I think it's highly probable that this proposed law has a lot more to do with pretending to be "doing something" about "the problem" than it does with protecting children from a real threat.
I wish this didn't have to occur and it doesn't but constituents of representatives and senators seem to think that games are causing these problems and want to see them regulated, so thusly, they are being regulated. It shouldn't have to happen, but the way the system is now, there isn't anyone making the rules (and enforcing them) so the government is taking it upon itself. I really don't know what else to say. People feel as if "this problem" has gone unchecked for too long. My personal feelings fall in very close to yours, my parents always made sure I didn't get overexposed to some things they deemed bad for children at a young age, and I don't think I'm any worse off because of that. Nor do I believe those that are allowed to do those things I wasn't are going to grow up to be violent. Media always wants a scapegoat, and right now, games are it, and they will continue to be until something "worse" comes along. People in the '50s were up in arms about this "Rock-and-Roll" that was "of the devil!!" and now, even though now, the music of this day and age has degenerated quite a bit in some respects, the focus has moved on to the next new thing.
That was exactly my point. the MPAA took it upon themselves to try to govern themselves so legislation wouldn't have to. As of yet, the game industry has yet to do the same. If there were a GDAA(?) then maybe they could keep stores that weren't heeding the ESRB ratings in check a little better since all the developers would be putting up a unified front. And yes, in the end I do realize it all becomes moot because the kids that want the games bad enough will find someone to buy the games for them, but the point of all this is that it is a roundabout way to inform parents that aren't paying enough attention to their kids. And those are the kids that end up growing up to bring a rifle to school or whatnot. Out of all the reports of children shooting up their school it's never been said that they were a perfectly normal child who got attention from both of their parents and was well loved, etc. Its generally been the same MO, left alone often, stayed in their room playing games all the time, not given any attention, listening to "scary" music... (i have done all of these, and i never shot up my school...) but anyhow...
My point is, legislation needs to pick up where the industry left off, they didn't try to create a body which could enforce the rules they wanted retailers to follow so now the legislators of individual states are picking up their slack.
There might not be laws that force movie theaters to screen who is allowed to watch their movies, the MPAA makes sure their rules are followed else the theaters won't be given the opportunity to do so. This is the type of self-regulation that should go on in the gaming industry, but, obviously no one has stepped up to force retailers to take heed to the ESRBs rating system so now the government has decided to get involved.
On the book part, how many kids do you know today that would go into a book store and buy a "bloodbath" novel to read it for its gory details versus going to blockbuster and renting a R-Rated movie which shows the same? My mind points me to this one number known as 0.
Not to get off topic, but I personally think the parents should have the ultimate choice in anything their children do, and they do, if they can execute their decisions correctly and raise the child to know what they expect them to do, then all is well. However, many parents today don't give a crap about what their children are doing so long as they aren't bothering anyone. Government should never have to be called in to be a baby sitter, but then again, if it never had to be, we wouldn't have a need for a military and an active police force now would we?
Point is, nothing in the world is perfect and forcing retailers to make people pay attention to the ESRB ratings on games isn't the perfect option, but it is better than what is currently going on.
I know when I was younger my parents were generally always making sure I wasn't doing things I wasn't supposed to, but on those occasions that they allowed me to run off by myself, if I wanted to go see a rated R movie, I wouldn't have been able to get in.
I ask you, really, what is the difference between enforcing laws that keep kids from watching movies that have been deemed too violet or sexual or whatnot, to keeping them from being able to buy games of the same nature without parental consent?
Nothing really.. If the parents allow it then the kid can still do it, this will hopefully just make the parents realise that maybe they shouldn't get their kid "game x" because it is rated mature, maybe they'll pay a little more attention to what they buy now.
I was told that I could not have caffiene for 2 weeks due to a medical condition (that I actually did not have, I was misdiagnosed.) and that caused me to quit cold turkey. I never was a coffee drinker, but I was drinking 8-12 coke/pepsis a day at a point, which is rather rediculous. I went through the withdrawals as well, but after a week or so they subsided, and as a side effect of not taking in all those extra calories I've managed to lose 30 lbs as well (over 5mnths). I also sleep better now that I'm not on caffiene. Its all up to you, but since I'm a poor college student I'm happy I quit my coke/pepsi addiction. The money I was spending on buying drinks now goes towards buying games and computer upgrades =)
Slashdot Mirror
I think it's highly probable that this proposed law has a lot more to do with pretending to be "doing something" about "the problem" than it does with protecting children from a real threat.
I wish this didn't have to occur and it doesn't but constituents of representatives and senators seem to think that games are causing these problems and want to see them regulated, so thusly, they are being regulated. It shouldn't have to happen, but the way the system is now, there isn't anyone making the rules (and enforcing them) so the government is taking it upon itself. I really don't know what else to say. People feel as if "this problem" has gone unchecked for too long. My personal feelings fall in very close to yours, my parents always made sure I didn't get overexposed to some things they deemed bad for children at a young age, and I don't think I'm any worse off because of that. Nor do I believe those that are allowed to do those things I wasn't are going to grow up to be violent. Media always wants a scapegoat, and right now, games are it, and they will continue to be until something "worse" comes along. People in the '50s were up in arms about this "Rock-and-Roll" that was "of the devil!!" and now, even though now, the music of this day and age has degenerated quite a bit in some respects, the focus has moved on to the next new thing.
That was exactly my point. the MPAA took it upon themselves to try to govern themselves so legislation wouldn't have to. As of yet, the game industry has yet to do the same. If there were a GDAA(?) then maybe they could keep stores that weren't heeding the ESRB ratings in check a little better since all the developers would be putting up a unified front. And yes, in the end I do realize it all becomes moot because the kids that want the games bad enough will find someone to buy the games for them, but the point of all this is that it is a roundabout way to inform parents that aren't paying enough attention to their kids. And those are the kids that end up growing up to bring a rifle to school or whatnot. Out of all the reports of children shooting up their school it's never been said that they were a perfectly normal child who got attention from both of their parents and was well loved, etc. Its generally been the same MO, left alone often, stayed in their room playing games all the time, not given any attention, listening to "scary" music... (i have done all of these, and i never shot up my school...) but anyhow...
My point is, legislation needs to pick up where the industry left off, they didn't try to create a body which could enforce the rules they wanted retailers to follow so now the legislators of individual states are picking up their slack.
There might not be laws that force movie theaters to screen who is allowed to watch their movies, the MPAA makes sure their rules are followed else the theaters won't be given the opportunity to do so. This is the type of self-regulation that should go on in the gaming industry, but, obviously no one has stepped up to force retailers to take heed to the ESRBs rating system so now the government has decided to get involved.
On the book part, how many kids do you know today that would go into a book store and buy a "bloodbath" novel to read it for its gory details versus going to blockbuster and renting a R-Rated movie which shows the same? My mind points me to this one number known as 0.
Not to get off topic, but I personally think the parents should have the ultimate choice in anything their children do, and they do, if they can execute their decisions correctly and raise the child to know what they expect them to do, then all is well. However, many parents today don't give a crap about what their children are doing so long as they aren't bothering anyone. Government should never have to be called in to be a baby sitter, but then again, if it never had to be, we wouldn't have a need for a military and an active police force now would we?
Point is, nothing in the world is perfect and forcing retailers to make people pay attention to the ESRB ratings on games isn't the perfect option, but it is better than what is currently going on.
I know when I was younger my parents were generally always making sure I wasn't doing things I wasn't supposed to, but on those occasions that they allowed me to run off by myself, if I wanted to go see a rated R movie, I wouldn't have been able to get in. I ask you, really, what is the difference between enforcing laws that keep kids from watching movies that have been deemed too violet or sexual or whatnot, to keeping them from being able to buy games of the same nature without parental consent? Nothing really.. If the parents allow it then the kid can still do it, this will hopefully just make the parents realise that maybe they shouldn't get their kid "game x" because it is rated mature, maybe they'll pay a little more attention to what they buy now.
I was told that I could not have caffiene for 2 weeks due to a medical condition (that I actually did not have, I was misdiagnosed.) and that caused me to quit cold turkey. I never was a coffee drinker, but I was drinking 8-12 coke/pepsis a day at a point, which is rather rediculous. I went through the withdrawals as well, but after a week or so they subsided, and as a side effect of not taking in all those extra calories I've managed to lose 30 lbs as well (over 5mnths). I also sleep better now that I'm not on caffiene. Its all up to you, but since I'm a poor college student I'm happy I quit my coke/pepsi addiction. The money I was spending on buying drinks now goes towards buying games and computer upgrades =)