Slashdot Mirror
Switzerland Passes Violent Games Ban
BanjoTed writes with a followup to news from February that the Swiss government was pursuing a ban on violent video games. He writes
"Sadly, Switzerland has now passed the law that paves the way for an outright ban on violent video games in the country. The full implications of the ruling will not be known until the government reveals the exact requirements that will be laid down by the new legislation – a decision that has not yet been made. What is certain though is that the Swiss authorities have now obtained the power to introduce any measures they see fit. The likeliest outcome seems to be an outright ban on the production, distribution and sale of any games deemed to be unsuitable – most likely anything with either a PEGI 16+ or PEGI 18+ certificate."
Congratulations on your purchase of a brand new nigger! If handled properly, your apeman will give years of valuable, if reluctant, service.
INSTALLING YOUR NIGGER.
You should install your nigger differently according to whether you have purchased the field or house model. Field niggers work best in a serial configuration, i.e. chained together. Chain your nigger to another nigger immediately after unpacking it, and don't even think about taking that chain off, ever. Many niggers start singing as soon as you put a chain on them. This habit can usually be thrashed out of them if nipped in the bud. House niggers work best as standalone units, but should be hobbled or hamstrung to prevent attempts at escape. At this stage, your nigger can also be given a name. Most owners use the same names over and over, since niggers become confused by too much data. Rufus, Rastus, Remus, Toby, Carslisle, Carlton, Hey-You!-Yes-you!, Yeller, Blackstar, and Sambo are all effective names for your new buck nigger. If your nigger is a ho, it should be called Latrelle, L'Tanya, or Jemima. Some owners call their nigger hoes Latrine for a joke. Pearl, Blossom, and Ivory are also righteous names for nigger hoes. These names go straight over your nigger's head, by the way.
CONFIGURING YOUR NIGGER
Owing to a design error, your nigger comes equipped with a tongue and vocal chords. Most niggers can master only a few basic human phrases with this apparatus - "muh dick" being the most popular. However, others make barking, yelping, yapping noises and appear to be in some pain, so you should probably call a vet and have him remove your nigger's tongue. Once de-tongued your nigger will be a lot happier - at least, you won't hear it complaining anywhere near as much. Niggers have nothing interesting to say, anyway. Many owners also castrate their niggers for health reasons (yours, mine, and that of women, not the nigger's). This is strongly recommended, and frankly, it's a mystery why this is not done on the boat
HOUSING YOUR NIGGER.
Your nigger can be accommodated in cages with stout iron bars. Make sure, however, that the bars are wide enough to push pieces of nigger food through. The rule of thumb is, four niggers per square yard of cage. So a fifteen foot by thirty foot nigger cage can accommodate two hundred niggers. You can site a nigger cage anywhere, even on soft ground. Don't worry about your nigger fashioning makeshift shovels out of odd pieces of wood and digging an escape tunnel under the bars of the cage. Niggers never invented the shovel before and they're not about to now. In any case, your nigger is certainly too lazy to attempt escape. As long as the free food holds out, your nigger is living better than it did in Africa, so it will stay put. Buck niggers and hoe niggers can be safely accommodated in the same cage, as bucks never attempt sex with black hoes.
FEEDING YOUR NIGGER.
Your Nigger likes fried chicken, corn bread, and watermelon. You should therefore give it none of these things because its lazy ass almost certainly doesn't deserve it. Instead, feed it on porridge with salt, and creek water. Your nigger will supplement its diet with whatever it finds in the fields, other niggers, etc. Experienced nigger owners sometimes push watermelon slices through the bars of the nigger cage at the end of the day as a treat, but only if all niggers have worked well and nothing has been stolen that day. Mike of the Old Ranch Plantation reports that this last one is a killer, since all niggers steal something almost every single day of their lives. He reports he doesn't have to spend much on free watermelon for his niggers as a result. You should never allow your nigger meal breaks while at work, since if it stops work for more than ten minutes it will need to be retrained. You would be surprised how long it takes to teach a nigger to pick cotton. You really would. Coffee beans? Don't ask. You have no idea.
MAKING YOUR NIGGER WORK.
Niggers are very, very averse to work of any kind. The nigger's most
Did a certain
gaming on Futurama's Neutral Planet would be.
"Banned for not being Neutral enough."
"I hate these filthy neutrals, Kif! With enemies, you know where they stand, but with neutrals - who knows. It sickens me."
There must be a good reason for this since it was done in a socialist paradise. The real question is: how does this show that Americans are culturally backwards compared to their European counterparts?
What a confusing Slashdot story.
Possession with intent to distribute?
Boy, it sure is a good thing they wrapped up all the violence into small packages with nifty little stickers on them! Whew, for a minute there, I was worried that I might actually see a "policeman" in that country, or find vulgar language on Youtube the next time I'm visiting there. Goodness me...
Good to know there's a country out there that can effectively protect its citizens from the real world.
Perhaps the Swiss could teach Slashdot programmers (if there are any) how to delete all posts with the "n" word in it.
Is it just me or is the entire world going into a period of reduced freedom and increased state control? Every developed nation appears to be banning violent games, porn and free speech in general and they're doing it for no logical reasons. Modern Warfare 2 sold 6.4million copies in the first week in the US and UK alone and yet there weren't 6.4million new mass murders on the streets. This is more than sufficient evidence to prove that violent games don't turn people into killers and yet are moronic, moralist rulers still press on with their attacks on our freedom.
The one thing that will turn me into a killer is if this continues because I'm growing to hate society more and more by the day. It's been shown many times throughout history that people will only take so much before heads start to roll.
Take the piss all you like, the fact is they have the highest gun ownership in Europe and the lowest gun crime.
Back on topic, follow the sponsors of this law, chances are they have an axe to grind and the Swiss voters will soon cost these people their jobs.
Isn't Switzerland in Europe? Whats to stop swiss gamers from driving to Germany, Italy or whatever and buying their games there?
If video games cause real world behavior, based on sales of the EA NHL 94-99 series games, the NHL should be vastly more popular than it is today. There should be an entire generation of hardcore American hockey fans who grew up playing the EA games.
But, there isn't. No one played NHL 99 and suddenly decided to demand their community center add a hockey rink.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
don't worry, there was no law passed. what passed was a mandate to the gov to create a law. that law needs to be voted on if it comes (and nobody knows what form it will have anyway).
even in the unlikely event that that law then will be passed by the parlament, we just need 50k signatures to get a public vote on it (in a world with facebook, that will be very easy).
So no panic, this just just the healthy way a democracy works, everybody has his ideas, and in the end we can vote on them.
Take the piss all you like, the fact is they have the highest gun ownership in Europe and the lowest gun crime.
Back on topic, follow the sponsors of this law, chances are they have an axe to grind and the Swiss voters will soon cost these people their jobs.
Let's hope so. I'm from the U.S. and there's plenty of this nonsense happening here: I mean, you'd almost think that our lawmakers have all our problems under complete control and have nothing more important to do with their time (and our money.)
... what do these people (indeed, anyone who wants to "ban" something) want to see happen to society, and what is the probability of that actually occurring? And is that outcome worth the price (the law of unintended consequences is always a factor.) A good law is one that has a beneficial outcome with minimal costs to society and that doesn't violate any core laws or principles of that society. It's hard to see what a ban on violent gaming will actually do, noisy rhetoric and flawed "research" aside. As you say, the country already has more guns per capita than just about anyone else (excepting perhaps the U.S., but I don't know the numbers) and comparatively little violent crime. Personally, I just don't see the point.
What it comes to down to is expectations vs. reality
I have played all sorts of games where targeting and destroying objects is what the game is all about. This started with military flight simulations and went on to tanks, mechs and space ships. Then there was the first-person shooter... started out shooting Nazis then monsters and other people... at least the shapes were people.
Also, there have been "boxing" and wrestling games for a very long time -- widely accepted sports that are also quite violent. In fact, American football is quite violent.
I know this is targeting the grand theft auto games, but there are LOTS of games where there is killing and dying. Few with rape and beating activities, but still. As far as I am concerned, MOST games are violent or could be considered such. Where should the line be drawn? The line certainly can't be straight as there are simply too many exceptions in government.
Cops are allowed to be violent. Soldiers are allowed to be violent. The news is permitted to display violence. Art is allowed to depict violent scenes... many of which are considered to be masterpieces.
And while we are telling people what they can and can't do in the privacy of their own homes, let's outlaw "violent" sex play... no more bondage and certainly no role plays or sexual fantasies that might be considered violent.
The term "slippery slope" is an understatement when it comes to this topic.
Forget legislating against entertainment. Let's legislate good parenting and see how many career-minded professionals and politicians get caught up in that net.
but at least it's a clearly stated policy with a clearly stated agenda. I disagree with this kind of censorship but it's better than the "refused classification" ban in Australia which seems to be open to more liberal interpretation than this law (although we'll have to see how it's effected).
So if this is the future...where's my jet pack?
Seriously? Make something illegal without defining what?
Obviously pretty much any RTS is out of the question. War games as well. First Person Shooters. But what about other types of games?
Is it one where violence is the primary incentive or primary way to complete a game?
If so, where does that place a game like Thief: The Dark Project, where violence runs counter to the spirit of the game?
Is it one where any kind of violence can take place?
If so, will that not eliminate any kind of racing game, where crashes are quite violent?
Is it one where you, as a player, can inflict damage to a humanoid character?
If so, what will that do to games like The Sims, where you can trap a character inside a house, letting them starve to death or set fire to the house?
What about sandbox games like Second Life, that doesn't have a specific purpose? I realise that quite a lot of people hate Second Life, but here it's a good example of a non-violent violent game. If you want it to be violent, it can be. If you don't want it to be, it won't be.
Is Mario a violent game? After all you need to kill off a lot of enemies to complete the game, or at the very least you have to avoid them killing you. Zelda? Sonic?
What about pure text based games, like Zork? Magic: The Gathering and other similar card-games that have expanded onto the computer?
Does chess count as a violent game? What about Battle Chess?
Sarcasm noted, however...
Having lived 2 years in Switzerland, their security is assured very proactively. Every male 18 to 40ish is required to serve in their military. It's not unusual to see tanks rolling down the street midday, on the way to training. Soldiers are often seen on the trains in full uniform, with weapon, off to their weekend on-duty. At a colleague's home, his service rifle was propped up in the corner next to his Swatch collection. Police with automatic weapons are obvious on their patrols at the airport in Zurich.
The Swiss may be conservative, but afraid of violence, they are not.
Too much government. It's sad to think that for something constructed to to keep the citizens safe would also find itself suitable to take it upon the right to deem what is acceptable for others.
Some games are obviously violent (GTA, Call of Duty, Quake). But what about cartoon violence, like Pokemon or even old
school Pacman? Maybe the measure addresses this
problem, but I have a hard time trusting politicians to come up with a meaningful definition that would apply to things that might need it but not to those that don't.
Of course all of this ignores the issue of one group of people deciding what larger group of can enjoy as entertainment when said entertainment isn't hurting anyone. Any state willing to do that can't call itself "free" without twisting the definition of freedom beyond anything meaningful.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
Did someone pass a law banning correlation between Slashdot headlines and the actual stories?
Title: game banned
Story: new law paves the way for a ban, but it's still unclear.
It use to be once in a while, but now...
What's next?
Title: Civilization destroyed in improbable cataclysmic event!
Story: 2012 released on DVD and Blu-Ray
Take the piss all you like, the fact is they have the highest gun ownership in Europe and the lowest gun crime.
They also have compulsory gun ownership for all military age males, so that particular statistic is pretty biased.
The idea of a total ban has more holes than a lump of Swiss cheese.
I thought this could only happen in Venezuela, because Chavez was an evil dictator..
http://yro.slashdot.org/story/10/03/04/2136257/Venezuela-Bans-Hostile-Videogames-and-Toys?from=rss
I'm confused now..
No. Just not true. Not entirely anyway. Yes, they do all have guns -- however domestic violence quite often ends up as fatal gunshot wounds. It may be true that they don't have much in the way of armed robbery compared to other European countries, but they sure do love to shoot their own families.
Not that this has anything to do with games.
How come Switzerland suddenly has an opinion about everything? First the minarets, now violent games...did Zapp Braningan sent spies to stir up the place or what?
What more can one expect from a country who's main claims to fame are dodgy bank accounts and the sodding cuckoo clock.
All of them love to shoot their families?
Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
Why does that make it biased?
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
Don't forget, they will bundle the game with its very own secret bank account! SWEET! Less violence, more embezzling, everyone WINS!
Three things will happen here. First, because Switzerland is a relatively small, landlocked country, many Swiss gamers will simply take the relatively short drive to a neighboring country to purchase the games they want. Second, many games are available for purchase online, so the drive will in many cases be unnecessary. And third, anyone who was still waiting for an excuse to pirate games in Switzerland now has it, and quite frankly, more power to them.
The only way this could be more of an empty gesture is if the Swiss legislature banned wicked thoughts. Good luck with that.
Proud member of the Weirdo-American community.
Switzerland bans everything.... Not to forget Minarets http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-december-3-2009/oliver-s-travels---switzerland
So long free world!
Grand Theft Auto - Zurich
Take control of young tough Friedrich Heinz Lykakok as he battles his way up the hierarchy of the illicit precision watch market, and eventually targets the trillions of secret dollars and Euros squirreled away in secret Swiss bank accounts. In between missions, tool around the streets and find a lovely little Swiss miss with whom to pass the time.
Pre-order now and get an unlock code for the Sig 550 rifle that shoots fine chocolate bullets. Carnage in the streets never tasted so sweet!
All that evidence could also lead to the conclusion that they're not just afraid of it, but paranoid about it.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
I am not in favor of censorship, but, I am also not in favor of 'forcing opinions' onto people regardless of the medium or method... what do I mean by that?
Let me try to give you a quick example. I have a friend that is incredibly obnoxiously loud in public, and he uses alot of profanity. I've had to distance myself from him because, while I do really enjoy his company, and he is a lifelong friend, from what I've been able to gather, he likes to pretend that he is like on one of the characters on several of the various sitcoms that he watches... For example we might go to a nice restaurant with you know, families with young children around, and he's still loudly talking about his sexual life or cussing about why such and such political candidate is useless, etc etc.... Yet, to him, if anyone would dare to ask him to keep it to himself, he would see it as censorship. He would see it as someone limiting, or placing restrictions on his 'personal freedom'.
But to me this bleeds over the edge, when we are at a public area, his words are no longer 'private' over a certain decibel level / proximity to others.
Contradictorily, if someone were to try to hand him some sort of religious tract on the streets, he would go brezerk- he would say 'how dare these @$%^@#$ try to force their opinion on me!' ---- and yet, he doesn't see what he does in public areas like restaurants as him forcing his opinion on others. (reread my very first sentence now and it should make sense in the way that I meant to express it.)-- In that sense, so many things we do are continually 'forcing' our opinions onto others. If I am in a good mood, and smiling, well... its contagious! Other people around me are cheered if I am cheerful, and thus, if it is my opinion that others around me should be happy, I am to some extent, at that period in time, 'forcing' my opinion onto them. Of course, people don't call this out because if they like what you're selling, they'll buy it.
So, what does this have to do with violent video games?
From my short lived experiences on this planet it would seem that so many humans enjoy the basest of activities- maybe not to physically participate from 1st hand, but, they certainly like to be observers of such. Sexuality, violence, oppression, strife, etc. These base qualities are used by various companies or people with agendas to trigger specific reactions from people. Usually for profit. (people on television using sexuality to sell automobiles, or people on ebay taking photos of their products in the hands of pulchritudinous females with few articles of clothing, etc.)
I quit playing violent video games a few years ago. I don't "blame" (in the sense that I do not hold them personally accountable for my actions, I would not, for example, sue them, but I will most certainly say what I'm about to say) any of the companies that made the games for my behavior while I was playing them because, well... I was the one that chose to put it on my computer and spend hours at the keyboard. But how far does that go? I mean, in various states, if you sell someone a gun and they use that gun to commit a crime, you are liable for the crimes they commit while using them. Playing various violent games for me in the past most certainly inspired me to cherish far more violent thoughts in real life- unquestionably. But I am one of those people that prides myself on the fact that I can take alot of abuse from people in real life and still treat them with respect and restrain myself from lashing out at them- verbal or otherwise------- but we all know that there are many people that pride themselves on the opposite side of that- they take pride in the fact that they will not be 'walked on' by anyone else, but will most certainly lash out to prove that they are the big man in charge, etc.
I remember I used to disdainfully ridicule the very idea that violent games could lead to violent behavior. It wasn't true in my experience, so obviously it must be false, right? But no... after man
Every able-bodied male citizen of Switzerland is conscripted into the military at age 20 for a tour of mandatory duty (women may also volunteer), and soldiers are required to keep their weapons nearby even if they're at home. This is a country where most citizens have ready access to real militarily useful guns, and the training to use them. And they're worried about Doom?
Is there a Swiss equivalent of Jack Thompson or something?
I am officially gone from
No ...
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir-crime-murders-with-firearms
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_mur_wit_fir_percap-crime-murders-firearms-per-capita
Where are your stats?
Are domestic-violence fatalities higher there than in other European countries? Or is that still lower too?
Now that dictator Chavez wants to ban violent video games in Switzerland!? WTF? These leftist dictatorships need to be stopped! ;-)
Democracy Now! - uncensored, anti-establishment news
The two legislative organs have suggested two bans, but that's by no means the end of the story (remember, everything in politics is very slow in Switzerland, mainly due to their direct democracy approach and the fact that there's no concept of a president there to speed things up):
a) ban extremely violent games for anyone under 18 years
b) ban extremely violent games for anyone, as well as the possession, production and sale thereof
a) is well accepted and b) is highly controversial, but unfortunately made it through nevertheless. It is very unlikely that the executive will implement b) though, in fact it's even unlikely it will implement anything as there are laws banning "cruel" violence already (with a rather high bar though, considering all the horror movies making it through), and beside being too controversial, b) is in fact considered not to be implementable as it would require a constitutional change which is unlikely to happen. Even then, there would be various ways to block it if enough people agree and enforce a vote on it.
The government is against it.
The parliament however has approved two laws: one which forbids the sale of 18+ games to minors, and another one that forbids the sale of "violent" games completely.
How this doesn't mean yet that the laws come into effect just like that. Instead a lengthy process starts to sort out the details. I do not think it will really lead to a complete ban on violent games.
As the government has already pointed out, just to define and judge what a violent game is, a federal level authority would need to be institutionalized. This requires a change in the constitution, which won't happen overnight. Probably it will require a referendum.
The parliament doesn't really want to have both laws come into effect, but the goal is to get the discussion started at the political level (the political process here is slow and complicated, and it may take several years before something really happens).
Most likely outcome: they will recognize the european PEGI rating system and forbid sales of 18+ games to minors; it will take 1 or 2 years before it really comes into effect.
Sorry, I don't speak leet.
This only can really effect stores in switzerland i would assume. You could still get games off ebay etc... steam, or other online distribution methods or even go so far as well...piracy. I'm pretty sure the Swiss government is too dumb to realize there are other methods to acquiring software/games.
This is not yet a law. There isn't even a law text. The only thing that happend is that the parliament (Nationalrat and Ständerat) has given the Bundesrat (think of the president, but 7 people) the order to create such a text. But he (the Bundesrat) first wants to "wait and observe" the situation. We will likely see a proposed text in a few years. Then first the parliament (both Nationalrat and Ständerat) needs to accept one of the proposed laws. Afterwards the people can start a Referendum with 100000 signatures and then the people will vote on it. In five years we will most likely have a law that makes the pegi ratings binding (no selling of 18+ games to a twelve year old).
The title of this article is bullshit an the contents in large parts. The journalist has apparently no clue what he/she is talking about and just aims to grab attention with a grossly wrong article.
Baki is correct, there are proposals under way to create a new law. Among them an extreme 'full ban'. The likely outcome is something 'eurocompatible', e.g. similar to what the other countries (France, Germany) do.
Markus
Because it's comparing apples (people who wanted a gun and so bought one) vs oranges (people who may or may not have wanted one but are legally required to have one anyway).
It'll allow Carmageddon but forbid Rabbids go Home, as the former doesn't require violence against humans (but does allow it, with very great positive effects in game) whereas the second requires you to shout "BAAAAAAAAAAH" against humans to get more stuff from them. That's got to be one of the dumbest laws I've ever seen.
Ah, blast. I was hoping to move to Switzerland when shit goes down in the States. Where am I going to go now?
TL;DR
"Take the piss all you like, the fact is they have the highest gun ownership in Europe and the lowest gun crime."
Yes, but they can't just buy as many guns as they want whenever they want. They are given registered assault rifles with a regulated supply of ammo that is periodically checked by the government. And they are also given military training and discipline along with it. They actually have a well-regulated militia, unlike America.
---------
There is inferior bacteria on the interior of your posterior.
In other news, piracy of violent video games in Switzerland is up 12000%.
There goes the whole franchised violent video games tourneys in Swiss minarets with the local bankers sending corroborating info to the IRS/DHS business model. Back to the drawing board.
There's a difference between paranoia and preparedness. I think the long prevailing position of the Swiss is that they don't especially care for violence, but simultaneously, they know it has its place.
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
From one of the article's comments which sums things up nicely:
Bullshit.
This exact same parliament, AFTER the last general elections, DENIED similar legislation two years ago. There where TWO motions passed, one that asks for legislation that prohibits the sale of violent games to minors, and one that asks for legislation (DRAFT legislation) that imposes a complete ban, the last one being passed with a much smaller majority.
This does not main that the radical proposal will be accepted by the parliament.
And then there is something much more important: in Swiss, ANY new law can be vetoed by the people. You can demand a binding referendum if you get 100.000 support votes. So, 100.000 gamers sign an internet petition, and there will be a referendum. Only 30% of the voting population has to show up to make the results legally binding. Gamers are going to vote for their hobby in massive numbers, meaning that even if this law is enacted, it will practically certainly be dead withing a month of it being accepted by parliament. IF it gets passed by parliament, that is.
Because it's comparing apples (people who wanted a gun and so bought one) vs oranges (people who may or may not have wanted one but are legally required to have one anyway).
You haven't explained the significance of that difference. To listen to gun-control advocates, more guns equals more crime. That's why they think they will reduce violent crime by disarming people who obey weapons regulations (that is, law-abiding citizens). I suppose some of them might seriously believe that a criminal willing to commit murder is worried about getting caught with an illegal weapons possession charge, but that's absurd. So when we talk of people who can realistically be disarmed, we are talking about law-abiding citizens.
In other countries, the only people who have guns are the ones who wanted them and bought them (let's call them Group A). In Switzerland, those people have guns and everyone else does, too (let's call those Group B). If the case for gun-control reducing crime were correct, Switzerland should have crime from Group A and crime from Group B. If they have less gun crime per capita than other industrialized nations, it seriously discredits the justifications given by gun-control advocates. And the use of the police power of government to remove a freedom like gun ownership does need justification.
So if anything, the relatively unique situation in Switzerland (a militia) strengthens the comparison, because anyone in Switzerland who wanted to shoot someone has ready access to firearms. In a way, this is like the reduction in violent crime that has been enjoyed by every US state which has enabled conceal-carry permits for firearms. Both situations incline me to believe that gun-control is a religious issue, because those who advocate it never seem to think very hard about the evidence against them. It does not surprise me that the desire to blame society's problems on inanimate objects would be based on rhetoric, emotional appeals, and religious fervor, and not on actual evidence.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
I suppose some of them might seriously believe that a criminal willing to commit murder is worried about getting caught with an illegal weapons possession charge
You suppose wrong. It's about muggers and other small fry. A mugger won't risk a possession charge because a mugging carries a much lower penalty and being the one mugger with a gun will make the police interested.
Also the compulsory weapons in Switzerland are battle rifles, those aren't exactly ideal for concealed carrying or even crime on the streets.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
There's a difference between paranoia and preparedness. I think the long prevailing position of the Swiss is that they don't especially care for violence, but simultaneously, they know it has its place.
(Paraphrased) "If you want peace, prepare for war." - Flavius Vegetius Renatus
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
I guess all violent games will simply be downloaded then.
Take my BFP (BF pillow) 9000, pink bunnies.
Giggle! It's so soft! And I don't even have to aim it!
Every male 18 to 40ish is required to serve in their military. It's not unusual to see tanks rolling down the street ...
It sounds to me as though they might be banning violent games.. not to curb violent behaviors.. but to prevent "tomorrows soldiers" from turning into couch potatoes.
After all, the Swiss Army should be known for something more than MacGuyver's dweeby pocketknife xD
People willing to trade their freedom of expression for temporary entertainment deserve neither and will lose both.
Actually the Swiss have the third highest gun-related crime rate in Europe. After Estonia and Finland.
Good for Switzerland!
About time some morality was interjected into the present day culture.
Killing is bad. Depicting killing as a game is bad. Didn't your parents teach you that? If not then now is the time to learn it.
For the instant we do find a substitute for war (video games/vr games) the more aggressive and violent of us will no longer be interested, as much as they were, in killing each other. Reminds me of Full Metal Jacket how the angry aggressive war-mongering drinkers hated the chilled out potheads cause they didn't wanna fight anymore. Video Games are a real threat people, can you imagine if those young minds actually had a clearer idea of what war was really like?
...his service rifle was propped up in the corner next to his Swatch collection.
That is the most horrifying thing I've ever heard! A Swatch collection? It's too late for him.
A month ago I started sewing, just to fix old work clothing, and now I've begun reupholstering things. Lime and teal look so good! No, NO!
Save yourself! Play violent video games, before it's too late
need to sew drapes, cushions, make doyles, must color match. can't. resist. styles.
... so it's no surprise they don't even want to fight virtual ones.
The summary and TFA is inaccurate. As this Swissinfo article explains, the Swiss parliament has not yet passed a law providing for a ban. They have passed a motion, which is a request that the government propose a bill that provides for a ban. Parliament must still discuss and vote on that proposed bill, and if it adopts that bill as a law, it will be made subject to a nationwide referendum if 50,000 voters request it.
...and freedom are inversely proportional. As the population increases, freedom must give way.
Grown people still play shoot-em-ups? Seriously? Simulated violence is considered fun, and there is nothing better to do? That anybody over the age of 14 cares I find amazing.
A mugger with a gun is a murderer who hasn't pulled the trigger yet. What's the purpose of having the gun if they're not willing to use it?
Doesn't this strike anyone as a bit weird given the centuries of Swiss neutrality that was bought by supplying mercenary armies to whoever would pay? Including the Pope?
Yeah, there's this really old thing called national borders, customs and taxes.
It makes everything you buy from outside of your own country subject to inspections, taxes and even confiscation if it's in conflict with your country's laws...
And in Europe country is an actual country not a federal state. This goes double for nations such as Switzerland that are NOT members of the supranational EU organization.
I'll ask this once, are you American?
What you describe there is robbery, where violence or the threat of violence is used to take someone's possessions. That's considered a violent crime, even if the mugger does not actually injure anyone. If the police are not already interested in this, they need to be fired and replaced by police who are. Further, let's say that a mugger uses a knife instead of a gun. Both are deadly weapons. A person killed by a knife is just as dead as a person killed by a gun. The crime is the same either way: the criminal threatened someone with a deadly weapon in order to take their property by force.
I doubt that the unauthorized possession (with no distribution) of a type of contraband carries a more severe penalty than a violent crime, but if true, that is not how it should be, but then I digress. If the gun-control advocated are correct, then those places where firearms are completely forbidden (like Washington D.C.) should have rates of muggings and other violent crimes lower than the rest of the nation, but they don't, so clearly their theories do not describe the real world.
Speaking of muggers, one reason conceal-carry permits lower violent crime is that the predatory criminals cannot distinguish between helpless victims and those who are ready to fight back. With a gun anyone, no matter what their physical condition, can quickly and reliably present deadly force. Criminals who prey on others want helpless victims; they don't want to risk their lives in a shootout.
I see what you are trying to do there, and I wonder if you also see what you're trying to do. I made two distinct points. One point was about universal gun ownership. The other point was about US states where plenty of people choose not to own firearms, but those who do are able to obtain conceal-carry permits. Those two points were listed in the same post, but are otherwise independent. You are conflating the two points. The inability to conceal a large battle rifle has absolutely nothing to do with whether conceal-carry permits lower violent crime rates. Sorry but when people try to confuse issues like this, either accidentally or deliberately, it's a sign that they have a weak argument.
Lest there be further needless confusion, I'll explain a bit more. The position of gun-control advocates is that fewer firearms means there will be less violent crime. This is why they urge the government to restrict and/or forbid the private ownership of firearms. When you have a militia that requires every able-bodied male in every household to own a battle rifle, every household has access to firearms. When you have states that allow gun ownership and conceal-carry permits, every household that wants guns can obtain and carry them. Both situations involve more guns and more people owning guns than anything the gun-control advocates would want. Yet both situations realize the gun-control advocates' stated goal of reducing violent crime.
Upon honest appraisal, the dispassionate, intellectually honest inquirer would be forced to conclude that gun-control is a religious position that has little or no connection with reality. That movement neither addresses the evidence against it, nor feels a need to address said evidence. Its followers do not see this as a problem, as a reason to rethink their position. It's purely emotional and it's purely based on blaming human problems on inanimate objects. It's amazing to me that anyone grants it equal footing with positions based on evidence and experience.
I just described the people who support this political position, t
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
Chess began as a symbolic war game. The pawns were swordsmen, the knights were knights, the rooks were war elephants, etc. The same principle might apply to other board games with opposing sides, such as checkers. PC and Console Games, anybody's guess really as to how the legislation will be written in each country. The clash between market demand as fulfilled by game developers and the perceived need for protecting the mental health of children has led to this crisis, which may turn into a growing international crisis all too soon.
Hehe, while your joke is somewhat funny a LOT of nations were in fact neutral at the time. It was a valid position! Norway, Sweden and Switzerland were all neutral nations - it didn't stop Nazi-Germany from invading Norway!
I have never ever seen a live tank yet and I've lived in Switzerland my whole life. They'd just damage the roads anyway.
Well, maybe you should stop yodelling in the hills and go into the towns and cities.
And on a related note if we outlaw possession of "hacking tools" like port scanners, password crackers and packet sniffers it'll reduce the amount of computer crime since script kiddies and other small fry won't risk a possession charge because an unauthorized access carries a much lower penalty than possession of hacking tools and being the one script kiddie with a copy of nmap will make the police interested.
or perhaps that approach is idiotic and hopeless and would only lead to sys admins being unable to check their own systems without being criminals leading to an increase in computer crime.
I saw them a handful of times in Hinwil, ZH from our office building. I do believe we were near a depot though.
That's why this terrible game called chess has to be banned.
All of the laws restricting economic flows define black markets.
What are the penalties vs the demand ? Do I have to stand on a street corner in a particular part of town ?
Killing for pleasure is sick. While socially acceptable, in many places, simulated killing for pleasure is no less sick (obviously less harmful for the victim).
If you state what you are arguing for plainly-- simulated violence and killing for pleasure-- the defense of violent games/ violent other activities becomes hard to defend without sounding line a psychopath.
German and French Game-vendors are popping the champagne as we speak.
No problem. Germans buy their videogames from Austrian shops that ship to Germany. Francophone Swisses can buy them from France (Lyon is very close to Geneva and is reachable by TGV), and Italophone Swisses can buy them from Italy :3
In Switzerland we have recently passed a law to protect animal rights. Theoretically, it is illegal now to buy a single aquarium fish, because it would be alone and depressed. Such animals have to be bought in couples.
The fact is, that the swiss parliament prefers passing law on non important matters, like animal rights or video games, that might receive a general agreement from the uninformed public, rather that being unpopular buy passing laws on more important but controvertial topics, like immigration, unemployment or social insurances.
This is just the first step in a long convoluted law making process. More information on how law making in Switzerland works is found in this excellent (and entertaining) documentary:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0381395/
Now is a good justification for piracy !
The Wise adapts himself to the world. The Fool adapts the world to himself. Therefore, all progress depends on the Fool.
> Because it's comparing apples (people who wanted a gun and so bought one) vs oranges (people who may or may not have wanted one but are legally required to have one anyway).
Well, to be correct, you are NOT required to keep your gun (Sturmgewehr) after your compulsory military service. It's up to you to say you wanna keep it or not.
In other news: Swiss ISPs are gearing up for an increase in Bittorrent traffic.
Hilarious that they are so concerned with military preparedness. Prepared for what exactly? Swiss in a war? Unheard of!
paves the way for an outright ban on violent video games
You've got that entirely wrong - what's the matter with you people? It is a "violent games ban", ie a violent ban on games - any game. If you are seen to play a game or otherwise enjoying yourself in an inoffensive way, a 2.5 m (this being a metric country) tall Schwarzenegger-shaped bloke will jump out from behind a bush, yelling "I'll rip your *&~#&£$&-ing head off, swine. Vot you zink your doing?".
True. Compulsory military service being defined as age 20 to approximately 34. Just being through with your on-duty days neither gets you out of the reserve (i.e. you keep a huge garbage bag full of, well, army garbage) nor does it get you out of owning an fully-automatic assault rifle.
> Just being through with your on-duty days neither gets you out of the reserve (i.e. you keep a huge garbage bag full of, well, army garbage)
> nor does it get you out of owning an fully-automatic assault rifle.
First part is correct, the second isn't. While you might still be the technical owner of the gun, you do NOT have to keep it anywhere near you. You can, as of recently, deposit it in an armory (Zeughaus), though not all of them are as of yet equipped to handle this.
True. After great opposition from Army figureheads, you are now allowed to voluntarily deposit your rifle in an armory (more or less) near you.
Unfortunately, most of the affected population won't hear but a very brief mention of this as they get all of their information about their rights (few) and duties (lots, to compensate for the lack of rights) from their superiors. Informational material from critical groups isn't really welcome in the barracks and sentencing anyone passing around flyers to pay a couple hundred bucks or sit in solitary for a few days costs the judge-jury-executioner but a smile.
Going on, you're very reluctant to think of the annual mandatory shooting exercises. Most people do them on weekends, and business hours of armories tend to be rather limited. So apart from all the travel time to retrieve and deposit that hunk of scrap metal again, don't forget to look after it for the rest of the weekend. Oh, and take care not to shoot your buddies on the range parking lot with the (unaccounted for) ammo you picked up there or any of the 3 million bullets (forced upon anybody with a gun, back in the day) whose whereabouts nobody is really sure of.
Indeed. I thought this was an interesting article on the BBC, about censorship laws following from a moral panic over an urban myth, in 1954: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/8574484.stm
At first I thought, it's sad that the same madness is still going on. But then I thought, it's actually worse today - for all the madness of the 1950s law, at least it was restricted to the issue of selling to minors. But these days, bans on selling to minors is a given - it's not even debated by politicans anymore - and the new laws in various countries are about banning things even for adults.
I too lived in Switzerland for 2 years (I suspect for the same reason as the above poster, though I no longer have anything to do with that crap, I did enjoy my time there). It is actually a safe and awesome country. Every man has a assault weapon in their home and is trained in its use. Women literally walk down dark alleys at night and nothing ever happens. They're so tolerant (well sort of, they have some xenophobia) that I've seen couples having sex clothed and unclothed in public, even same sex couples, and no one minded. It's really a mind your own business type of country. They also love the heck out of their home, to the point that gradeschool kids are required to learn the reasons that their local community's streets are named as they are (this is also a requirement for citizenship).
Overall it's a great country, though I'm not saying there aren't bad things about it. The 50 hour standard work week kind of sucks, though since NO ONE commutes (literally a 45 minute drive is an all day event over there), it might work out to about the same amount of time that the average american works. It is probably one of the top 10 best countries to live in, though it'd be at the bottom of that list, pretty much every Nordic country beats it on my criteria list (incidentally the US is around number 40 on my list, I'd have already left but am trying to finish raising my kid in a divorce situation).
Also the compulsory weapons in Switzerland are battle rifles, those aren't exactly ideal for concealed carrying or even crime on the streets.
Then why make such a big deal about them here in the States?
Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
Hilarious that they are so concerned with military preparedness. Prepared for what exactly? Swiss in a war? Unheard of!
Why do you think that may be? Perhaps because they are quite prepared for it, making an invasion very difficult.
Your word does me no harm.
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.
From what I understand, their country is essentially a giant mountain fortress filled with an entire country of well-armed militia with no real strategic value. Far easier to roll through the lowland countries like Holland in WW2. At least, I'd bet that's what the Germans were thinking.
Irony: Agile development has too much intertia to be abandoned now.
Honestly no idea, I'd say assault rifles are more in the spirit of the second amendment than handguns because they are more useful for a militia. Assault rifles and submachine guns are the kinds of guns you'd want for a militia, in addition to man-portable rocket launchers for anti-vehicle and anti-air use. During a surprise blitzkrieg a population armed with proper military gear would be much more effective in tying the invaders up until the main force arrives (a key of Blitzkrieg is to strike a weak position, capture and fortify it before the enemy can react so the counterattack is against a strong position). On the other hand a concealed pistol has no use for a militia, you have to declare that you belong to a militia by wearing some identifying sign if you want to follow the Geneva Convention.
Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
A very fine line. However my point - that people having guns everywhere are not somehow automatically braver than those that don't - still stands.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
A very fine line.
It's not a fine line in the least. These are completely disparate ideas. Paranoia is a delusion marked anxiety and or fear. Preparedness is what it is: a state of being prepared. The point is, if you're prepared in mind (being disciplined and resolute), body (being fit and trained) and material needs (such as having a supply of goods beneficial to survival*), you need not be afraid.
Natural disaster? Foreign invasion? Domestic insurrection? Zombie attack? (that's a joke, son) Your life is simply made easier if you've taken the necessary steps to become generally prepared, whereas paranoia is useless to the survivalist.
However my point - that people having guns everywhere are not somehow automatically braver than those that don't - still stands.
You mean having a gun in hand doesn't make you instantly brave? Well, I don't know... There's ghettos in this country that my white ass would not walk through unarmed. However, I can definitively say that my confidence would be greatly expanded, if I were rolling through behind an M2 machine gun turret.
*serviceable weapons as applicable to militia use would certianly be counted.
Constitutional rights may be respected, repealed, or modified; but they must never be ignored.
So, has it been 2 or 3 days since you last molested a child? You're a Child Molestor. QED!
Over-the-top Response Guy! Giving "Over-the-Top Responses" since 1970.