Congressman Introduces Video Game Warning Label Legislation

Gamasutra reports that Congressman Joe Baca (D-CA) has introduced legislation that would require video games with a rating of T or higher to have a warning label that alerts buyers to the dangers of simulated violence. The warning would read: "Excessive exposure to violent video games and other violent media has been linked to aggressive behavior." Congressman Frank Wolf (R-VA), who introduced similar legislation in 2009, co-sponsored the bill, and said, "Just as we warn smokers of the health consequences of tobacco, we should warn parents — and children — about the growing scientific evidence demonstrating a relationship between violent video games and violent behavior. As a parent and grandparent, I think it is important people know everything they can about the extremely violent nature of some of these games.”"

Comments

Citation Needed

[drmacinyasha]

Can we get some citation on the whole "linked to aggressive behavior" bit? Last I heard... The opposite was shown.

Re:Citation Needed

[myurr]

Especially as this is going to be the thin end of the wedge. By putting a warning label on it and getting the population to accept that, it then legitimises their complaints and fears about computer games leading to restrictions and bans in the future.

Re:Citation Needed

[cheekyjohnson]

However, they have been shown to cause aggressive behavior in children and young teens (who are still learning what is socially acceptable behavior).

Even a child's mind is not that fragile (let alone a teenager's). Given the number of children and teenagers that play violent video games, the amount of them that are violent and possess minds that are that fragile appears to be abysmally small and not worth worrying about.

I propose another warning

[Totenglocke]

I propose we put a warning before every comment on the news (print, online, or televised)by a politician that says "Warning: Being a politician has been linked to severe defects in reasoning ability and to rampant paranoia of all things invented after 1950. All statements should be assumed false until verified by independent sources".

Re:I propose another warning

[GameboyRMH]

This, in conjunction with the NASCAR rule (politicians must wear a suit with their corporate sponsors' logos on it)

Re:Priorities

[Supurcell]

For real. It'll be a golden age once my generation takes power. At least until the generation after mine shows up with all the things I don't like.

Warning

[ensignyu]

Excessive warning labels may lead to a distrust of warning labels.

Fox News?

[Sockatume]

I saw a study recently that showed Fox News viewers held significantly more incorrect beliefs about recent news than viewers of other channels, and that this effect scaled with the amount of viewing. Very neatly showed a causal effect. If it had been about a food additive and brain damage, we'd already have people screaming about a ban. Perhaps there should be a mandate that Fox carry a disclaimer at every ad break: "Studies show that watching Fox News results in you believing things that aren't true." The research is just as solid and incontrovertable as the research on violent video games.