, Schwarzenegger, Specter, Colin Powell.. Folks who are just as happy as Democrats (and me, frankly) to see DeLay get DeFrocked.. Who do the Democrats have that isn't a complete tool of the left, besides possibly Ron Wyden? Where are the principled, moderate Democrats? (answer: retired or Republicans, or dead like the late great Pat Moynihan...)

omg!!! republicans!!!

[iocat]

So does the lack of comments to this story indicate that the average slashdotter's head am explode by conservatives defending videogames, while Hillary Clinton bags on them?

Re:omg!!! republicans!!!

[Chuckaluphagus]

I just have to step in here. I'm pretty liberal, but I have a lot of respect for real conservatives. That means people who believe in smaller government, lower taxes, and less governmental interference in the private lives of citizens. The real conservatives I know are decent, intelligent people who just want to live quietly, work hard and build good lives for themselves.

The "social conservative" and "religious conservative" groups that have co-opted the term are practically anathema to the real meaning of the word and are destroying the Republican party, a party that used to garner some respect and due consideration. Nowadays the party is a bloated, corrupt sham of its former self that seems determined to drive itself into the ditch. Sadly, the Democratic Party isn't really any better, leaving a sour taste in my mouth whenever I vote. I realize it's currently hopeless, but we could really use some more major political parties in this country (Bull Moose Party!)

Parents should admit when they make a mistake

[mstahl]

A common theme in politics today seems to be that a loud minority of people want the US Government to act as a safety net for poor parenting. Honestly, if you bought your 12-year-old a copy of GTA San Andreas, it's not Rockstar's fault, it's not the US Government's fault, it's not the store's fault, it's yours, because you made a conscious decision to buy your kid that game when the title and the carton art tell the whole story. It's not as if the violent and sexually themed games are hiding among more "wholesome" games and trying to fool parents. They're clearly labelled and it's no one's responsibility but the parents' to take a proactive role in choosing the material to which their children are exposed.

Re:Parents should admit when they make a mistake

[itscolduphere]

The video game industry and the retailers are already doing a reasonable job in making sure video games stay out of the hands of minors. We don't need a police state to make it difficult for grown adults to purchase video games, or more expensive, which is what you want to happen.

Of course, because enforcing age restrictions with legal penalties on retailers have made alcohol and tobacco so insanely expensive. Oh...wait. It's mostly taxes doing that, not age restrictions. Never mind.

And the only added difficulty you would see in getting games with legally-enforced age restrictions is having to have an ID handy to buy them. Big freakin' deal.

Also, I'd say retailers have done a pitiful job keeping adult-themed games out of the hands of minors. What, they're running about 50%? About 35% for big-name national chains, who supposedly actually give a crap? Good job.

If a store sold alcohol to minors 35% of the time they'd be fined, lose their license, and have to shut down. It does not represent a "good faith effort" on their part. Not even close. And publishers claim that their games aren't marketed to minors, or meant for minors, but complain when somebody mentions restricting their sales to minors. Smells like industrial-grade BS to me.

PA pretty much summed up my opinion on the right of minors to buy any given game here,

OMG I'm actually being held responsible...

[Brothernone]

It is indeed truly astounding to see the number of parents that want to blame their shitty parenting on someone else. That is today's fad, Pass the buck. I'm glad a publication of ANY type is saying it too. Parents are the fault in the rating system, not the ratings. Parents are how kids are getting violent games. Here's a hint, if you wnat to avoid ultra violent games... buy a gamecube and shut up. A big "w00t" out to the mag, Let the people know they have to be responsible for thier parenting actions.

Re:Thierier is not a real NRO type

[stlhawkeye]

I don't know about that. Poking around on NRO, it's not especially married to the Republican party. More than a few of their editors show strong libertarian leanings, and there's always Rod Dreher.

Re:Thierier is not a real NRO type

[Bob Uhl]

Ummm...NRO is its own creature. It's anti-drug-war, which is hardly the Republican party line. Although the vast majority of its writers oppose infanticide, a few regulars do not. There are those who are religious Christians, irreligious vaguely-Christians, Jews and atheists. On the whole, its perspective is right-libertarian.