Another beautiful right wing agenda

Majiac · Post by **Majiac** » Wed May 28, 2003 6:02 pm

IGN News

Okay, for those too lazy to read the article, heres the skinny. In washington state minors cannot purchase or rent video games the depict violence on law enforcement officers.

This will just open the way for more censorship and over the top laws. Does anyone else happen to think that it should be the parents that monitor what there children do, instead of the government? I'm sure its easier to let the government do your parenting for you, but damnit, it's unconstitutional.

Damn Im pissed, makes me glad I already have a copy of gta III.

Aught to make a 1st person shooter where you hunt down and kill members of the senate and congress. Bet that would be a money maker.

SothThe69th · Post by **SothThe69th** » Wed May 28, 2003 6:05 pm

Based on the principle of free speech and that theres already a precedent for striking down this kind of thing, I would think that it'll be ruled unconstitutional within 6 months.

Eihger · Post by **Eihger** » Wed May 28, 2003 9:20 pm

and it's more left wing if you ask me, BURN THE SENANT stupid people make games seem violent, they should have warning lables

WARNING: You must be a gammer to purchase this game

SothThe69th · Post by **SothThe69th** » Wed May 28, 2003 9:22 pm

Warning- You must be this mature *insert height bar joke here* to buy this game.

PhoenixFire · Post by **PhoenixFire** » Wed May 28, 2003 9:31 pm

I think the only thing stupid about this is the fact it's specificaly games which have anything against law enforcement officials.

I'm all for restricting the sales of violent games by putting film style ratings on them making it illegal to sell said games to anyone below that age limit - I grew up in a country that has that system in place, and I've got no complaints.

But when it get's stupid like what's been mentioned here...now that's daft.

Felan · Post by **Felan** » Wed May 28, 2003 10:38 pm

Most places that sell games wont even sell M+ ESRB rated games to minors. So its not suprising. Meh, I guess I wouldnt want my kid (if I had one) to buy violent games on himself. But thats me.

SothThe69th · Post by **SothThe69th** » Wed May 28, 2003 10:42 pm

I kind of have to wonder where the kid would get the 50 some odd bucks to buy a game. I mean, if he can save his money for the months it'd take to get the game, and he STILL wants it after all those months, then he deserves whatever he gets.

document · Post by **document** » Wed May 28, 2003 10:45 pm

Hey, I had that kindof money when I was that age. I had a paper-route, and that meant that I had about 120 dollars a month to spend. But in most cases, the parents are buying the game for the child. How many parents actually know about the rating system? How many parents just blindly buy games for their children?

Evil Ghaleon Strife · Post by **Evil Ghaleon Strife** » Thu May 29, 2003 12:39 am

Document has a point. The parents are the ones buying the games, so TECHNICALLY, they are to blame more than the industry is. (Personally, I think it's a plot from the Movie industry to cripple the #1 industry in America and get back on top, but that's just me.)

billf · Post by **billf** » Thu May 29, 2003 12:52 am

I'm all for game ratings, then again I'm an old man, so such things don't effect me unless I'm clean shaven and forgot my ID, but a complete ban on the sale of games to minors is a bit overkill. I can understand if it were like 15 and under, but 17 and under? I've known some 17 years olds I would trust with a violent video gaame more than some people in their 30's.

mikehendo · Post by **mikehendo** » Thu May 29, 2003 2:19 am

Document is right, we have a rating system on video games in America for a reason. Also, parents are usually the ones who buy video games for thier kids and if a game has a mature rating a child should not be able to buy it without thier parent, IMHO.

What I really want to know though is why was I carded when I bought .Hack//Mutation.. I mean come on, it is rated T.. I am 22, WTF!!!
I suppose the question that i should be asking is what was the cashier on that made them think I was under 13.
I would say more but it would turn into a rant.. actually I might take it there..

SothThe69th · Post by **SothThe69th** » Thu May 29, 2003 2:29 am

Maybe your 5 foot nothing with a face like a babies bum Mike. Do you have a picture that we could judge?

Tanarin · Post by **Tanarin** » Thu May 29, 2003 8:31 am

[quote="SothThe69th";p="85229"]Based on the principle of free speech and that theres already a precedent for striking down this kind of thing, I would think that it'll be ruled unconstitutional within 6 months.[/quote]

Actually in the 4th circuit court region I belive(or whichever circuit court covers St Louis) This is perfectly legal, since video games are not a form of speech as intended by the constiution. So it DOES have some form of legal backing, ablit it is out of region, so it will be interesting, seeing as how Washington state IS in the same region that said the Pledge is unconstitutional...

Eihger · Post by **Eihger** » Thu May 29, 2003 12:42 pm

I think that if you take violent games away THEN there will be more violence, think about it, if you have a violent game you can vent anger from the day, if you can't vent you A) supres it untill it exsplodes or B) exsplode

hell_monkey5623 · Post by **hell_monkey5623** » Fri May 30, 2003 1:17 am

NY Times article:

"Video-Game Killing Builds Visual Skills, Researchers Report"

Go here, make an account, and read the whole story, because apparantly, first-person-shooters ENHANCE visual awareness 30-50% times better than the heathen devil non-player.

Or, if you get the NY Times, go read it. It's below the fold, sadly.

Real Life Forums

Another beautiful right wing agenda

Another beautiful right wing agenda

Holy Hell!

Who is online