A Right To Bear Virtual Arms?

theodp writes "In the world of virtual goods, reports GeekWire's Todd Bishop, it looks like there's no such thing as a Second Amendment. According to a forum post by an Epic Games community manager, a new policy will remove 'gun-like' items from Microsoft's Xbox Live Avatar Marketplace on January 1. The policy reportedly applies to accessories for the avatars that represent Xbox Live users, not to games themselves, and owners of virtual weaponry like the Gears of War 3 Avatar Lancer purchased before the policy goes into effect will be permitted to continue to wield them."

Comments

Walled Garden

[houstonbofh]

And people wonder why I hate the walled garden approach to gaming... You can blow people away, but you can't say fuck... Idiots.

No rights in private forums

[Anonymous Coward]

There are many real world places that won't allow you to enter with a gun. They are not in violation of the 2nd amendment, neither is this. Being a virtual environment has nothing to do with it.

The "right" to bear arms is an Americanism

[Rix]

Don't be surprised when an international audience (like the internet) laughs at you for it.

Re:The "right" to bear arms is an Americanism

[Anonymous Coward]

Canucks with bare arms will probably get frostbite this winter, and then they'll have nothing to bear arms with.

Bad analogy...

[msauve]

First, the US Constitution affirms the rights of individuals against government interference.

Secondly, a private organization, such as MS, can tell their employees not to carry arms into the workplace, and it's perfectly OK.

Finally, if an argument is being made that there are "virtual arms," then one must refer to the "virtual Constitution." Seems to me that's the contract/TOS. I suspect it allows them to do what they want, and the user's option is to cancel their subscription. Really, does someone think they have rights when playing in MS's garden? Seems to me that it's only privileges, as provided by the contract.