PDA

View Full Version : Help Defend Video Games In The Supreme Court!


Pages : [1] 2

Usiel
08-12-10, 06:45 PM
Arnold Schwarzenegger, '80s action star and governor of California, has passed a law banning the sale of "violent" video games to anyone under the age of 18. This is more than just enforcing the ESRB ratings; this is banning all minors from buying all games that could be considered "violent".

This law has been challenged and is now on its way to being tested in the Supreme Court. The National Youth Rights Association is currently working on an amicus brief to oppose this law, and we need help from the rest of the gaming community. We are collecting testimonies on the social, artistic, and especially political value of video games to prove to the court that their distribution should be protected under the First Amendment.

The media has been demonizing gamers ever since someone decided that Doom caused Columbine. Getting the Supreme Court to strike down this law and admit the value of video games would be a huge step forward in fighting these misconceptions. This is our chance to clear the name of video games and protect the First Amendment rights of young gamers. This could be the first step in government regulation of video games that could affect all gamers, regardless of age. Our brief is coming along, but we really do need your help. The more testimonies we have, the better our chances of winning over the court.

For more information and to submit your testimony, visit:

http://blog.youthrights.org/2010/08/11/schwarzenegger_v_gamers_help_us_fight_back/

FearMeAll
08-12-10, 07:54 PM
Glad I'm 27 so I don't care. Kids under 18 are stupid as hell and if there's one thing I like it's more restrictions placed on them.

MU HU HU HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!!!!

Seriously any lawmaker or judge is going to laugh at angry kids faced with having their video games taken away.

Damn I love being an adult.

(BTW just flamebaiting)

|MaguS|
08-12-10, 08:00 PM
Arnold Schwarzenegger, '80s action star and governor of California, has passed a law banning the sale of "violent" video games to anyone under the age of 18. This is more than just enforcing the ESRB ratings; this is banning all minors from buying all games that could be considered "violent".

This law has been challenged and is now on its way to being tested in the Supreme Court. The National Youth Rights Association is currently working on an amicus brief to oppose this law, and we need help from the rest of the gaming community. We are collecting testimonies on the social, artistic, and especially political value of video games to prove to the court that their distribution should be protected under the First Amendment.

The media has been demonizing gamers ever since someone decided that Doom caused Columbine. Getting the Supreme Court to strike down this law and admit the value of video games would be a huge step forward in fighting these misconceptions. This is our chance to clear the name of video games and protect the First Amendment rights of young gamers. This could be the first step in government regulation of video games that could affect all gamers, regardless of age. Our brief is coming along, but we really do need your help. The more testimonies we have, the better our chances of winning over the court.

For more information and to submit your testimony, visit:

http://blog.youthrights.org/2010/08/11/schwarzenegger_v_gamers_help_us_fight_back/

I support this. Little kids should not have he ability to buy violent games. Let the parents decide and be accountable. No longer can they blame the games or the kids, not its all on the parents.

mailman2
08-12-10, 08:33 PM
I have no problem with this. I just hate when they blame video games for crimes. It would be like blaming a handgun for the murder. Its not the fault of the gun, its the idiot carrying it who is to blame.

Bah!
08-12-10, 08:44 PM
What age are you considered an adult in California? If it's 18, I have no problem with this law. If it's lower the law should be changed to the lower age.

Movies already do this, I don't see what the big deal is honestly. Also, as Magus said, this puts the responsibility right back where it belongs, the parents.

john19055
08-12-10, 08:56 PM
I would agee no one under 18 should be able to buy these games ,If your parents think it is alright then they can buy it for you.

NaitoSan
08-12-10, 09:10 PM
I support this law. Nowaday kids don't know what reasonsiblity means. But of course they'll find a way to get a copy. :(

DiscipleDOC
08-12-10, 11:09 PM
I support this. Little kids should not have he ability to buy violent games. Let the parents decide and be accountable. No longer can they blame the games or the kids, not its all on the parents.

I have no problem with this. I just hate when they blame video games for crimes. It would be like blaming a handgun for the murder. Its not the fault of the gun, its the idiot carrying it who is to blame.

What age are you considered an adult in California? If it's 18, I have no problem with this law. If it's lower the law should be changed to the lower age.

Movies already do this, I don't see what the big deal is honestly. Also, as Magus said, this puts the responsibility right back where it belongs, the parents.

I would agee no one under 18 should be able to buy these games ,If your parents think it is alright then they can buy it for you.

I support this law. Nowaday kids don't know what reasonsiblity means. But of course they'll find a way to get a copy. :(

+1.

Bah!
08-12-10, 11:11 PM
Something tells me the OP was expecting a completely different reaction. :)

Airbrushkid
08-13-10, 12:57 AM
I'm with everyone else here. I support it.

t3hl33td4rg0n
08-13-10, 01:00 AM
Doesn't look like Arial is getting any support here (lol)

+1 in support

MaXThReAT
08-13-10, 04:43 AM
I just want to make sure I understand everyone. By supporting this you are essentially saying yes, games are too violent already and these games are causing harm to children so the government needs to step in because ESRB ratings don't fully call out violent games and parents can't stop their kids. Right, right, so developers can be even more careful to avoid a violent rating by ESRB and now the supreme court. Let’s all make sure we never see another GTA again. I know this may be shocking to some of you but consoles and most PC games are for children. They are kids toys. We are all playing the same games. I'm 30 next month. IMO it is safe to say that because of things like this we will NEVER see another SOF or a kingpin or a voyeur or hot coffee. I guess I don't understand what the cause for this is. Doesn't gamestop ask for ID (17+) when selling an M rated game. When ESRB first came up I supported it. I though finally, developers are free to make the most violent and adult themed games they want because now there is a line. Except that line really mean do not cross cuz if you do your cutting off 50-60% of your revenue. Okay remove the dismemberment and blood. Okay now you can sell to 70% of the people. Fine remove all the strong language and all the gore. There, now you can sell to 90%. In walks Arnold saying, NO those bodies on the ground are still very violent. Can't you shoot flowers that send people to heaven. Okay to avoid your violent rating bodies will turn into a bed of flowers and you'll see a spirit fly up to the clouds. Arnold now says, okay now it's not too violent, parents go ahead and ignore your kids some more we have everything under control for you. I don’t see how this put it on the parents at all. O I don’t know where little Jonny got that, gamestop shouldn’t have sold it to him Arnold told me so. Whhhaaaaaa. Maybe developers would actually step up and cross the line making the next carmageddon come to life but so far every push of that line makes my gaming even more of a children’s pass time.Violence is violence and porn is porn, neither is for kids, we've been over this.

I don’t support this. Sorry.:thumbdwn: -1

saturnotaku
08-13-10, 04:56 AM
I know this may be shocking to some of you but consoles and most PC games are for children. They are kids toys.

You're playing right in to the stereotype.

Watch this video, it addresses this a bit:

oFywW99Uvwc

MaXThReAT
08-13-10, 05:04 AM
You're playing right in to the stereotype.

Watch this video, it addresses this a bit:

oFywW99Uvwc

Thank you. That's my point exactly. Ask a rep who their target demographic is. I don't like the stereotype and that's why I posted. It's not a kids toy but it's become that and that video explains why and how it happened. That's exactly what I said above. That line hasn't helped it's only hindered. Thats why I say maybe if you push them far enough they will break that line and make the next carmageddon but they haven't so far and have only been held back by that line. IMO it should be adult games come first and kids games come second. Ask a kid and he would say the reverse. The market reflects this because they only make kids games. However I can't really see my 60+yo father buying or playing adult games (violent sexy whatever) but I can see myself doing so in 30 years though.

nekrosoft13
08-13-10, 08:06 AM
Arnold Schwarzenegger, '80s action star and governor of California, has passed a law banning the sale of "violent" video games to anyone under the age of 18. This is more than just enforcing the ESRB ratings; this is banning all minors from buying all games that could be considered "violent".
http://blog.youthrights.org/2010/08/11/schwarzenegger_v_gamers_help_us_fight_back/

good, Good Work Governator

LurkerLito
08-13-10, 09:04 AM
The law doesn't affect me nor do I see anything really wrong with it other than the vagueness of who's definition of "violent" we are to use. Video games rated M aren't suppose to be sold or marketed to minors anyway. So as far as I can see all this does is actually allow penalties most likely in terms of fines on retailers who sell to minors. It does not ban selling the M rated game from a parent or guardian then that parent or guardian giving the game to their child or even preventing a child who got the game from a parent or guardian from owning the M rated game. It is only making it illegal to actually sell the game to a minor. It should in no way affect game development considering any game that would be affected like GTA or the others mentioned earlier still would be made and marketed for the M rated audience.

The only place I can see this being a issue, is with web retailers and digital distributors. They really don't have a way to check what your real age is so this law could be a big hindrance to them.

ViN86
08-13-10, 09:54 AM
If you're under 18, you don't pay taxes and you can't vote, so I don't know why the Supreme Court would listen to you. I have played Modern Warfare 2 and have heard the 1000's of kids (some are extremely young) whose retarded parents bought them the game. Maybe a law like this will make parents pay attention to wtf their kids are doing.

Have fun getting your parents to buy your video games for you.

nekrosoft13
08-13-10, 09:56 AM
I wish that would also mean that there would be less annoying brats online playing games

ViN86
08-13-10, 09:57 AM
The law doesn't affect me nor do I see anything really wrong with it other than the vagueness of who's definition of "violent" we are to use. Video games rated M aren't suppose to be sold or marketed to minors anyway. So as far as I can see all this does is actually allow penalties most likely in terms of fines on retailers who sell to minors. It does not ban selling the M rated game from a parent or guardian then that parent or guardian giving the game to their child or even preventing a child who got the game from a parent or guardian from owning the M rated game. It is only making it illegal to actually sell the game to a minor. It should in no way affect game development considering any game that would be affected like GTA or the others mentioned earlier still would be made and marketed for the M rated audience.

The only place I can see this being a issue, is with web retailers and digital distributors. They really don't have a way to check what your real age is so this law could be a big hindrance to them.

Sure they do. Credit cards are essentially an age check. Practically no kids have credit cards, which means they need to ask their parents.

LurkerLito
08-13-10, 10:04 AM
Sure they do. Credit cards are essentially an age check. Practically no kids have credit cards, which means they need to ask their parents.

True but some parents do give kids credit cards, and also there are the paypal and google checkout options that need to be taken into consideration.

grey_1
08-13-10, 11:31 AM
Something tells me the OP was expecting a completely different reaction. :)

I think so :lol:

I fully support this.

One of the issues is that some parents are horribly out of touch with what their kids are playing. A good example is one of my nephews, a few years ago. I don't even remember what game he was playing, I think it was a Final Fantasy, not sure though.

He was 11 at the time. I walked in to say hi and he's sitting there with tears in his eyes because he just had to kill his parents to advance in game. This is a smart kid, top student, helps out around the house etc - great kid. No one will ever, ever convince me a video game can't impact a kid in harmful ways.

He was angry at me after that too, I got his mother and showed her what was going on and she flipped, rightfully so. No more video games for little Jim for a while, but he understood why when it was explained to him.

DiscipleDOC
08-13-10, 11:42 AM
I think so :lol:

I fully support this.

One of the issues is that some parents are horribly out of touch with what their kids are playing. A good example is one of my nephews, a few years ago. I don't even remember what game he was playing, I think it was a Final Fantasy, not sure though.

He was 11 at the time. I walked in to say hi and he's sitting there with tears in his eyes because he just had to kill his parents to advance in game. This is a smart kid, top student, helps out around the house etc - great kid. No one will ever, ever convince me a video game can't impact a kid in harmful ways.

He was angry at me after that too, I got his mother and showed her what was going on and she flipped, rightfully so. No more video games for little Jim for a while, but he understood why when it was explained to him.

Most people that say this are either kids themselves, or don't have them.

Redeemed
08-13-10, 11:46 AM
Yeah, I agree with this. Parents need to... *wait for it...*


PARENT!!! :wonder: :wonder: :wonder:

They need to monitor what their kids watch, play, listen to, etc. If they don't want that responsibility they shouldn't have had kids. Since they do, be an adult and accept the responsibility.

grey_1
08-13-10, 11:46 AM
Most people that say this are either kids themselves, or don't have them.

Or just don't care.

Yep, agreed DD.

grey_1
08-13-10, 11:47 AM
Yeah, I agree with this. Parents need to... *wait for it...*


PARENT!!! :wonder: :wonder: :wonder:

They need to monitor what their kids watch, play, listen to, etc. If they don't want that responsibility they shouldn't have had kids. Since they do, be an adult and accept the responsibility.

I'm too busy gaming to parent....















wait....












heh - had to throw that in there. :D Back to our regularly scheduled thread...:bleh: