UK Researcher Wants Parents Arrested for Buying Kids Violent Games

[La Kias]

When I have kids, I'd say that it is down to me and my partner when I think my kids are at an appropriate age to play the game. If I think they are not I wouldn't buy, but some kids are more mature than others, its down to the parent's own judgement and that is something the government should not interfere with. How would the authorities even know whether a child is playing such games or not?

Its like how a parent can say in a pub whether or not their child can have an alcoholic drink with their meal.

 

[Techno Destructo]

I've seen this thing happen dozens of times at my local game retailer: An oblivious mom or dad with their little preteen child, and the child points out a game with the gore level of Splatterhouse all over it's M-rating. The parent pays for the game and then gives it to the child, because once the purchase has been made, the responsibility is no longer in the hands of the retailer. As far as the retailer was concerned, an adult bought the game, not the child, but we all know who is going to end up playing the game.

The fate of these people is out of our hands; it is in the domain of subjective experience. Irresponsible parents need to know how to say "No" when their ten year old asks for the new Hooker Shooter Five. The kid may be upset, but that just temporary. At least they aren't ripping out people's digital spines.

 

[Alpha Bootis]

This man has lost it, regardless of his meanings with the word "prosecute".
The purpose of these ratings is to make it overseeable to what audiance the game would be suitable for. As an indication. Not to make a hard line. Theres people that are 50 that still are mentally too frail for anything more violent then Mario Kart FFS.

If a parent decides their kid is metally old enough for things like Modern Warefare airport scenes who the hell does this man thinks he is proclaiming to know otherwise.
I'd like to think this is still a free part of the world. If this sort of blundering in other people's business is going to be had you might as well outsource parenting to the gouvernment completely, or dictate in laws what parenting is and shoot everyone who thinks parenting should be done any other way then what the law dictates.

I was playing games, and violent ones at that, for as long as my memory will bring me back. I was playing things like Duke Nukem 3D, Wolfenstein and Rise of the Triad _way_ before I had the "proper" age for those games and I still didn't shoot anyone, the only effect it had on me was a very good understanding of the English language at a young age.

 

[Azuaron]

*facepalm*

You know, on second thought, I actually hope this kind of legislation will pass, in the States as well. It would pave the way for arresting parents who shove their religious beliefs down their children's throats; parents who force their kids to take part in sports or scout groups; parents who teach things to their kids that have even the slightest racist undertone to them.

Sometimes the slippery slope can be a good thing.

Also, Venza from Toyota can kiss my hairy ass.

Er, I don't think you understand the slippery slope this would be in America. This would pave the way for mandatory church on Sundays, mandatory scouts, etc. etc. etc..

 

[Alpha Bootis]

It breaks down two ways.

One hand its the whole why should government be telling people how to raise their children? is that any business that a government should have to be deciding some overarching standard of what is good and proper for people to show/let their kids play, vs what is not? dont different children mature differently to a good degree?

but on the other hand we have all seen those parents with the young kids at the R rated movies and such, and well it hard not to see a certain point here.

The parent that child is with is the only one with a an intimite understanding of what and how that kid ticks. So, no its really easy not to see a point, as everyone else in the theater can only speculate about the kids "readyness" for blood and obscene language, and reflect off of what they themselves would do in the same situation with an imaginairy kid.

People who really wait for their kid to be 18 before they let them play things like Duke Nukem aren't by definition doing the right thing you know... Those ratings are given by a select group of people who themselves have opinions and stances.
Blindly looking at ratings is just as silly as taking an 8 year old kid to see things like Pulp Fiction.

 

[Twilight_guy]

Yes, have the government enforce how parents should raise kids... that won't end in a horrible flaming mess, no siree.

As long as parents can get kid into R rated movies by accompanying them and saying 'it's okay', this isn't going to fly. The parent still has the authority to re there kids how they want and control what media they are exposed to. Are they making bad calls? Yes. Can you do anything? No. Until the state decides to raise kids instead of parents its going to stay that way.

 

[Tiamattt]

I'm conflicted here. On the one hand I LOVE the idea of idiot parents that buys their kid games with a giant M on the cover along with all the very obvious reasons why and then complains about violent games being bad for them getting a nice big fine.

On the other hand parents should have the right to determine what their kids can and can not handle.

Plus I'm not sure how you can possibly enforce this idea. For example lets say I went to my local Gamestop with my kid, he asks quite loudly for a rated M game and I buy it. Is the gamestop employees going to take my money and then detain me until a cop arrives? Or is the government going to spend a ton of tax money to put cameras in video game stores like traffic lights? I have no idea on the stats but something tells me they'll never make their money back on that one.

 

[RADIALTHRONE1]

I think this is appropriate.

 

[Jack Rascal]

Plus I'm not sure how you can possibly enforce this idea. For example lets say I went to my local Gamestop with my kid, he asks quite loudly for a rated M game and I buy it. Is the gamestop employees going to take my money and then detain me until a cop arrives? Or is the government going to spend a ton of tax money to put cameras in video game stores like traffic lights? I have no idea on the stats but something tells me they'll never make their money back on that one.

This is my thoughts as well. How is it even possible to enforce something like this?

Should everyone at the counter give their ID and it's checked if you have kids? And what age those kids are? And what if I have kids? I could be buying it for myself or husband. If I had a kid now, it would definitely be for me. Or should we have community watches where neighbours can come and check that a kid is not playing something the government has deemed unfit for him? Or maybe it's mandatory to leave your contact details at the shop so good old police can come and check your house.

We all know console accounts will never be any good in fighting this. Not until the console can only be activated by your finger print and that print has to be given during the game every 16:52 minutes.

I still don't believe that violent video games lead to violence. So this suggestion is just dumb.

 

[templar1138a]

*facepalm*

You know, on second thought, I actually hope this kind of legislation will pass, in the States as well. It would pave the way for arresting parents who shove their religious beliefs down their children's throats; parents who force their kids to take part in sports or scout groups; parents who teach things to their kids that have even the slightest racist undertone to them.

Sometimes the slippery slope can be a good thing.

Also, Venza from Toyota can kiss my hairy ass.

Er, I don't think you understand the slippery slope this would be in America. This would pave the way for mandatory church on Sundays, mandatory scouts, etc. etc. etc..

Sarcasm. Look it up.

 

[karloss01]

Did I read the same article everyone else did?

This guy said "prosecute", not specifically "jail" or "arrest". Maybe he means like a fine? Who here has ever received a traffic ticket? Tada! You've been "prosecuted". This guy wants to make it illegal for parents to buy these games for their children, which is currently how many circumvent PEGI (and ESRB in the U.S.), but then the "parents" still turn around and run these ridiculous campaigns about the violent videogames that somehow got into their children's hands.

Isn't this suggestion the logical conclusion to the "blame the parents, not the game" mantra when the "games community" feels threatened by major media or legislation against violent videogames?

Personally, I'd rather government just stay out of everyone's business, but the dichotomy here confuses me.

This. In so many ways.

You either start making parents responsible for their poor practices (maybe not as extreme as jail time, a fine is more reasonable,) or you let the industry take the responsibility when little Jimmy shoots up a school and points the finger at Call of Duty.

The most reasonable answer is to make little Jimmy responsible for his own actions, but of course that will never happen. No one wants to think children aren't innocent, and will blame everything else before they blame the person who pulled the trigger.

seconded.

I work in retail (now in food and general goods) and when i was standing at the counter waiting for the next customer i see at least three or separate cases of kids younger then 10 with their parents picking up stuff like gears of war, mortal kombat, COD and Halo with a "mummy/daddy can i have this." and either replying with "sure." or "thats too much money". all i could say to the parents is "are you sure you want to buy this game for your child. it has depictions of violence/sex/strong language." which they will reply "ah its fine." never a "oh dear I won't get it then."

where i work now if i'm selling tobacco or alcohol i need ID off anyone who looks under 25, if i fuck up i can be fined up to £5000 or jail time if i can't pay it. parents should be fined something as they are exposing kids to possibly damaging products to their kid just like tobacco and alcohol.

also kids suck at the games, get out of my battlefield,halo,COD etc.

 

[chadachada123]

My parents allowed me to get games that were above my rating when I was younger, because I matured faster than many others. They always looked at why a game got a specific rating and reasoned whether or not it was appropriate for ME specifically.

This researcher clearly doesn't understand that children mature at different rates. There are some 18 year olds that are too immature to handle some teen-rated games, for example.

 

[Denamic]

Let's just skip the details and just fucking jail everyone because there's no one that's completely innocent. No need to make up retarded laws for that.

 

[Kungfu_Teddybear]

So instead of buying kids violent video games he wants to jail the parents. Yes, I'm sure that's going to help the child's mental state growing up.

This guy is a total douche.

 

[Kyogissun]

Arrested for buying kids violent video games? No.

But I AM keen on the idea of punishing parents who haven't raised a child that is capable of separating fantasy and reality and will be able to tell the difference between what's acceptable IRL and what isn't, as well as general stupidity of the parent and the child.

Mostly because of stupid shit like that little fucker who cried 'innocent' when he went on a spending spree on XBL for fucking FIFA and the obnoxious little children who scream into their headset when they get mad or are trying to trash talk someone.

 

[TallanKhan]

Did I read the same article everyone else did?

This guy said "prosecute", not specifically "jail" or "arrest". Maybe he means like a fine? Who here has ever received a traffic ticket? Tada! You've been "prosecuted". This guy wants to make it illegal for parents to buy these games for their children, which is currently how many circumvent PEGI (and ESRB in the U.S.), but then the "parents" still turn around and run these ridiculous campaigns about the violent videogames that somehow got into their children's hands.

Isn't this suggestion the logical conclusion to the "blame the parents, not the game" mantra when the "games community" feels threatened by major media or legislation against violent videogames?

Personally, I'd rather government just stay out of everyone's business, but the dichotomy here confuses me.

While true that jail time is not specifically mentioned the implication is that it will be more serious than fines. The sad truth these days in the UK is that people dont need to be prossecuted or found guilty to have fines slapped on them, any number of officials are free to issue fines at the drop of a hat without it going anywhere near a courtroom. So while i agree that prossecution does not equal jail its certainly implied that the penalty will be disproportionatley harsh.

 

[BreakfastMan]

Um, I thought the point of having legislation to prevent minors from buying mature rated games was to empower the parent to make the decisions about what the child can and cannot play [footnote]basically stopping kids from going behind their parents back and forcing the parents to actually get educated and make decisions about what their children play.[/footnote], right? That would just take the decision away from them, saying "Your wrong, we are right. Kids all develop the same and all can handle the same content at the same age, right? Yep, seems about right". Seems very nanny-state. BreakfastMan disapproves. :/

 

[Mr Binary]

So... what, are we going to do a background check on every person who purchases a game with graphic content to see if they have kids? Are we going to set up cameras in every home pointing towards the TV with someone monitoring 24/7? This has to be one of the most stupid ideas I have ever heard. Some parents unknowingly purchase these games for their children under a veil of ignorance of what they may/may not contain.