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."
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."
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...
You are aware that Switzerland is *more* capitalistic than the rest of Western Europe right? Due to the lack of a common ethnic or linguistic background, they adopted a form of government quite similar to that of the U.S.; federalist in nature, with significant autonomy for the cantons. Their health care is provided by private organizations, and while the base level health care is required to be offered on a non-profit basis, anything above the base level is offered on a for-profit basis similar to our own. It's one of the few countries to allow assisted suicide, which is a personal freedom even the U.S. denies. Troll all you want, but Switzerland is not the country to use as an object lesson.
$_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
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.
We have assisted suicide laws in Oregon and Washington.
An Education is the Font of All Liberty
Those laws exist in a legal limbo (similar to the medical marijuana laws); they basically exist at the sufferance of the Department of Justice, and to my knowledge have not been well tested in court at the federal level.
$_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
That censorship would be significantly more odious than the easily ignored slashdot trolls.
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.
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.
In contrast to the freedom to commit assisted suicide, the country is not, in general, very socially permissive. It's a very right-wing country both economically and socially. Take, for instance, the ban on minarets in Switzerland. That degree of censorship (and xenophobia) is much more restrictive than most other western countries.
So if this is the future...where's my jet pack?
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
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..
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.
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!
That would be a niggardly response, don't you think? Why should posts that offend some be deleted? Selfish in the extreme IMO.
I still cannot find the droids I am looking for...
The minarets were not banned out of a desire to make the country homogeneous for naive tourists.
Just another "DOJ fascist authoritarian totalitarian bootlicker" -- Zeio
Actually, the Swiss always had an opinion about everything. However, we think our laws apply only in Switzerland. We do not think that we have to improve the rest of the world. So, maybe our opinion is not so known outside of Switzerland as the opinion of other countries sometimes is...
Disclaimer: Yeah I am biased.
That would be a niggardly response, don't you think? Why should posts that offend some be deleted? Selfish in the extreme IMO.
Well done; you nailed it. It masquerades as a noble cause that, coincidentally enough, is difficult to oppose just like the "for the children" or "to stop terrorists" excuses. Really it's an incredibly selfish desire to "cleanse" the world of everything the person finds distasteful. With good old ends-justify-the-means consequentialism, this type of selfishness will make people advocate censorship and other cures that are worse than the disease.
It's like that saying: most people have two reasons why they do anything -- a good reason, and the real reason. I call it a corrupting influence because the person is usually not aware that the real reason exists, which makes their agenda little more than software they are mindlessly executing.
It is a miracle that curiosity survives formal education. - Einstein
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
So do I, I live in Switzerland by the way. I think the minarett law is a scandal and Switzerland makes itself rididulous with it.
How can you single out a single religion or even a single symbol of it? I don't think it will stand before the european court of human rights.
What they should have done, to protect the swiss landscape (which doesn't include windmills b.t.w., those are dutch) is to have a law that requires new buildings to blend in with the environment. In fact such regulations are already in place, making this idiotic law superfluous.
It would allow minarets in industrial areas for example, where noone should be disturbed by them.
Sorry, I don't speak leet.
That's a naive, if understandable way of looking at things. By that logic, the federal government couldn't have laws against murder that were enforced outside of D.C. The Constitution is a mess of clauses that inevitably conflict in the real world, and common law makes the situation even more muddled. Practically speaking, the 10th is interpreted very narrowly; i.e. the federal government has a lot of powers not specifically delegated, but rather granted through centuries of legal decisions. That's why I'm saying it's in legal limbo; until federal courts specify which side of the line it falls on, we don't know whether the law applies, but that doesn't usually stop the feds from acting on their own personal interpretation.
$_ = "wftedskaebjgdpjgidbsmnjgcdwatb"; tr/a-z/oh, turtleneck Phrase Jar!/; print
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).
Were? [citation needed]
Yes, and cars can run people over, and planes can be used to take down whole buildings, and computers can be used for child porn, etc. Where do you draw the line?
Stop the actual people who commit the crime, don't put an unreasonable ban over everything you find "bad".
Then you don't ban HTF; if some parents are doing that, you stop them.
Yes, it's almost impossible to find that out. But guess what: so is banning the Internet. And the first doesn't actually conflict with Human Rights.
Yes
Don't cater to groups. Allow every adult to watch whatever they want.
No, it's not.
Dilbert RSS feed
Yes, you are. While I strongly dislike the foreign policy of the US, Switzerland's xenophobia is an embarrassment for all of western Europe.
Compared to the bastions of friendliness to foreigners that say, Austria, the UK and the Netherlands are becoming lately?
Plenty of embarassment to go around...
People replying to my sig annoy me. That's why I change it all the time.
In a practical sense Slashdot is guilty of censorship on a daily basis. It provides the ability to hide any post that moderators don't like.
Offering criteria by which readers can choose to censor incoming content is a positive thing. All readers are two clicks away from either fine-tuning or turning that feature off and viewing every post anyone wants to make. I, for example, view everything below some threshold "abbreviated" and open up some comments that appear potentially interesting even if they were panned by the mods.
OTOH making that decision for them and forever silencing unpopular speech (especially in an automated fashion based on simple word choice) is a negative thing (that many content providers obviously do). Try playing "combat arms" one day (free to play military fps) where if you say the word "sniper" your friends get "s***er" and waste valuable seconds wondering if there is a toilet on the bell tower and strain their eyes in that direction when they should be taking cover. :P
People willing to trade their freedom of expression for temporary entertainment deserve neither and will lose both.
That's not all, last time I went to London, there wasn't a single dancing chimney-sweeper in sight! Europeans have really let themselves go.
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.
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.
It would be great if moderation could objectively rank posts (if that means anything) or even rank them according to an individuals tastes or beliefs, but the way it really works is a handful of people you don't know are deciding when the4 earplugs go on or off. So all you really get to choose is whether you want to evaluate posts on your own or eliminate those that other people don't want you to see.