NY Governor to Target Violent Video Games

NoMoreGuns writes to tell us that Governor Eliot Spitzer is planning to target violent movies and video games in a new bill. "Spitzer said he wants to restrict access to these videos and games by children, similar to motion picture regulations which prohibit youths under 17 from being admitted to R-rated movies without a parent or adult guardian. Under Spitzer's proposal, retailers who sell violent or degrading videos or video games to children contrary to the rating would be sanctioned."

Comments

Election time already?

[TomRC]

Back to focusing on trivial things, while important problems go un-addressed.

Re:Election time already?

[Convector]

I might add that this was before the gunman's NAME had even been established, and there was no way to know if he had ever played a videogame of any type.

Bad headline!

[Rob T Firefly]

Unless I'm really misreading this, he isn't targeting the violent games at all. What he's targeting is the sale of violent games to minors, in the manner of R-rated movies.

I expect that sort of misleading headline from the mainstream press, but Slashdot should really have fixed it.

Re:Bad headline!

[sqlrob]

*NOT* in the manner of movies. That's the problem.

Movies do not have this regulation. All media or none.

Re:Bad headline!

[Barny]

Whoooshh

No, he is targeting game stores.

Re:Bad headline!

[morgan_greywolf]

There are legal restrictions preventing sale of porn to minors, but no legal restrictions for violence. If your blockbuster won't let twelve year olds rent "Death-Death-Death-And-Blood 7" it is due to store (or corporate) policy, not due to regulation.

It's a matter of local and state laws, not federal laws. There are no federal laws banning the sale of any movies to minors, AFAIK. However, most states have laws regarding the sale of pornography or movies with strong sexual content. Surprisingly, most states do NOT have laws concerning violence.

So what we as a society are saying is that it's okay for kids to see people shooting, stabbing, kick boxing, or whatever else to each other in a violent rage, but HEAVEN FORBID if any minors see NAKED PEOPLE or, worse, two people engaged in a perfectly normal act that is part of our biological survival process as a species. Hmmm, I wonder which would inhibit the development of a child more...?

Re:Bad headline!

[Ngarrang]

And here I thought it was the parent's job to monitor the video game habits of their children. Silly me. Thank goodness the government is here to save me.

Re:Bad headline!

[Mister Whirly]

Yeah, we better fill that hole with a useless law. My God, for a second there parents were almost responsible for their own children's actions. I will feel much more relieved when the government is raising children again!

On a side note, does anyone else recall that in the 80s a 14 year old kid had no problems renting R rated movies? I would do it all the time. Only one place I rented at actually required parental permission for kids to rent R rated movies. If mom and dad said it was okay, they would rent them to you.

But then again myself and all my age related peers ARE all psychopathic serial rapists and murderers now due to this very fact.... Damn you Jack Thompson you were right!

I don't see the problem with this law

[SilentChris]

Maybe I'm missing the big picture, but what's the problem with preventing minors from buying games specifically market for adults? I know legally there's been no teeth in it up until now (and parents should really be watching out for their kids) but what's the objection to this? The only group I would think could possibly object is minors.

Re:I don't see the problem with this law

[Khaed]

I'm an adult, and I have a problem with it.

If the law just targets video games, then that is unfair. Other than pornography, there are no laws about content being sold to minors.

Video games, like movies, are voluntarily rated. There is no law to enforce the movie ratings, as far as I am aware, and so there shouldn't be one for video games.

Another poster here said, "All media, or none." And I agree.

Re:I don't see the problem with this law

[parkrrrr]

Unfortunately, in many cases, neither are the parents.

"Society" doesn't know best

[MikeRT]

Parents have been basically regulated into the ground by governments like this one. They can't punish their kids without social services show up, can't buy their kid a handgun and let them carry it in their own car to a range, even if the kid is a 100% balanced eagle scout, can't let them drink, can't let them do that. All the while the parents shoulder most of the blame if their kid does anything wrong.

That's why I say fuck the "community." The only person raised by a village was a feral, tribalist, not a civilized human being.

There are NO regulations on movies in the USA

[bigbigbison]

So when "Spitzer said he wants to restrict access to these videos and games by children, similar to motion picture regulations which prohibit youths under 17 from being admitted to R-rated movies without a parent or adult guardian." Either Spitzer is ignorant about the law, he is lying just to get headlines, or just possibly he knows there aren't any such laws and so it would be technically correct to say that there will be regulations "similar" to film regulations.

Either way he is an ass.

There are no laws in the USA regulating the sale of any entertainment medium. There are regulations on things like porn, but those are a genre and they are notoriously vague in that at least once a year a comic book store gets busted for selling comic books with drawings of boobs.

If videogames were to be singled out there would have to be a mountain of evidence that shows that they are dangerous to children. No such mountain exists. Therefore, it is just singling out videogames because it is an easy way to look like you are "looking out for families."