You are wrong about porno thing. The government can regulate the sale of porn to minors as pornography falls under the legal definition of obscenity, and obscenity isn't protected by First Amendment. I totally agree with what you said otherwise.
Seeing as there are no laws barring the sale of ultra violent movies, music CDs, books, magazines or any other violent materials to minors, i see no reason why there should be one for violent video games.
Not only that but the courts including the Supreme Court have ruled that minors have First Amendment rights and that the only material that can be legally restricted to them is material that falls under the legal definition of "harmful to minors", and that the "harmful to minors" definition is an extension of obscenity law that deals only with sexually explicit material (a.k.a. pornography). Materials that depict of describe violence are not obscene and are therefore fully protected by the First Amendment for both minors and adults.
The MPAA rating systme isn't inforced by law. It's voluntary just like the ESRB. And that's the way it should be. Also minors DO have First Amendment rights. So this law does have to do with free speech and the constitution.
It takes away the parents responsibilty of having to keep an eye out for material THEY may find offensive or unsuitable for their kids and places it on someone else shoulder's. The fact is it's up to YOU, to make sure YOUR kids don't get ahold of material YOU may find offensive or unsuitable for them. If we make stuff like this law, then we'd essencially have to ban the sale of everything out there to minors as just about everything out there is likely to be offensive or unsuitable for their kids in the eyes of some parents.
"As for resulting in less M games being made, this should have already happened if it was going to happen. Movie ratings have caused many, many originally MPAA board R-rated movies to be pared down to PG-13, and this was all with a purely voluntary, fine-free ratings system."
So can you imagine what would happen if they made it law for movies to. We'd get yet more cut down from an "R" rating to a "PG-13" rating crap so that the movie execs can get more money from the young kids/teens. It would make things worse.
"Yet, laws fining retailers for selling alcohol to minors has not caused convenience stores to stop selling beer. Only to stop selling beer to minors."
That because it's worth the risk. Beer stores make WAYYYYYYYYY more money then places that sell games. And stores that sell beer make WAYYYYYYYY more money on selling the beer then the places that sell games make on selling the games.
The fines for cigereetes are still not as high as that for selling "M" rated games to minors. I guess the government thinks violent games are worse for kids then smoking. Not to mention the original law had fines of $5000 and up to 6 months in prison for those who sold "M" rated games to minors.
Well, a recent FTC study showed kids are able to get R and Unrated DVDs and videos easier they they can get "M" rated video games (81% for R and unrated DVDs/videos compared to 69% for "M" rated videogames) yet you don't see the government trying to regulate movies. There are many stores that will card you for buying an "M" rated game yet won't card you for buying an R or unrated rated DVD or video. So it looks like the videogame industry is doing better then the movie industry in this regard.
"This is hardly a freedom issue, as the law does not ban minors from playing the games, just buying them."
Seriously, how is this not a freedom issue. Lets say for example that the government banned the sale of alcohol or cigerettes to adults but you could still drink or smoke them if you got ahold of them. Would you consider that not to be a freedom issue to? You should either ban them outright from sale AND use or do neither.
"I know that it may sound harsh to all you kiddies out there, but not being allowed to do/get something is part of growing up. Besides, being underage and still obtaining that mature game/case of beer/porno mag/bag of mushrooms and hiding it from parents/authorities is (was for me, at least) hella fun at that age."
I agree. When i was younger smoking seemed so much better then it does now (i'm 23) since i couldn't legally obtain them back then, same thing with drinking. With that said though the things you mentioned in your post (beer, shrooms, prono mag) are nowhere even near comparable to harmless "Mature" rated video games.
Originally the fine was $5000 and the person could get up to 6 months in prison. But it doesn't matter anyways, this law is no different the other anti-gaming laws that were struck down as unconstitutional in the past. Actually, this one is even more broad and vague then those other ones. It's DOA.
Anybody who claims this law is a TOOL to help parents is a TOOL themselves. There are alot of things parents out there don't want there children to have so according to your logic we'd have to ban the sale of of just about everything to minors as just about everything out there is likely to be offensive or unsuitable for their children in the eyes of some parents. Why should the parents against violent games have a law but not the religious parents who are against there kids having Harry Potter books, heavy metal music and Dungeons & Dragons RPGs. Or the atheist parents who don't want there kids having the Bible or Koran. Or the health nut parents who don't want there kids to have chips, chocolate bars and pop.
P.S - There are no laws barring the sale or rental of R rated movies to minors. This is a common missconception. Like the video game ratings these are voluntary ratings only meant as a guide to parents and that's it.
Go to this website: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/default.asp
Then on the left hand corner of the screen is a thing called "Search by Number". In the blank space right below it type "HB4023" without the quotes. Then in the top left hand corner click "Full Text".
Sorry i couldn't find a direct link that could work.
This law is so vague it would essenially ban minors from buying football games, World War 2 themed shooters or even RPGs because they contain realistic depictions of human on human violence. If this law was extended to cover movies, music and books also it would essenically (sp?) outlaw the sale of the Bible or Star Wars films to minors. Pretty pathetic.
You're using extreme examples here: Guns, knives, alcohol, cigerettes. None of those things even remotely compare to entertainment materials like movies, music, video games, books, ect.
What i'm saying is this. If the your going to restrict access to violent games on the basis that it helps parents who find them unsuitable or offensive for there kids, then essencially you would have to restrict access to all materials to children because everything out there is likely to be offensive or objectionable in the eyes of some parent in regards to their kids whether it be the Bible, Harry Potter books, Magic the Gathering cards, ect. The parent who doesn't want his/her child reading that Harry Potter novels can't be around their child 24/7 to make sure they're not doing so, so accroding to your logic we'd have to restrcit Harry Potter books to all persons under the age of 18 as a TOOL to help the parents who don't want there children reading them. Apply the same thing to the bible, magic the gathering cards, heavy metal music, ect. Parents all have differing opinions of what's suitible or not for there children. Some parent might find that "T" rated game unsuitable for their 14 year old while another parent might find that "M" rated game perfectly fine for there 12 year old. The only time the government should get involved is when it comes to direct harm to the child. (child being beaten, sexually abused, ect.)
Actually i'm pretty sure i read a recent study from the FCC that showed that it was easier for minors to buy R or unrated DVDs and videos from retailers then it was for them to buy "M" rated video games. Also many retailers have I.D. checks for "M" rated games but don't for buying an R or "unrated" rated DVD or movie. As for saying that most kids rent the R rated movies or play the "M" rated video games only for the extreme gore, ect as opposed to those who read books. Well i'd say that's kinda discrimitory. While there are those that do, there are many kids who watch those movies for the storyline/plot/characters and play the games for the challenge/funfactor/interesting gaming aspects.
"If they decide that they aren't OK with you, a 12 year old, playing GTA, then there should be some means of them enforcing that decision."
Exactly, it's called doing it themselves. The parents themselves have to enforce the restrictions they put on their kids. They shouldn't expect the government and retailers to do the job for them. There are parents who don't want their kids to have access to the bible or Harry Potter books. Should the government restrict access to those to minors to help out their parents. How is it any different with violent video games? Parents all have differing opinions on what materials are approriate or not for their children.
According to your flawed logic we'd have to restrict just about everything out there to minors seeing as there are some parents out there who are likely to find it offensive or unsuitible for their child/children.
The washington state law was struck down as unconstitutional awhile back. Read here: http://www.mediacoalition.org/legal/Maleng/Lasniks ummaryjudgment.pdf
You do realize there are no such laws for movies, books and other mediums right. Hell books don't even have a rating system. Any kid can walk in a bookstore and buy the lastest Stephen King bloodbath novel. But God forbid if it's in video game form. OH NO!!!
You do realize there are no such laws for movies, books and other mediums right. Hell books don't even have a rating system. Any kid can walk in a bookstore and buy the lastest Stephen King bloodbath novel. But God forbid if it's in video game form. OH NO!
I agree. It seems the cenosormongers, child adovates and the "government should control every aspect of our lives and our children's lives" morons have taken over slashdot.
Where are the laws banning the sale of Harry Potter books to minors? I'm a christian fundamentalist and i find the Harry Potter books offensive and unsuitable for my under 18 year old children. I can't be expected to be around my kids 24/7 and nor should i have to. Also my son has a paper route and gets money from his relatives on christmas and his birthday. He could just go out to the store, buy a Harry Potter book, sneek it home and read when i've gone out. I would never know he had it. If other parents are fine with their kids reading Harry potter books, then they can just go out and buy it for them. But a law banning the sale of Harry Potter books to those under 18 would be a great TOOL to help me parent my children better.
Slashdot Mirror
You are wrong about porno thing. The government can regulate the sale of porn to minors as pornography falls under the legal definition of obscenity, and obscenity isn't protected by First Amendment.
I totally agree with what you said otherwise.
Seeing as there are no laws barring the sale of ultra violent movies, music CDs, books, magazines or any other violent materials to minors, i see no reason why there should be one for violent video games.
Not only that but the courts including the Supreme Court have ruled that minors have First Amendment rights and that the only material that can be legally restricted to them is material that falls under the legal definition of "harmful to minors", and that the "harmful to minors" definition is an extension of obscenity law that deals only with sexually explicit material (a.k.a. pornography). Materials that depict of describe violence are not obscene and are therefore fully protected by the First Amendment for both minors and adults.
The MPAA rating systme isn't inforced by law. It's voluntary just like the ESRB. And that's the way it should be.
Also minors DO have First Amendment rights. So this law does have to do with free speech and the constitution.
" Just how does a measure like this restrict free speech?" Uhh, maybe because minors have a right to free speech buddy.
It takes away the parents responsibilty of having to keep an eye out for material THEY may find offensive or unsuitable for their kids and places it on someone else shoulder's.
The fact is it's up to YOU, to make sure YOUR kids don't get ahold of material YOU may find offensive or unsuitable for them.
If we make stuff like this law, then we'd essencially have to ban the sale of everything out there to minors as just about everything out there is likely to be offensive or unsuitable for their kids in the eyes of some parents.
"As for resulting in less M games being made, this should have already happened if it was going to happen. Movie ratings have caused many, many originally MPAA board R-rated movies to be pared down to PG-13, and this was all with a purely voluntary, fine-free ratings system."
So can you imagine what would happen if they made it law for movies to. We'd get yet more cut down from an "R" rating to a "PG-13" rating crap so that the movie execs can get more money from the young kids/teens. It would make things worse.
"Yet, laws fining retailers for selling alcohol to minors has not caused convenience stores to stop selling beer. Only to stop selling beer to minors."
That because it's worth the risk. Beer stores make WAYYYYYYYYY more money then places that sell games. And stores that sell beer make WAYYYYYYYY more money on selling the beer then the places that sell games make on selling the games.
Because it makes retailers content-filterers and babysisters for other people's kids under threat of huge fines and punishment. That's why.
The fines for cigereetes are still not as high as that for selling "M" rated games to minors. I guess the government thinks violent games are worse for kids then smoking.
Not to mention the original law had fines of $5000 and up to 6 months in prison for those who sold "M" rated games to minors.
Well, a recent FTC study showed kids are able to get R and Unrated DVDs and videos easier they they can get "M" rated video games (81% for R and unrated DVDs/videos compared to 69% for "M" rated videogames) yet you don't see the government trying to regulate movies.
There are many stores that will card you for buying an "M" rated game yet won't card you for buying an R or unrated rated DVD or video. So it looks like the videogame industry is doing better then the movie industry in this regard.
"This is hardly a freedom issue, as the law does not ban minors from playing the games, just buying them."
Seriously, how is this not a freedom issue. Lets say for example that the government banned the sale of alcohol or cigerettes to adults but you could still drink or smoke them if you got ahold of them. Would you consider that not to be a freedom issue to? You should either ban them outright from sale AND use or do neither.
"I know that it may sound harsh to all you kiddies out there, but not being allowed to do/get something is part of growing up. Besides, being underage and still obtaining that mature game/case of beer/porno mag/bag of mushrooms and hiding it from parents/authorities is (was for me, at least) hella fun at that age."
I agree. When i was younger smoking seemed so much better then it does now (i'm 23) since i couldn't legally obtain them back then, same thing with drinking. With that said though the things you mentioned in your post (beer, shrooms, prono mag) are nowhere even near comparable to harmless "Mature" rated video games.
Originally the fine was $5000 and the person could get up to 6 months in prison. But it doesn't matter anyways, this law is no different the other anti-gaming laws that were struck down as unconstitutional in the past. Actually, this one is even more broad and vague then those other ones. It's DOA.
You just said what i think. I really wish i had some mod points. Someone mod this guy up. Very Insightful.
Anybody who claims this law is a TOOL to help parents is a TOOL themselves.
There are alot of things parents out there don't want there children to have so according to your logic we'd have to ban the sale of of just about everything to minors as just about everything out there is likely to be offensive or unsuitable for their children in the eyes of some parents.
Why should the parents against violent games have a law but not the religious parents who are against there kids having Harry Potter books, heavy metal music and Dungeons & Dragons RPGs. Or the atheist parents who don't want there kids having the Bible or Koran. Or the health nut parents who don't want there kids to have chips, chocolate bars and pop.
P.S - There are no laws barring the sale or rental of R rated movies to minors. This is a common missconception. Like the video game ratings these are voluntary ratings only meant as a guide to parents and that's it.
Go to this website: http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/default.asp Then on the left hand corner of the screen is a thing called "Search by Number". In the blank space right below it type "HB4023" without the quotes. Then in the top left hand corner click "Full Text". Sorry i couldn't find a direct link that could work.
This law is so vague it would essenially ban minors from buying football games, World War 2 themed shooters or even RPGs because they contain realistic depictions of human on human violence.
If this law was extended to cover movies, music and books also it would essenically (sp?) outlaw the sale of the Bible or Star Wars films to minors. Pretty pathetic.
I'd say it's more then that. Pretty much everyone i know has a modded XBox or PS2 and pirates almost all their games. I'd say at least 2/3rds of them.
You're using extreme examples here: Guns, knives, alcohol, cigerettes. None of those things even remotely compare to entertainment materials like movies, music, video games, books, ect.
What i'm saying is this. If the your going to restrict access to violent games on the basis that it helps parents who find them unsuitable or offensive for there kids, then essencially you would have to restrict access to all materials to children because everything out there is likely to be offensive or objectionable in the eyes of some parent in regards to their kids whether it be the Bible, Harry Potter books, Magic the Gathering cards, ect.
The parent who doesn't want his/her child reading that Harry Potter novels can't be around their child 24/7 to make sure they're not doing so, so accroding to your logic we'd have to restrcit Harry Potter books to all persons under the age of 18 as a TOOL to help the parents who don't want there children reading them. Apply the same thing to the bible, magic the gathering cards, heavy metal music, ect. Parents all have differing opinions of what's suitible or not for there children. Some parent might find that "T" rated game unsuitable for their 14 year old while another parent might find that "M" rated game perfectly fine for there 12 year old. The only time the government should get involved is when it comes to direct harm to the child. (child being beaten, sexually abused, ect.)
Actually i'm pretty sure i read a recent study from the FCC that showed that it was easier for minors to buy R or unrated DVDs and videos from retailers then it was for them to buy "M" rated video games.
Also many retailers have I.D. checks for "M" rated games but don't for buying an R or "unrated" rated DVD or movie.
As for saying that most kids rent the R rated movies or play the "M" rated video games only for the extreme gore, ect as opposed to those who read books. Well i'd say that's kinda discrimitory. While there are those that do, there are many kids who watch those movies for the storyline/plot/characters and play the games for the challenge/funfactor/interesting gaming aspects.
"If they decide that they aren't OK with you, a 12 year old, playing GTA, then there should be some means of them enforcing that decision."
Exactly, it's called doing it themselves.
The parents themselves have to enforce the restrictions they put on their kids. They shouldn't expect the government and retailers to do the job for them. There are parents who don't want their kids to have access to the bible or Harry Potter books. Should the government restrict access to those to minors to help out their parents. How is it any different with violent video games? Parents all have differing opinions on what materials are approriate or not for their children.
According to your flawed logic we'd have to restrict just about everything out there to minors seeing as there are some parents out there who are likely to find it offensive or unsuitible for their child/children.
The washington state law was struck down as unconstitutional awhile back. Read here: http://www.mediacoalition.org/legal/Maleng/Lasniks ummaryjudgment.pdf
Sorry, i replied to the wrong post. Ignore my comment. They should really allow you to edit your comments or delete them here on slashdot.
You do realize there are no such laws for movies, books and other mediums right. Hell books don't even have a rating system. Any kid can walk in a bookstore and buy the lastest Stephen King bloodbath novel. But God forbid if it's in video game form. OH NO!!!
You do realize there are no such laws for movies, books and other mediums right. Hell books don't even have a rating system. Any kid can walk in a bookstore and buy the lastest Stephen King bloodbath novel. But God forbid if it's in video game form. OH NO!
I agree. It seems the cenosormongers, child adovates and the "government should control every aspect of our lives and our children's lives" morons have taken over slashdot.
Where are the laws banning the sale of Harry Potter books to minors? I'm a christian fundamentalist and i find the Harry Potter books offensive and unsuitable for my under 18 year old children.
I can't be expected to be around my kids 24/7 and nor should i have to. Also my son has a paper route and gets money from his relatives on christmas and his birthday. He could just go out to the store, buy a Harry Potter book, sneek it home and read when i've gone out. I would never know he had it. If other parents are fine with their kids reading Harry potter books, then they can just go out and buy it for them. But a law banning the sale of Harry Potter books to those under 18 would be a great TOOL to help me parent my children better.