Slashdot Mirror
Louisiana Passes Violent Games Bill
GameDaily is reporting that the Louisiana House has passed a violent games bill, aping similar legislation from across the country. From the article: "The bill would allow a judge to determine if a video game is 'patently offensive to prevailing standards' and if it's appealing 'to the minor's morbid interest in violence.' If the title meets these "criteria" the game could be ordered to be pulled from store shelves. Furthermore, someone found guilty of selling one of these games would face fines of between $100 and $2,000, and a prison term of up to one year. According to the Associated Press, even though several members of the House questioned whether the bill would be in violation of the First Amendment, none felt they should vote against the measure."
You just made a big chunk of the population criminals, let me know how that turns out.
I don't give a damn for a man that can only spell a word one way.
Mark Twain
so you can have a real gun... just not a virtual one.. at least they have their constitutional priorities in line.
mod me down Im use to it.
Bah, TFA not wanting to load for me. What I get from this, though, is that a retailer can be taken to court AFTER a sale for selling a game to a minor and then if the judge decides that the game is indecent and trying to appeal to minors, the store will be punished and the game pulled from shelves? How is the store to know this before selling the game to be able to be taken to court for it? Is the lousiana state government going to review all games themselves before allowing them to be sold in the state? I've got to figure out how to get in on this. You guys do something, after you do it I'll tell you if it was legal or not and sue you and throw you in jail if it wasn't. Sound like a good deal?
"Even though several members of the House questioned whether the bill would be in violation of the First Amendment, none felt they should vote against the measure."
"These decisions should be left to the legislature, the representatives of the people, not the courts."
Legislators: "I'm not touching that. Let the courts decide."
Don't you asshats have a city to rebuild? Why the fuck are you wasting your constituent's money on this?
"I would say that 99 per cent of what my father has written about his own life is false." - L. Ron Hubbard Jr.
It just means that if you don't have a drivers license that states you're over 18, you don't get to buy the game. If you're a minor and you have the game, it's because mommy and daddy bought the game for you. What's wrong with making parent's take more of an interest in what their children experience?
What's that? Your kid brought a gun to school and executed his classmates? You say that his violent video games made him do it*? Well then, who bought him the video game?
* - I find this notion laughable, by the way
even though several members of the House questioned whether the bill would be in violation of the First Amendment, none felt they should vote against the measure
In summation:
-they know a law already prohibits this
-they decided to approve it anyway
Therefore, every member of the legislature that voted for this bill has committed a crime. I assume the courts will be as swift in getting the wheels of justice spinning as they are for the local meth dealer or pot farmer.
A state legislature passes a bill, knowing full well that it won't survive a court challenge. They wasted your tax dollars coming up with the thing. They wasted your tax dollars getting it passed. And they'll waste your tax dollars defending it in court. If I lived in Louisana I'd be pretty pissed off about that. Maybe you guys should get a voter referendum going to take all the money wasted on such laws out of the salaries of the legislators instead of out of the general funds of the state. Isn't Louisana pretty cash-strapped anyway? I seem to recall some whining about them not having enough money recently...
I'm trying to teach myself to set people on fire with my mind... Is it hot in here?
The bill would allow a judge to determine if a video game is 'patently offensive to prevailing standards' and if it's appealing 'to the minor's morbid interest in violence.'
I'm not sure if they could be any more vague. I mean, given the right conditions, you could argue this about just about any game. I recall many an hour in wholesome puzzle games like Lemmings and The Incredible Machine inventing horrible things to do to the creatures under my control. Does that count as morbid violence?
We need states to enact this kind of thing. The states, not the federal government. When one state does this, consumers on the borders will flee to adjoining states to buy video games. If it's a truly horrible piece of legislation, the market will bear this out and the retail outlets will raise hell. The feedback loop between a free market and a democracy will show itself one way or another. It could be that the residents of Louisiana overall want exactly this kind of thing, they should have it. This is not a clear violation of free speech, but it's a worthy law to challenge it. What we want now, is a legal challenge to this law. A case will be decided using this law by the lower courts, and we'll get an appelate court decision. At this point, we'll know what this law really means. Don't worry, gamers and liberterians. The passage of these kinds of laws is vital to ensuring that rights are preserved in a common law judisdiction.
"I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib
Except the Louisiana state legislature is 64% Democrats in the state House and 61% Democrats in the state Senate and a Democratic governer. Whoops. Oh well. The important thing is to always blame Republicans for restricting people's personal and economic freedom, no matter whose fault it really is. Holding the guilty accountable isn't the point. The point is blasting people we find politically distasteful.
Crusade onward, my good man! Get those Republicans!
"I have never won a debate with an ignorant person." -Ali ibn Abi Talib