Slashdot Mirror
ESA Fights Minnesota Game Sales Restrictions
BaldManTom writes "ZDNet is running a story about the ESA's suit against the state of Minnesota regarding a bill which would fine anyone under the age of 17 for buying a game rated 'M' or 'AO'." From the article: "Lowenstein said that the average game buyer last year was 40 and the average player was 33. He also questioned how lawmakers reasonably expected retailers to collect the $25 fine from children."
He also questioned how lawmakers reasonably expected retailers to collect the $25 fine from children.
That's easy: they'd kill a hooker and steal her money, or murder someone for their wallet. We're talking about gamers here, after all.
This is a sig. It is appended to the end of comments I post.
Ventura is no longer the governor, he didn't run for a second term. If he was, its unlikely he'd have signed this law. he was slightly libertarian bent. He went on record as saying prostitution should be legal in the past.
I still have more fans than freaks. WTF is wrong with you people?
FTA
The association's most recent legal victory came in April when a federal judge in Michigan issued a permanent injunction halting the implementation of a state bill that would ban the sale of violent video games to minors. The judge rejected the state's claim that the interactive nature of video games makes them less entitled to First Amendment protections, the ESA said.
cause you know... conversations arn't interactive in the least. Guess some politician got too used to hearing themselves talk and everyone else just sit there in silence.
When any non-government agency is supposed to collect any money for the government, they usually get a cut of the money. That's how it works for sales tax, which is analogous to a fine here.
What concerns me is that, depending on how this bill is written, retailers may be given an incentive to entrap minors. What's to stop a retailer from trying to convince kids to buy these games, then charging them an additional $25 'fine' at the register when they but it (besides bad publicity, although it might garner them good publicity from some sources). Since the description of the bill FTA seems to indicate that it's not a finable offense until after the purchase, the retailer makes a profit off of the sale, and more profit off of the fine. Something just doesn't add up with this scheme.
Well I'm a Minnesotan gamer and I don't think it is that silly to prevent kids from playing rated M games. It shouldn't be a law though, I'd rather see it be a simple store policy. The movie industry doesn't have this kind of ridiculous legislation.
Why do you say that? Did the State of Minnesota mandate the rating process? Does the state oversee the correct application of a rating to a particular game? Did the state place the ratings on the boxes? Can a game producer appeal to the state if they feel a rating is unfair? Does the state regulate any portion of the rating system at all?
No.
A voluntary system created by the industry, with private reviews and voluntary compliance by game producers, and now it's somehow state-mandated that retailers abuse this completely unofficial system? And not only that, but to try to fine minors at the register? It's like someone wrote this law just to see how fast the Supreme Court can strike it down.
Let parents do their job and be parents. The state is horrible and ineffective at just about everything else they do, what on earth makes them think they know better than me what's best for my kid?
What I'd really like to see the ESRB do is to grant some game an M rating strictly for "flagrant blasphemy and satanic references". Then we'd see how quickly this idiocy could be overturned!
John