Poll: Violent Game Law Goes To Supreme Court

[Billion Backs]

Not somehow punishing people for breaking a pre-existing law (who are stupid enough to get caught) would be pretty ineffective. A law that isn't enforced is not a law, it's a joke that only some brainwashed monkey would follow.

Wait, I thought that was the point of laws?

Not in my opinion. I don't do things not because they're illegal, but because I know that they're supported by a sufficient amount of force to overpower me and in most scenarios it's unrealistic to expect to avoid it easily, especially when it comes to serious stuff.

Just letting the system indoctrinate you into believing that illegal=bad=don't do it when there's no enforcement or realistic reason(that stuff can be pretty subjective) for the law whatsoever is just weak in my opinion. Brainwashing everyone into a happy fake society, meh.

Guess what I'm trying to say is that a law that is not enforced in any way WILL be broken by most people with a shred of individual thought as long as the breaking of such law benefits them and, as I've said before, is not punished by the law.

More on topic... I think one of my posts didn't make it for some reason, so I'll reiterate. It's a good thing that stores will be fined for selling M-rated games directly to unescorted underage kids. Why? It doesn't really change a damn thing for the kids in question in most situations, and it removes another retarded argument from anti-game "communities" because once the law for the sale of M-rated games is practically the same as laws for selling other M-rated material like alcohol (16-21 age in most developed countries... sucks to be US, hahaha), tobacco, and so on.

Basically, some idiot soccer mom won't be able to blame the eeeeevul video games industries for pushing their devil terrorist training programs on her kids because the only way for the kids to get the games in question would be THROUGH HER. And if she's blind enough to skip it, it's her own idiocy. And if she's okay with it - my parents were okay with me doing various "M-rated" activities since early age, whether movies, video games, or occasional ceremonial drinking during holidays - then she has no argument either way.

Ratings are just a suggestion for the parents, who are responsible for kids survival anyways. If the parent is okay with the material his or her kids see and interact with, he or she buys that material for her kids... If the said parent doesn't... Well, sucks to be you, kid - you're financially dependent on your parent, and your parent generally has the ability to censor a lot of things from you at early age... And there's always the shady methods.

 

[crystalsnow]

Snip

Internet sarcasm fail detected.

 

[Billion Backs]

Snip

Internet sarcasm fail detected.

Must have been some shitty sarcasm then =p

Although I guess I can blame it off on having to spend the whole day doing "serious things" for "school".

 

[Audioave10]

This is probably good. The government jokers need to be shown the perception that the industry is
policing itself. Keep them off our backs and stop the whining.

 

[tsb247]

In my state, stores are already fined for selling M rated games to minors - unless I am missing something.

I'm all for it. I've been playing relatively violent video games since I was a kid (Wolfenstien 3D!). As games grow more realistic, it is becoming increasingly important to control who takes in a game's content.

*Edited for redundancy

 

[Wintermoot]

to prevent soccer moms from wining they should ask for ID or parents premission

 

[Dhell]

no id no service in nz pretty much plus fining people is good too

 

[asinann]

This is the US, making it a first (and apparently a 14th) amendment issue. If this law gets through, every other anti-game law will get reconsidered and then we're going to get true game censorship. Add in that the state of California is bankrupt and is paying for the game industry's legal bills on this already (they are already up over $280,000) and that every time a law like this is passed, the Supreme court has declared it unconstitutional (time and time again.) The article also isn't showing the whole law, just the parts that make it sound reasonable. It's not showing the part where the state gets to set the ratings, not the ESRB (which is the most effective entertainment regulatory body in the US.) Also keep in mind that this law was written by the same moron that wanted a health warning on all games rated above E10 stating that there was a causal link between video games and violent behavior in children (which has been repeatedly debunked by science.)

 

[Call Me Arizona]

Good.
Underage kids don't need to be playing those games anyways, at least it might shut up some of the naysayers who hate violent games because children might see them. They'll still get them of course, it's way too easy to convince an older friend or just bluff through it if you look old enough.

 

[Phoenixlight]

It's a fantastic idea, looking at the polll though there seems to be a lot of underaged/ignorant people here.

 

[asinann]

This is nothing more than the same McCarthyism that the movie and television industries went through back in their infancies and we are still suffering through the censorship applied to those media back in the 50's and 60's. If this law is allowed to stand, all that will happen is that California will end up getting games that look like the ones in Australia and the rest of the US will laugh at them the way we do Aussies when a new game comes out and they have to ship the game in from out of country. The difference is that Californians can just drive a few hours and get the game the day it comes out, killing off the smaller brick and mortars along the borders of the state.

It's a fantastic idea, looking at the polll though there seems to be a lot of underaged/ignorant people here.

Or they could just be against all forms of censorship.

 

[asinann]

http://gameon.msn.com/articles/4753/Violent-Game-Law-Goes-To-Supreme-Court

Basically California wants to fine retailers that sell M rated games to underage kids.
Personalty I don't care ether way as most stores I have been asked for ID if I was buying an M rated game when i was about 18 so i guess its doing nothing but enforcing an already accepted practice.

I do hope games get protection under the first amendment which seems to be the argument behind the court case from the looks of it.

Hell fucking yes. Children shouldn't be allowed to buy porn, and they sure as hell shouldn't be able to buy games with it (without parental consent, of course.)

That's putting a huge onus on the parents to not be fucking idiots though, isn't it? Are we sure they're up for the responsibility of kids AND decisions like these?

If the parents are idiots and want to raise their children as such, fine. But at least they have to be active in their child's life. As it is now, it's ridiculous that a ten year old can go in and buy Gears of War 2 and Manhunt.

Taken from the ESRB web site. Sorry about the wall, I don't know how to use spoiler tags.
http://www.esrb.org/ratings/faq.jsp#18

About the Effectiveness of ESRB Ratings

How effective is the rating system? Are parents using it?

According to a survey by Peter D. Hart Research Associates in May 2009, 87% of parents with children who play video games are aware of the rating system and 76% say they regularly check the rating before buying computer and video games for their children. For more information about consumer awareness and use of ESRB ratings, please see: http://www.esrb.org/about/awareness.jsp.



Do parents agree with the ratings and find them to be reliable and accurate?

The ESRB commissions consumer research to measure parental agreement with the ratings. According to a study conducted by Peter D. Hart Research Associates in November 2005, parents agreed with the ESRB ratings 82% of the time, while another 5% of the time the ratings were thought to be "too strict". A recent study, published in April 2007 by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), found that 87% of parents are "somewhat" to "very" satisfied with the ESRB ratings, and 64% agree with ratings "all," "nearly all" or "most of the time." In fact, in a study published in 2007 by the Kaiser Family Foundation about parental views of media rating systems for television, films, music and video games, 58% of parents said they consider the ESRB rating system to be "very useful" (the highest percentage among the various rating systems), and 91% found ESRB ratings to be either "very useful" or "somewhat useful."



How is the rating system enforced?

As the game industry's self-regulatory body, ESRB is responsible for the enforcement of its rating system. Every publisher of a game rated by the ESRB is legally bound by contract to disclose all pertinent content when submitting the game for an ESRB rating, including content that may not be playable (i.e. "locked out") but will exist in the code on the final game disc. After a game is released, ESRB staff, including raters (time permitting), play-test the final version of a variety of games - including, but not limited to, games which generate consumer inquiries to ESRB and those which receive broad consumer exposure - to verify that all materials provided by the game's publishers during the rating process were accurate and complete. In the event of incomplete disclosure during the rating process that would have affected the assignment of a rating or content descriptor, an ESRB enforcement action may be initiated, which can result in revocation of the original rating and the imposition of sanctions, including monetary fines. Corrective actions may also be required of the publisher to ensure that all future game packaging and advertising materials are accurate. Examples of corrective actions include the re-labeling of product inventory and unsold product at retail or, potentially, a product recall. Where warranted, ESRB has the option of suspending all rating services until the publisher complies with its directives.

 

[Kouen]

yup id support this, it pisses me off when kids get a hold of games that are rated higher than there age to no end. its also because of this that the video game industry gets so much flak... even though its clearly printed on just about every cover 3+ 6+ 12+ 16+ 18+ xD

 

[asinann]

yup id support this, it pisses me off when kids get a hold of games that are rated higher than there age to no end. its also because of this that the video game industry gets so much flak... even though its clearly printed on just about every cover 3+ 6+ 12+ 16+ 18+ xD

Wow, those aren't even relevant ratings to the discussion. This thing needs a descriptor to keep anyone who can't vote in the US from voting in this poll (which I'm guessing eliminates about 75% of the votes either way.) The ESRB ratings are EC, E, E10, T, M and AO, none of which have those ages.

 

[Good morning blues]

However the relevant jurisdiction treats adult movies, they should treat adult games the same way.

 

[asinann]

However the relevant jurisdiction treats adult movies, they should treat adult games the same way.

That's reasonable, the government doesn't get involved with enforcing movie ratings other than XXX, the equivalent rating to that is AO.

 

[Kouen]

yup id support this, it pisses me off when kids get a hold of games that are rated higher than there age to no end. its also because of this that the video game industry gets so much flak... even though its clearly printed on just about every cover 3+ 6+ 12+ 16+ 18+ xD

Wow, those aren't even relevant ratings to the discussion. This thing needs a descriptor to keep anyone who can't vote in the US from voting in this poll (which I'm guessing eliminates about 75% of the votes either way.) The ESRB ratings are EC, E, E10, T, M and AO, none of which have those ages.

I Cant help being a European still in all fairness I prefer the Age system over the T for Teens system.

 

[asinann]

yup id support this, it pisses me off when kids get a hold of games that are rated higher than there age to no end. its also because of this that the video game industry gets so much flak... even though its clearly printed on just about every cover 3+ 6+ 12+ 16+ 18+ xD

Wow, those aren't even relevant ratings to the discussion. This thing needs a descriptor to keep anyone who can't vote in the US from voting in this poll (which I'm guessing eliminates about 75% of the votes either way.) The ESRB ratings are EC, E, E10, T, M and AO, none of which have those ages.

I Cant help being a European still in all fairness I prefer the Age system over the T for Teens system.

The rating we have here are already enforced, the state of California just wants to take over the rating and enforcing. This isn't even really about children, when laws like this are presented it's a political move to get re-elected because most people don't know that the state has to pay the legal bills of the video game industry when they lose these cases. Because the states have all been shown that these laws don't fly.