Clinton introducing federal game regulation

Zoglog

Zoglog

CAGiversary!
Feedback
1 (100%)
http://www.gamespot.com/news/6140535.html

This afternoon, Clinton's office announced she has written a bill that would institute federal regulation of games sales. Co-authored by longtime game critic Senator Joe Lieberman (D-Conn.), the Family Entertainment Protection Act will be jointly submitted by the two legislators when Congress reconvenes in two weeks.

If made law, the Family Entertainment Protection Act would be a "a prohibition against any business for selling or renting a Mature, Adults-Only, or Ratings Pending game to a person who is younger than seventeen." It would punish violators with unspecified fines, though it did not specify if the clerk who sold the game or the retailer where said clerk worked would be punished. "This provision is not aimed at punishing retailers who act in good faith to enforce the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB) system," read a statement from Clinton's office.
Click to expand...

from joy a quick rundown of the proposed points

* Prohibition on Selling M and AO games to Minors - Retail enforcement of ESRB.
* Analysis of the ESRB - An annual independent analysis of the games rating system must be undertaken.
* FTC Investigation of Misleading Ratings - FTC would be empowered to see if there were more pervasive problems in the industry.
* Complaint Registration - The Bureau of Consumer Protection within the FTC will track complaints filed on behalf of consumers regarding misleading or deceptive content.
* Annual Retailer Audit - FTC will be empowered to conduct annual audits of retailers and have those results reported to congress.


I see nothing wrong with this bill. I'm sick of seeing kids turn retarded after playing too much GTA San Andreas.
 
If games are supposed to be art, then is it up to the government to decide who can purchase art? This is blatant governmental censorship, in the same vein of Tipper Gore and the PMRC.
 
Here's a summary of the Bill's provisions(From gamepolitics):

I. Prohibition on Selling Mature and Adults Only video games to minors

The centerpiece of this bill is a prohibition against any business for selling or renting a Mature, Adults-Only, or Ratings Pending game to a person who is younger than seventeen. This provision is not aimed at punishing retailers who act in good faith to enforce the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB) system. That's why retailers would have an affirmative defense if they were shown an identification they believed to be valid or have a system in place to display and enforce the ESRB system. Similar prohibitions have become law in the last several months in California, Michigan, and Illinois.


II. Annual Analysis of the Ratings System

Since the bill relies on the video game industry to continue rating the appropriateness of games for minors, this bill requires an annual, independent analysis of game ratings. This analysis will help ensure that the ESRB ratings system accurately reflects the content in each game and that the ratings system does not change significantly over time.


III. Authority for the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to Investigate Misleading Ratings

Part of the genesis of this bill was the revelation that the makers of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas had included, through embedded code that was discovered and made accessible to the public, sexually explicit content inconsistent with the game's Mature rating. This bill requires the FTC to conduct an investigation to determine whether what happened with GTA: San Andreas is a pervasive problem. It also includes a Sense of Congress that the Commission shall take appropriate action if it determines that there is a pervasive problem.


IV. Authority to Register Complaints

This bill requires the Bureau of Consumer Protection (BCP) of the FTC to ensure that consumers can file complaints if they find content to be misleading or deceptive and requires the BCP to report on the number of such complaints to Congress.


V. Annual Retailer Audit

This bill authorizes the FTC to conduct an annual, random audit of retailers - sometimes referred to as a secret shopper survey – to determine how easy it is for young people to purchase Mature and Adults Only video games and report the findings to Congress.


It seems simple enough, but there's always the chance that things like this can slippery slope to hell and back. I'd rather read the actual bill...soon.
 
I don't see a problem with the bill as there are some games that minors shouldn't be playing...listening to the last cagcast, I do agree with cheapy about some kids might be ready sooner then others for more mature content, but if setting strict guidelines on the sale of mature games to minors helps shut up the anti video game crowd I am all for it.

While it would be nice, IMO, the problem isn't the games themselves, it is the parents who let there kid do what ever the fuck they want. Yes there are parents that are involved, but the amount of parents that will buy whatever the kid asks for and not look into the content need to step it up. In my experiance, I have come across several mothers with sons under the age of 11, and have bought them a gta game. While I do feel there may be some 11 year olds that can handle mature games, these mothers knew nothing about the games, the games content, or if there kid could handle such material. I do not feel it is the gov't job to raise the youth of america.
 
Well I think it is dumb to make it a law. I think parents should be more involved. But I suppose if the bill is needed to keep stupid kids from buy GTA then fine. I mean everytime I go to EBgames some kid is always trying to buy GTA either himself or by asking his mom.
 
Apparently some of you aren't looking at the worst case scenario or long terms effects of such legislation. First off this won't shut anyone up, the anti-video game nuts will only fight harder after a small victory to see if they can abolish games enirely. Not to mention it will likely bring others out of the woodwork to see if they can't do the same for TV or movies. If this is an overly enforced policy like government censorship often becomes, we could see larger retailers either try to censor games as best they can or just not risk the hefty fines at all and drop the sale of all M-rated games. This would have a huge effect on publishers not bothering to make mature games because there's not enough money in it. Sure it seems simple enough now, but laws are often changed before they become a real law, plus they are often expanded on later.

Long story short it's walking a narrow path, in a worst case scenario, all that needs to be done is change some wording and we don't get great games like RE 4 anymore no matter what your age. It's basically backdoor gov't censorship and IMO no one who plays games or anyone who even slightly opposes censorship should not support something like this or the policitians who come up with such legislation.
 
i thought not selling M rated videogames to kids under 17 was somethig that many retailers already enforced...
 
[quote name='ryanbph']I don't see a problem with the bill as there are some games that minors shouldn't be playing...listening to the last cagcast, I do agree with cheapy about some kids might be ready sooner then others for more mature content, but if setting strict guidelines on the sale of mature games to minors helps shut up the anti video game crowd I am all for it.
[/QUOTE]

Kids shouldn't be reading the bible; it's got rape, incest, prostitutes, murder, torture... you name it. Obviously there has to be a body that rates books, and the government should make sure the ratings are enforced.
 
http://www.livejournal.com/users/gamepolitics/146225.html
ESA Responds to Clinton-Lieberman Bill

Doug Lowenstein of the ESA has issued a response to the Family Entertainment Protection Act, announced today by Senators Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and Joe Lieberman (D-CT). Lowenstein's statement reads, in part:

"We share Senator Clinton's commitment to effective enforcement of the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB) ratings by retailers, and we appreciate the fact that she has sought to draft a more thoughtful proposal in this area than most others. However, we strongly oppose the bill. We believe the combination of trustworthy ESRB ratings, parental education, voluntary retail enforcement of ESRB ratings, and, most recently, the major announcement that all next generation video game consoles will include parental control systems, makes Senator Clinton's bill unnecessary... "

"While we are gratified that the Senator holds the ESRB in such high regard that her bill would give these ratings the force of law, the courts have made clear that giving a private party governmental powers is unconstitutional. Beyond that, the bill clearly infringes the constitutionally protected creative rights of the video game industry. Thus, if enacted, the bill will be struck down as have similar bills passed in several states...."

"It is worth noting that on the same day David Walsh from the National Institute on Media and the Family called for overhauling the ESRB's video game rating system, two Senators called for a bill that would enshrine that same rating system into federal law, showing that they think the ESRB rating system is credible, trustworthy, and helpful. "
Click to expand...
I agree with Doug.
 
[quote name='Storamin']i thought not selling M rated videogames to kids under 17 was somethig that many retailers already enforced...[/QUOTE]

Policy, not law.
 
They should make more games in which you can commit suicide. That way only the kid who was stupid enough to think the game was real life would die rather than innocents being killed.
That woulda actually be good for the gene pool.
 
yeah i believe there are these things called...parents, some people have one some have more, but usually they are responsible for those under the age of 18. Here is the funny thing these "parents" are supposed to monitor what their kids' do. Now wouldnt it be funny if the ones complaining about violent games did their jobs.
 
[quote name='eldad9']Will you support similar legislation for movies and books?[/QUOTE]

Couldn't have said it better myself.
 
Stores card for liquor and alcohol. I don't see this going so far as to ban video games. It will just become another carding rule.
It won't hurt anything and only stops some stupid kids from buying stuff they shouldn't.
You people are reading too much into it.
It is obvious that parents are doing a crap job of parenting, so IMO this legislation will do what they should be doing for them. Hopefully it will shut JT up for a while.
 
[quote name='peteloaf']Interesting fact: 451 degrees is the temperature at wich paper burns...[/QUOTE]

Hahaha. Nice reference. ;)
 
[quote name='eldad9']Will you support similar legislation for movies and books?[/QUOTE]
Actually, yes. its not hurting kids by keeping them away from R rated material. They can take in as much smut and violence as they want once they hit 18. Either way kids are gonna get their grubby mits on em. they get a hold of cigarettes, beer, porn, etc. as it is, so this won't be any different. hell, there parents aren't paying attention to the labels anyway. theyll probably buy it for them.
 
[quote name='eldad9']Kids shouldn't be reading the bible; it's got rape, incest, prostitutes, murder, torture... you name it. Obviously there has to be a body that rates books, and the government should make sure the ratings are enforced.[/QUOTE]
ya had to bring out that argument. weak.
 
[quote name='Duo_Maxwell']Apparently some of you aren't looking at the worst case scenario or long terms effects of such legislation. First off this won't shut anyone up, the anti-video game nuts will only fight harder after a small victory to see if they can abolish games enirely. Not to mention it will likely bring others out of the woodwork to see if they can't do the same for TV or movies. If this is an overly enforced policy like government censorship often becomes, we could see larger retailers either try to censor games as best they can or just not risk the hefty fines at all and drop the sale of all M-rated games. This would have a huge effect on publishers not bothering to make mature games because there's not enough money in it. Sure it seems simple enough now, but laws are often changed before they become a real law, plus they are often expanded on later.

Long story short it's walking a narrow path, in a worst case scenario, all that needs to be done is change some wording and we don't get great games like RE 4 anymore no matter what your age. It's basically backdoor gov't censorship and IMO no one who plays games or anyone who even slightly opposes censorship should not support something like this or the policitians who come up with such legislation.[/QUOTE]

That is what I am worried about. I don't like this bill but it's not horrible. However, what could happen next is what concerns me
 
there should remain a distinction between making something store policy, or corporate policy, and making something illegal. I agree with the arguments stating that allowing this bill to pass would be entirely unconstitutional. Imagine, if you will, that it was ILLEGAL to go see an R-rated movie at the age of 16. Imagine you were breaking the law as a 15 year old buying an Eminem album. Or, more appropriately, imagine if the movie theater was breaking the law for letting you into an R rated movie, or that FYE was breaking the law by selling you that CD. What kind of sense does that make? If there's no law against being a bad parent, there shouldn't be a law against selling videogames to kids. Admitted, stores should use their best judgement, but lets not get started on the slippery slope of governmental censorship.
 
[quote name='varsitygamer']there should remain a distinction between making something store policy, or corporate policy, and making something illegal. I agree with the arguments stating that allowing this bill to pass would be entirely unconstitutional. Imagine, if you will, that it was ILLEGAL to go see an R-rated movie at the age of 16. Imagine you were breaking the law as a 15 year old buying an Eminem album. Or, more appropriately, imagine if the movie theater was breaking the law for letting you into an R rated movie, or that FYE was breaking the law by selling you that CD. What kind of sense does that make? If there's no law against being a bad parent, there shouldn't be a law against selling videogames to kids. Admitted, stores should use their best judgement, but lets not get started on the slippery slope of governmental censorship.[/QUOTE]

it wouldnt be illegal for a 16 year old to PLAY an M rated game, it would be illegal for them to BUY an M rated game. the bill wouldnt change things too much, the only people who care are 12-16 year olds that cant buy these games without their parents knowing now. while working at gamestop i noticed that most parents dont care that games are rated M. so all kids have to do is kid their parents, older siblings, cousins, friends etc, to buy the game for them. everything is fine.
 
[quote name='Noodle Pirate!']Stores card for liquor and alcohol. I don't see this going so far as to ban video games. It will just become another carding rule.
It won't hurt anything and only stops some stupid kids from buying stuff they shouldn't.
You people are reading too much into it.
It is obvious that parents are doing a crap job of parenting, so IMO this legislation will do what they should be doing for them. Hopefully it will shut JT up for a while.[/QUOTE]

No offense but you're off base on most accounts. For starters a comparison to alcohol is essentially unwarranted as alcohol is under a rule where it is also illegal for minors to consume and adults to give alcohol to them. A 16 year old can't be arrested for driving with a copy of the Warriors in his/her car. Secondly the economical effects are nothing like alcohol. It doesn't take millions of dollars to develop a bottle of alcohol and to be honest the profit margin on alcohol for retailers is probably just as big if not bigger than games. Not to mention when compared to the numbers that have been tossed around for similar bills the fines for selling alcohol to minors is considerably cheaper (something like $500-1000 compared to proposed nearly $3000 or so fines in some video game bills).

Also, last I checked the gov't is not supposed to be a fallback babysitter for crappy parenting and like I said earlier if something like this is passed it likely won't shut up nuts like Thompson. You've no doubt seen his views of games and things in general, after winning a small battle do you think he's just stop his crazy crusade there? My guess is him and those like him will fight harder and bring even more things up for censorship and abolishment that they feel is wrong.
 
[quote name='thagoat']ya had to bring out that argument. weak.[/QUOTE]

I don't think the Bible argument is very weak. If there is going to be legislation over video games, then it stands to reason that there very well may be legislation over movies and books in the near future. If that is the case, movies may be easy to differentiate because we already have a rating system. But books? That is one big fucking can of worms to try and rate every book. If we were to even try, you know that the Bible would not get an "M" rating even though it does contain all these things that these legislators feel is wrong.
 
[quote name='eldad9']Kids shouldn't be reading the bible; it's got rape, incest, prostitutes, murder, torture... you name it. Obviously there has to be a body that rates books, and the government should make sure the ratings are enforced.[/QUOTE]

The christian bible is also dangerous. Reading the bible conditions people to take stupid and destructive actions such as

- The Crusades
- The Spanish Inquistion
- Witch Trials
- Manifest Destiny
- The Crusades II (AKA the Iraq war)

In short, it's a war/genocide/torture simulator!
 
I'm all for this.
Sadly parents can't do their job and stores don't give a shit half the time, so it had to come to this. I have no problem getting carded buying a rated M game. All ready have to show my ID when I go see a rated R movie.
 
it doesn't seem like anyone really understands the ramifications of a bill like this being passed. too many of you are just entirely apathetic.

"Oh, it's okay, I'm old enough to buy the game, a 16 year old shouldn't be allowed to play halo anyway."

"Already show my ID at an R-rated movie."

I entirely agree that there are some games (I'm not a huge fan of kids playing GTA, for example) that individuals of certain ages should not have access to. But whether or not those individuals have access to that game should not be something that is legislated by the United States government. THAT is the point that many of us are trying to make. It is an insult to the videogame industry, and the corporations that thrive from the industry's product. But more importantly, it's just generally destructive to the industry. The motion picture association of america implemented their own ratings system, and they have been allowed to self govern since. Does the videogame industry not deserve the same right (or to use a cliche, freedom)? The motion picture industry also practices self censorship. That is, if they think something is going to be too risque, they either cut it out, or give the film a stricter rating. Before jumping the gun and bringing the government into this, I think it's important to explore all possibilities. No system is perfect, but that is especially true of one with a heavy handed government.
 
[quote name='varsitygamer']it doesn't seem like anyone really understands the ramifications of a bill like this being passed. too many of you are just entirely apathetic.... No system is perfect, but that is especially true of one with a heavy handed government.[/QUOTE]

Not to mention that we all get to fund another piece of bureaucracy - hope you guys like paying more taxes!
 
I think that there are bigger things that are legislative body should worry about. Instead of worrying about some 15 year old fat kid fucking a damned hooker on his PS2, how about bringing about a flat tax, end of interest groups, a limit to congressional terms, etc.

Government regulation would not solve the poverty of good parenting in our society. Prime example.. you may have to be 18 to get porn, but did you not find a means to obtain it when you were 15? It's just another method of censorship and an attempt to secure votes if you ask me
 
[quote name='Skylander7'] It's just another method of censorship and an attempt to secure votes if you ask me[/QUOTE]

What is it censoring?

[quote name='Duo_Maxwell'] Secondly the economical effects are nothing like alcohol. It doesn't take millions of dollars to develop a bottle of alcohol and to be honest the profit margin on alcohol for retailers is probably just as big if not bigger than games.[/QUOTE]

I'd be willing to bet that the amount of alcohol produced to reach the same amount of people at the same price point would cost as much, if not more to produce. I'll toss out a figure here: 5 mil to produce a game, market it and press about 500k copies at $50 a pop. I'd be willing to bet that a company like Jack Daniels would spend the same amount of money to brew 500k $50 portions along with glass, bottling and advertising. In fact, I'd be willing to bet that cheap beers, like bud or Miller spend more on advertising than a game developer would spend on development, advertising and production all in one.

Not to mention when compared to the numbers that have been tossed around for similar bills the fines for selling alcohol to minors is considerably cheaper (something like $500-1000 compared to proposed nearly $3000 or so fines in some video game bills).
Click to expand...

This bill has no defined amount to fine a retailer.

Also, last I checked the gov't is not supposed to be a fallback babysitter for crappy parenting and like I said earlier if something like this is passed it likely won't shut up nuts like Thompson. You've no doubt seen his views of games and things in general, after winning a small battle do you think he's just stop his crazy crusade there? My guess is him and those like him will fight harder and bring even more things up for censorship and abolishment that they feel is wrong.
Click to expand...

The government has a right to impose restrictions based on what it deems appropriate. Such examples include underage pornography, bestiality, etc.

[quote name='varsitygamer']If there's no law against being a bad parent, there shouldn't be a law against selling videogames to kids. Admitted, stores should use their best judgement, but lets not get started on the slippery slope of governmental censorship.[/QUOTE]

Plenty of laws against being bad parents. However, I'm not sure if you were trying to be sarcastic there, or not.
 
[quote name='varsitygamer']it doesn't seem like anyone really understands the ramifications of a bill like this being passed. too many of you are just entirely apathetic.

"Oh, it's okay, I'm old enough to buy the game, a 16 year old shouldn't be allowed to play halo anyway."

"Already show my ID at an R-rated movie."
[/QUOTE]

Oh, it's just like not caring about slavery, because you're already white.
 
I don't see why anyone is getting upset over this. It's just like Skylander said, look at the laws that are set up that aren't enforceable and truly can't be enforceable. If I wanted to, I could go to my friend right now and buy some weed. I could go to the store and buy alcohol for minors. And who can't remember trying to look up porn before you were 18?

If you want to get upset, you should be upset that instead of the government actually fixing the problems that we have today (the war, the economy, hurricane relief, etc.) they pick a very easy topic to try to create a stir. I've said it before; Hilary Clinton is not doing these conservative tactics for no reason (because if you’re going to run for president some day, you have to appeal to independent voters that went out in droves to support a conservative view). So whenever the candidates start coming out and wanting to be our next commander-in-chief, she can say that she neither conservative nor is she liberal.
 
When I was like 13 or 14 I remember walking into suncoast with my mother. I picked up angel of darkness and dragon pink (both hentai) on vhs and bought them with my mother standing right there. The guy said "this is mature stuff, are you sure he should watch this?" or something like that. My mother said she didn't really care, since I can see worse on tv anyway, and that was the end of it. He didn't attempt to convey what it really was.

Basically if the guy had actually explained it to my mother she probably wouldn't have let me buy it. She did make a comment on the cover of angel of darkness about how it looked (girls with tattered clothing with sexual looks on their faces), she also noted that it said 18+ which she said usually means sex while 17+ is just violence, but this was as we wer walking out of the store and she wasn't overly concerned. She had no idea that it was an explicit hentai though (for the time anyway, some of the stuff is disgusting now), just that it may be sexy and have some nudity.

Though I think new hampshire may have some sort of law or something. I never got carded for a game in my life (though some old lady at best buy carded me for buying clearanced resident evil strategy guide once), but lately every time I buy a game in NH I get carded. It's extremely annoying since I've even been told I didn't look like I was 17 (not just that they were being certain). I just keep telling myself that when I'm 50+ I'll be glad I don't look my age.

Though I like this, not so much for what they want to implement, but simply because its hillary beating conservatives on their own territory. She's probably the most vocal on this "values" issue, other than thompson. Hillary in 08! Bill for first lady!
 
Well if they can help the "Gun" industry from lawsuits, maybe the government should do so for the entertainment industry. Just to add balance to the equation. I believe in the right to bear arms as most Americans do. I also believe in the right to play any friggin game I see fit. Hmmm, need that one voted on. :)

I think the game industry should police themselves just like the movie industry does. Just turned 31 yesterday and I still get carded at Walmart for games. If it keeps young kids from getting certain games, I'm all for it. Just hate to see government involvement. To much red tape and someone (Jack Thompson comes to mind) always mucks up the works.
 
At least this law is somewhat defensible under the commerce clause of the Constitution. Say what you want about freedom of speech but it is also very clear that Congress has the right to regulate interstate trade. Normally I'd throw up the 10th ammendment to fight stupid laws but you just can't when it's about trade.

Lastly, conspiracy theorists and Bradbury fans be damned. Porn hasn't exactly been hurt by being relegated to the back walls you know.
 
[quote name='FriskyTanuki']http://www.livejournal.com/users/gamepolitics/146225.html

I agree with Doug.[/QUOTE]

I also agree with Doug if consoles will have parental controls on them. That addresses a major issue because it gives parents an easy way to have control over what their kids play. I never opposed this type of legislation though but agreed that it wasn't a perfect fit. I also agree that it starts with the parents and they have to be as involved as possible. I did believe, however, that retailers should have some accountability in it as well, but I think the controls on consoles changes things significantly. Once that is implemented parents have zero excuse.
 
[quote name='kev']
Lastly, conspiracy theorists and Bradbury fans be damned. Porn hasn't exactly been hurt by being relegated to the back walls you know.[/QUOTE]

This is an excellent point. I remember arguing back and forth with javeryh about this issue a while back and his problem with this type of legislation was the long-term and widespread effect it would have on the industry and I just didn't see it happening.
 
The sad thing is, is that none of this really has to do with Joe or Hillary's actual beliefs its just attempt to steal away some voters from the religious right, and create a religious left. After the last election they feel this is the only way to get a Dem in the white house. If this passes its only matter of time before both parties are for prayer in school and a constitutional ban on gay marriage. Video games are just a Red Herring, just desperate grab for votes by destoying a parties principles. Its a sad day indeed
 
[quote name='chickenhawk']I also agree with Doug if consoles will have parental controls on them.[/QUOTE]

Doug neglected to point out that Xbox 360's parental controls don't work on Xbox games; so your overprotective parent can keep you from playing Condemned, but not San Andreas (if it's BC, of course ;)).

It will be interesting to see if PS3 has parental controls for PS2/1 games, and how the Revolution will implement it as well (especially considering that only very few SNES games were given ratings (didn't the ESRB start ratings in 1994 or so?).

I'd say this is much ado about nothing. It's important for you people who think that games will be outlawed (or some similar overreaction) if this bill passes to keep braying, however. Seriously.
 
[quote name='eldad9']Kids shouldn't be reading the bible; it's got rape, incest, prostitutes, murder, torture... you name it. Obviously there has to be a body that rates books, and the government should make sure the ratings are enforced.[/QUOTE]


From what I read of the law, they won't be rating the games...the main theme is they want stores to follow the guidelines already set...If a game is rated mature, then anyone under 17/18 (whatever the age is) shouldn't be able to pick it up. If 42% of kids under the age are getting the games themselves, that needs to be fixed.

They did say they will file reports on the game industries rating system. While that may become scary, the way it is currently worded I don't have a problem with
 
Actually, it's an attempt by the federal government to usurp more power from the States and the people. Another step in the total control of our society. Let this one pass, then another, then another, all for the 'greater good'. Next thing you know you're waking up in an exact replica of your room and buying state issued non-alcoholic vodka for 20 credits and everybody in the village calls you by your assigned numerical designation.


The Fed's have no right to be making such a law, but I'm sure the argument will be made under the interstate commerce clause. After all, they're only trying to help us from ourselves.


Be seeing you !
 
[quote name='alonzomourning23']

Though I like this, not so much for what they want to implement, but simply because its hillary beating conservatives on their own territory. She's probably the most vocal on this "values" issue, other than thompson. Hillary in 08! Bill for first lady![/QUOTE]

Is she really beating republicains in there own territory. The republicains have never been a main stay at pushing for rating systems, getting bad lyrics/songs out of kids hands. Most of those at the forefront of music/movie/tv/game attacks have been democrats. The republicains usually believe in less gov't (maybe not with GW Bush :roll: ) and the dems believe in bigger gov't. I don't see the need for the law, but I don't really have anything against it
 
[quote name='ryanbph']Is she really beating republicains in there own territory. The republicains have never been a main stay at pushing for rating systems, getting bad lyrics/songs out of kids hands. Most of those at the forefront of music/movie/tv/game attacks have been democrats. The republicains usually believe in less gov't (maybe not with GW Bush :roll: ) and the dems believe in bigger gov't. I don't see the need for the law, but I don't really have anything against it[/QUOTE]

I think you need to find me some prominent democrats who aren't Tipper Gore who were a part of the PMRC.

I can also state with confidence that the Meese commission wasn't embraced by many democrats, either.
 
This legislation won't really help anything because most of the little kids that get M rated games are those who have parents that let them buy them or will go buy them for their children anyway.

Legislation is one step but the ultimate responsiblity will be on the parent that lets their child/children play these games and don't teach their children the values that a game is just a game and you shouldn't try to do what you see in the game.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top