Quote:
Originally posted by ARTelevision
Before you go all out and defend your intense universal and unflinching love of video games and the "right" of companies to sell whatever they want to whomever they want, step back and note we're talking about protecting minors here:
|
I agree, and have for years.
Quote:
[b]
.................................
Ban on violent video games signed
The News Tribune - Tacoma, WA
Calling it a victory for parents and kids, Gov. Gary Locke signed an unprecedented bill Tuesday that bans the sale of certain violent video games to minors.
But it could be a loss for all state taxpayers, countered Douglas Lowenstein, president of the Interactive Digital Software Association, which represents video game makers.
Lowenstein's group announced plans to file a federal lawsuit in a couple of weeks to overturn the first such state law of its kind as unconstitutional.
House Bill 1009, which goes into effect in late July, will make it a civil violation to sell or rent to youths under age 17 video games that graphically depict violence against law enforcement officers. Violators can be fined up to $500.
|
[/b[
I applaud them for doing this. If they only try to restrict it for kids. We started putting warnings out about adult content (graphic violence) since 98 or so but the public, once again, chose to ignore our warnings until the shit hit the fan. What did the people do when they realized what all happens in some games like GTA3 or Postal? They wigged out, the blamed the companies for irresponsibility, congressmen (Liberman) has tried to ban them. if people would quit playing the "LLALALA LALAL LALAL I CAN'T HEAR YOU" defense, it wouldn't be such a problem now.
why do so many groups of people not react responsibly until its too late, then blame the people who beged them to heed the warnings?
Quote:
That's a violation of the freedom of speech, said Lowenstein, predicting, "We're going to prevail. And unfortunately that's going to result in Washington's taxpayers spending money on litigation that could have been spent on other programs."
Groups representing students, pediatricians, schools and police supported the measure. Retail and rental stores and the American Civil Liberties Union of Washington joined Nintendo and Microsoft in opposing it. Neither of the two Washington-based corporate giants make video games that depict virtual cop killing, but representatives from both joined Lowenstein in a recent meeting at which they urged Locke to veto the bill.
|
I do not see how barring minors from certain materials can be considered violation of free speach. I love kids and I support them when they are having family problems, but in my mind, you don't vote until you're 18. you have some rights... but not many.
[/quote]
Quote:
Lowenstein's group expects additional plaintiffs to sign on to the suit. If the group wins, it'll ask the state to pay its attorneys' fees, which could top the hundreds of thousands of dollars the industry is investing in challenging a similar county ordinance in the Midwest.
State Rep. Mary Lou Dickerson, a Seattle Democrat and prime sponsor of the bill, predicted the law will be upheld.
|
if i knew the money would not be wasted by the governmant I'd say BOO on wasting tax money. but our current blind, deaf, and dumb leaders are blowing billions anyway.
Quote:
|
"I believe that (video games) are not covered by the First Amendment. And even if they are, the safety of children always trumps the First Amendment," Dickerson said. She noted that a growing number of studies link playing violent video games to aggressive thoughts and behavior in children.
|
AAAANNNCCCHHHHH! wrong answer!
Video games ARE speech. video games can represent lifestyles and reflect real culture. they're wanting to play the 'one bad apple makes them all bad' card and that is censorship and evil at its possible worse.
Quote:
"While the legislation is being defended, it will create numerous opportunities for parents to learn about ultraviolent video games," said Dickerson, whose crusade against digital violence has landed her on National Public Radio's "Morning Edition" and the pages of The New York Times.
Lawmakers from other states have contacted her for advice on passing similar laws in their states, Dickerson said at a post-signing party featuring a big chocolate cake with "1st in the nation" written in its icing.
"So video game industry, look out," she said, though she stressed her intention is not to hurt the booming industry.
|
... "So Video game industry, look out'?
is she dumb?
the industry has been screaming to parents about their content. she needs to address the parents!
they are the people who've covered their eyes or stuck with the 'my kid can play it cuz he's super mature!'. give me a break. for once in our short lives, can't the right person take responsibility and let us stop these witch hunts?
Quote:
If there is a court ruling, it won't be in the state's favor, warned Jerry Sheehan of the ACLU of Washington, who asserted the law violates the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.
"It's been challenged successfully by the software industry every other place it's been passed," Sheehan said.
But Dickerson said she studied those efforts and crafted the bill so that it would avoid those problems.
Though other state lawmakers urged her to expand the bill to include more types of violence, Dickerson narrowed the language to violence against cops to make it bulletproof to challenges.
|
that's kind of fucked up. they are literaly saying "it is okay to kill people, but don't touch the cops.'
another way of saying "give me what I want and to hell with fairness and liberty."
Quote:
|
But, in doing that, Sheehan said the law engages in what's known as content discrimination: "They're saying (violence) is not wrong all the time, it's only wrong when we say it's wrong."
|
told ya!
(i'm reading the article as i nitpick)
Quote:
The video game industry has developed its own voluntary rating system, similar to the one used to rate movies. Lowenstein said it eliminates the confusion retailers could face in trying to figure out which games are covered under the new law.
While Dickerson and other child advocates point to surveys in Seattle in which retailers sold games with violent content to kids, Lowenstein said his group's surveys have found that it's mostly parents buying those games for their kids.
"It's very disappointing that people are trying to shift the responsibility to retailers to become parents," Lowenstein said.
|
am i the only one seeing a trend? blame one group....
it sounds to me like someone needs to go to Seattle and kick some booty.
if you are an employer of a workplace with a policy saying "Do not sell to minors", then they should be fired. don't bother innocent people out of laziness of another.
Quote:
He added that Locke refused his offer to join dealers, manufacturers and parents in a pilot program based on the rating system "to use Washington state as kind of the laboratory to develop effective systems of retail enforcement that might be used in other states.
"And unfortunately, instead of working on this broader effort, we're going to be in court."
|
hmm... unforunately it will go to court. imagine that.. laws.. and court... in the same sentence.... that seems so right. i wonder why....
...............
At some point I'll need to make the case again about how popular culture is destroying our minds. I will, of course. It just gets demoralizing when I see what a minority of one I seem to be in all this. [/QUOTE]
right. see, this makes me feel really weird because i am definatly taking a popular stand here. oh well, i am me and that's all i have to be.
it actually saddens me in a real way. not just an irritation, this actually adds to my real depression because it shows how little people care and are willing to listen and take responsibility.
this country is ran by people who want to only take a stance on an issue or make blame by pointing fingers at other people.
I'll have more to say soon. please post some replies. there's only one way to change the system, and staying silent isn't an option.