Slashdot Mirror
Congressman Wants Health Warnings On Video Games
An anonymous reader writes "California Rep. Joe Baca has proposed a bill which would mandate placing health warning labels on any video game rated T (13+) or higher by the ESRB. The Video Game Health Labeling Act of 2009 would require a cigarette pack-like label that reads, 'WARNING: Excessive exposure to violent video games and other violent media has been linked to aggressive behavior.'"
I'd say warmongering is better than abortion, because it always better to kill someone else's child than your own.
This is my sig.
Generally the stuff where the good guy can do evil things is not the kind that children at the impressionable age should be subjected to anyway. I don't think anyone ever argued that kindergarteners should play GTA (and I don't think they'd even want to) or watch Kill Bill or Saw. The kids that look for violent entertainment tend to be like 12-14 years old and do it as a combination of rebelling against their parents and doing something they think adults would do (at that age kids can't wait to be adults) but they'll grow out of it again as they get older. Does Sponge Bob or Bob the Builder ever rape, kill or steal without repercussions? If you're worried about impressionable children being taught violence you should look at parents teaching their children religion at a young age since those things do tend to contain a lot of bad things even if the parents don't emphasize them and there's no real question that religion has a strong tendency of affecting your behaviour when you grow up.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
Kinda interesting that all of the references except for two are to his own works and that one of those two deals with television violence and the other was published in 1986 -- well before video games became extremely popular.
If his claims are indeed "facts", then one would expect that others in the field would have found them as well. Further, one would also expect, that an author seeking to provide credence to his claims would intentionally attempt to cite others, instead of his own works.
I noticed that as well. That said, his work isn't published on his personal website. It's published on the APA's web site and is therefore the APA's voice. I can conclude three things:
1. The APA vetted his work and considers it valid.
2. The APA did not vet his work, but let him post his work as the voice of the APA anyway.
Additionally, search for "video games" on the APA's search site and see what you come up with.
I want to test your own bias. Suppose a video game producer produced a game called "KKK Warrior" in which you got the take the role of a KKK member and go on missions to murder black people, blow up black churches, and assassinate black political leaders, all while top-notch voice acting related the "heroic struggle" against the [insert vicious racial slur here]. You would complete missions and earn rewards based on killing black people and destroying black property. Do you think that people who play this game would be more likely to become aggressive toward black people?
I don't make the rules. I just make fun of them.