I know that you know that I know that we both know quite a significant amount of people who are troglodytes, and I know also that you know that we know that they are troglodytes not particularily due to the age that they are.. Merely that's the type of people they are. Sorry, I don't buy that... Age is meaningless, I can think of several more relevant things to base an arbitrary assessment of whether or not a group of people is prepared to see certain content. Regardless in my view it's pointless to even attempt to restrict it from the view of those who aren't fit to see it, it's not likely to prevent anything that they would have done from occuring anyhow.
I agree that it's about as useful a reaction as banning many low-end guns after Martin Bryants rampage with a semi-automatic, already-restricted rifle. However, laws, even when easily broken, still have the effect of providing an avenue of prosecution, and act as a filter to those who are less determined to do whatever is being restricted. The American ratings enforcement aren't useless now, (unlike Australia's) they will actually succeed in keeping a fair number of people out of the cinema who aren't "meant" to be there.
The fact that we don't agree that those people should be kept out is irrelevant, the people in control of that do, and they have the say.
I would like to clarify something here, do you honestly believe even for a moment that the day before a person turns 18 he is infintesimally less mature than the day after? that *is* an arbitrary barrier, an arbitrary , and in my opinion , nonsensical barrier... it's absurd to think that the passage of a single second (between 11:59:59 and 12:00:00) can so drastically alter a persons ability to judge between reality and fantasy that before that second had passed
The point isn't the cross-over from "child" to "adult" that you sarcastically propose occurs in that one second, but the age at which the ratings committees deem most people are able to watch this stuff without taking a gun up the nearest bell tower. By the time most people are 18, they have enough of a grasp on reality not to be overly affected by the material. The fact that the people who control the ratings are anally retentive conservative doinks is why they have an idiotic system which places hardcore violence as nicer than sex - probably something which has a large basis in religion.
I'm sorry, censorship is flat wrong...
Very true, it is a pity that moral crusaders so often turn to censorship to destroy what they don't like. It literally comes down to "I don't like this, I can make it go away if I do this". If enough of an outcry is made against the rules, the government will change them. If the rules are fucked up enough, people will break them without thinking twice (i.e. new aust. net censorship law)
They are not good, nor well founded, they were created as a political stunt in order to curry favour with the moral majority of the American public.
Which is exactly what many corporations do, for instance the buffy incidence. It's an unfortunate fact of life that people do what they think will make them liked, whether that is for social, power , money, or spiritual reasons.
A message to all the moron trendoid sheep who blindly take up the banner of censorship and march , zombielike, bleating the praise of their new creed: You can learn to think, instead of following, you can learn that often the best way of getting something isn't forcefully. Of course, because you are stupid, and in the habit of being stupid, you probably won't. Your loss.
Slashdot Mirror
I know that you know that I know that we both know quite a significant amount of people who are troglodytes, and I know also that you know that we know that they are troglodytes not particularily due to the age that they are.. Merely that's the type of people they are. Sorry, I don't buy that... Age is meaningless, I can think of several more relevant things to base an arbitrary assessment of whether or not a group of people is prepared to see certain content. Regardless in my view it's pointless to even attempt to restrict it from the view of those who aren't fit to see it, it's not likely to prevent anything that they would have done from occuring anyhow.
I agree that it's about as useful a reaction as banning many low-end guns after Martin Bryants rampage with a semi-automatic, already-restricted rifle. However, laws, even when easily broken, still have the effect of providing an avenue of prosecution, and act as a filter to those who are less determined to do whatever is being restricted. The American ratings enforcement aren't useless now, (unlike Australia's) they will actually succeed in keeping a fair number of people out of the cinema who aren't "meant" to be there.
The fact that we don't agree that those people should be kept out is irrelevant, the people in control of that do, and they have the say.
Later,
Bio.
I would like to clarify something here, do you honestly believe even for a moment that the day before a person turns 18 he is infintesimally less mature than the day after? that *is* an arbitrary barrier, an arbitrary , and in my opinion , nonsensical barrier... it's absurd to think that the passage of a single second (between 11:59:59 and 12:00:00) can so drastically alter a persons ability to judge between reality and fantasy that before that second had passed
The point isn't the cross-over from "child" to "adult" that you sarcastically propose occurs in that one second, but the age at which the ratings committees deem most people are able to watch this stuff without taking a gun up the nearest bell tower. By the time most people are 18, they have enough of a grasp on reality not to be overly affected by the material. The fact that the people who control the ratings are anally retentive conservative doinks is why they have an idiotic system which places hardcore violence as nicer than sex - probably something which has a large basis in religion.
I'm sorry, censorship is flat wrong...
Very true, it is a pity that moral crusaders so often turn to censorship to destroy what they don't like. It literally comes down to "I don't like this, I can make it go away if I do this". If enough of an outcry is made against the rules, the government will change them. If the rules are fucked up enough, people will break them without thinking twice (i.e. new aust. net censorship law)
They are not good, nor well founded, they were created as a political stunt in order to curry favour with the moral majority of the American public.
Which is exactly what many corporations do, for instance the buffy incidence. It's an unfortunate fact of life that people do what they think will make them liked, whether that is for social, power , money, or spiritual reasons.
A message to all the moron trendoid sheep who blindly take up the banner of censorship and march , zombielike, bleating the praise of their new creed: You can learn to think, instead of following, you can learn that often the best way of getting something isn't forcefully. Of course, because you are stupid, and in the habit of being stupid, you probably won't. Your loss.
That is all,
-Biodecay.