California Game Ban

[quote name='javeryh']This is ridiculous. If you are going to fine retailers $1,000 a pop for selling violent games to children then soon retailers are going to figure out it is not worth the hassle to carry these games and then the developers will stop making them. Why isn't there a comparable law in place for renting R-rated movies or selling certain violent CDs to minors? I'm pretty sure 50 Cent talking about bitches and hos right into junior's ear has at least if not more of an effect on him then playing a video game.[/QUOTE]

I agree, they should make a law comparable for movies and music. I think movies and music require carding the customer, though, whereas video games do not. Working for a Walmart store, and having used to have worked at Circuit City, I had to card people who looked under 27 for rated R movies, and I was supposed to have carded people for games.
 
[quote name='Ugamer_X']Illinois is in the process of passing a law that would allow the state government to slap a rating on games it deems inappropriate to sell to minors.[/QUOTE]

Did this by chance already happen, because all of a sudden I'm getting told at stores whenever I try to buy M-Rated games, " You're only 17, law says you have to be 18."
A friend of mine on the site has experienced this too, and it's really friggin annoying when I'm the age that ESRB says I need to be, and the fact that I was buying even worse games when I was barely a teen. 1 more month away from 18, so it's not that bad, I just don't like that the box says one thing and the clerk tells me another. Actually, kinda hate the clerks at the game stores around me in general, that might have something to do with it too.
 
[quote name='chickenhawk']No.


No.

That is just a dumb question. The laws cannot regulate what you give as a gift. That adds nothing to your side of the argument. I think you're really reaching here.

I would limit it using the exising ratings. M games should be restricted.[/QUOTE]

You do realize that you're in favor of a rating system for books, right?

Do you realize how many classics would not be readable by kids, or even teenagers?
 
[quote name='BLarR']Did this by chance already happen, because all of a sudden I'm getting told at stores whenever I try to buy M-Rated games, " You're only 17, law says you have to be 18."[/QUOTE]

Store policy? yes. Law? no.

Many people will be glad to tell you what "the law" says, even though they're not really sure.
 
[quote name='eldad9']You do realize that you're in favor of a rating system for books, right?

Do you realize how many classics would not be readable by kids, or even teenagers?[/QUOTE]

No, I didn't realize that. Because I never was allowed to read the classics, I never learned to read. :roll:

So why couldn't there be a rating system for books? Is it because reading as an activity is much more acceptable than video games or movies? Because it's universally thought of as educational? If there is content in there that kids shouldn't read then who cares that they are books and who cares that they are classics? Just because they are books, anyone should be able to read anything? If they are classics, they will read them eventually. And there are enough books out there that it wouldn't create a shortage of readers in the world if they were rated.

My point is just that you should treat all media the same. If you want to have a system to regulate games you should do it for movies and books too.
 
[quote name='Cheese']
How are anti-smoking and alcohol laws aimed at stopping emotional harm? What emotional harm? I'm pretty sure the laws are for the kids physical well being, granted, I could be wrong.

[/QUOTE]

I think you misunderstood me on that. I was referring to the video game law being aimed at preventing emotional harm to kids. I was just saying that they can harm certain people in different ways.
 
Many people are of the opinion that violence in games can be 'worse' than violence in books because it's:
* more visually graphic/realistic
* sometimes much more prevalent as a portion of the whole work.
That said, there are of course exceptions--while i might let a 10 year old read Edgar Allan Poe, I might not let him read certain Stephen King novels.
 
This law AGAIN? Hooray for vote pandering. These laws are completely unconstitutional and even if this passes it will get overturned. The case law is pretty simple--the government is not justified in restricting this kind of speech.
 
I'm personally waiting for each and every person who comes up with dumb shit like this to literally go fuq themselves. There are more important matters in the world that need attention far more than incessantly obsessing about video games. Besides, until people start treating DVD purchasing the same way (i.e. keeping kids from buying R movies, etc), it's just a bunch of asshats bandwagoning against gaming.
 
[quote name='greendj27']Sorry, but I don't think there is anything wrong with them banning the sale of violent games to minors. At least this way if the parent buys the kid the game, they have to at least see what they are buying.[/QUOTE]

I agree, ban the sales of violent games to minors.
 
The kids whom this law is supposed to be protecting are presumably well under the age where they could get a job. The point has been made several times, but nearly everyone is ignoring it. How many 12 year old kids have $50 laying around. Those who have that kind of money were almost certainly given it by their parents. Isn't that the parents' fault?

I'd rather not have legislation restricting speech in anyway, but in this case, I don't believe there's much to worry about. Laws like this will have the forbidden fruit effect, and M rated games would continue to sell, perhaps even in higher numbers.
 
Yes parents should be held responsible, but what elected official will have the balls to make a statement blaming the parents. If their is a law, yes it will become the stores responsibility to check id's. Kids shouldn't be playing some of the more mature games out their like GTA, God of War and others... IMO, developers will continue to make mature themed games, as their is a large demographic of legal aged consumers willing to buy the games. Stores will continue to sell them, as long as consumers still come in to buy them, so the argument on this being censorship, and the companies will realize that it isn't worth it is bullshit. All you have to do is ask for a ID, it isn't that difficult to do. No major changes will needed to be made. If you have an employee mess up and sell one to a minor, that just so happens to be a sting operation, they will have to pay the fine. Their have been sting operations before. Walmart was fined a couple years back for this, done in the south.
 
[quote name='Cheese'][quote name='Coffeeedge']Wow. Interesting. The most violent games reach the equivilant of the highest (general) movie rating, in which all but the most extreme (and we're really talking extreme) violence is allowed. Fascinating. I don't have to explain why this is a stupid statement, do I?[/quote]
NC-17, Kill Bill had to go Black and White to get an R rating and I could think of much more violent films then that.[/quote]
Notice that I said highest GENERAL rating. NC-17 is almost never used these days, and is really an outlying factor. I'm well aware of it's existance.
Kill Bill was an odd situation. I've seen way worse violence IN R-rated movies, and in full gory color. I think that someone was being a little over-prudent.

But this topic is pointless...it's the same old marry-go-round.
 
[quote name='chickenhawk']No, I didn't realize that. Because I never was allowed to read the classics, I never learned to read. :roll:

So why couldn't there be a rating system for books? Is it because reading as an activity is much more acceptable than video games or movies? Because it's universally thought of as educational? If there is content in there that kids shouldn't read then who cares that they are books and who cares that they are classics? Just because they are books, anyone should be able to read anything? If they are classics, they will read them eventually. And there are enough books out there that it wouldn't create a shortage of readers in the world if they were rated.

My point is just that you should treat all media the same. If you want to have a system to regulate games you should do it for movies and books too.[/QUOTE]

Yes, you should treat all media the same. And the government should not be able to tell people what content is allowed and what is prohibited.

Who's to say that a certain book is fine for a 13 year old but not a 12 year old? Or that, in effect, any 13 year old is more mature than any 12 year old?

Rate content all you want. But you can't decide who should be selling what content to whom.
 
[quote name='eldad9']I'm white, so racism concerns me not.[/QUOTE]
Except that fighting against racism is a good and worthy cause for anyone, white, black, or whatever, to be involved in.
Fighting for children to be able to buy violent games? I don't think there's quite as much justification for that one, whether you're 12 or or 30 or 60, or whatever.
 
That was not the point. The point was that an issue shouldn't concern you directly for you to be able to have an opinion.

The real problem, though, is that you don't want to give government that kind of power. It would only be abused.

Remember "Alcohol is harmful; let's make it illegal"?
 
[quote name='eldad9']Remember "Alcohol is harmful; let's make it illegal"?[/QUOTE]

At least the harm that alcohol does is well-documented. There's not even close to the same evidence that violent media causes harm, which is why the government shouldn't (and isn't) allowed to regulate it. It doesn't matter if it's "simple" or "easy" to ask for an ID, the government has to show much more than that to regulate speech.

And laws like this do nothing to increase or encourage parental responsibility, they are just screaming "oh hey government I can't raise my kids, you do it for me".
 
[quote name='Friedle']May just be me, but I agree with the bill. It's not banning the games, just stopping sales to minors, correct? It'd force the parents to actually be parents.

Working at TRU I can say that about 80% that come into the store whith their young children wanting to buy a M-rated game aren't even aware of the ESRB ratings. Once we explain it to them they thank us for the information and normally send the kid back for something like T-rated or less.

I thought most retail outlets had policy's like this anyway.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, I've seen kids (by themselves) turned down trying to buy M-rated games somewhere (EB or GS maybe?). I figured this already was the law! I guess it was just that store's policy though. I believe Target has this policy as well - they have to type in your birthday when you buy an M game there, so I'm assuming they wouldn't sell to a minor.

Note that I'm all for not giving the govt. too much power (particularly these days), and I'm fairly opinionated on most political issues - however, I find it difficult to get too worked up about either side in this case. I see good and bad points just about equally with both - which is really nice for a change, as I don't really care how it works out!
 
I personally don't care either way. I'm 16 now and have played both violent and non-violent games my whole life. I don't see anything wrong with them restricting it, I guess maybe because by the time a law were to be in place, I'd already be old enough to buy those banned games anyway. Even today, I can still walk into my local best buy and pick up GTA or RE4, I do all the time. Ultimately, I'm not concerned with banning games to minors or not, what I'm concerned with is more the way that they are used as a scapegoat. Music, movies and games always will be blamed for problems. Kids killing eachother will be blamed on GTA, its unavoidable but it's unnecessary. We never hear how a kid was shuffled from home to home, a drug adict, or bullied. We hear that he played GTA and listened to rap.

People need to start owning up to their problems. We cannot accept the fact that people use games as a scapegoat for their problems. We need to pick our battles, and I think too many people are concerned with the wrong one right now.
 
I agree, in many cases violent games are a scapegoat, and that's wrong. But also in many case, the games do have *an* effect on the person--along with all those other things you mentioned. I grew up in the age of the PMRC, when listening to Ozzy was supposed to make you want to kill yourself. Ozzy *himself* never caused that, but that music *and a bunch of other stuff* worked together in some cases. Unfortunately, then as now, the 'easy target' was scapegoated.
Even with all that, I don't have a problem with this. The games are already voluntarily rated. If I as a parent say, "Son, I don't want you playing M rated games", but he can buy them anywhere, I'm basically spinning my wheels. A little support from the state would be nice--since the games are still easily and widely available, and I can always go buy it for/with him.
And the government is already so far in our lives, making a big deal about this is like putting out a fire with a watergun. Those of you who work, Google 'tax freedom day.' Frightening stuff. And you're worried about kids, whose rights are already limited because they're not adults, being able to buy GTA?
 
I guess another thing is too, my parents never cared what I played. They know the content, they're not dumb and I don't hide it from them either. If it were a situation where I was not allowed to play m-rated games, then that would be one thing, but I guess the fact that I am makes me not care so much about the law itself. As well, I'm not going to block my children someday from playing m-rated games, I played them as a kid, if my kid wants to, he/she should be allowed to. now, also my view may also be skewed cause I'm one of the few teens that isn't afraid to pick up "kiddy games" like pikmin or Katamari demacy. I know many people who only play violent games, so i see how this could factor in.
 
The whole point is to stop kids from defying there parents by going someplace and picking up an M-rated game without parent permission. If the parents don't care (who are probably driving the kids around anyway) then they will be there to buy the game with their kids.
 
I don't have a problem with this law at all. First of all, the video game industray is one of the fastest growing sectors in entertainment vastly exceeding the movie industry. I guarantee this will not force stores to stop carrying videogames which is a clear moneymaker. What it will do is force employees to enforce carding everyone, just as if someone were buying cigarettes, alcohol or any other product restricted from underage users. Also it will involve parents into the decision making process. Also if you think long-term, lawsuits blaming violence on videogames will have less clout; if all M rated games have to be bought by a parent of a minor, they can't blame the game company or the store for any bad influence since they would be fully aware of what little Johnny's playing.
 
[quote name='dopa345']I don't have a problem with this law at all. First of all, the video game industray is one of the fastest growing sectors in entertainment vastly exceeding the movie industry.[/quote]

This means nothing in a court of law.

I guarantee this will not force stores to stop carrying videogames which is a clear moneymaker.
Click to expand...

Montgomery Ward and Sears decided a while back to stop carrying M-rated games. It's not inconceivable to think that such laws could have a "chilling effect" on protected speech (which is one of the reasons why these laws always get overturned).

What it will do is force employees to enforce carding everyone, just as if someone were buying cigarettes, alcohol or any other product restricted from underage users.
Click to expand...

Alcohol and tobacco do well-documented harm to everyone that uses them. Video games do not. And the courts have already distinguished violent material from sexually explicit material (which may be lawfully kept out of minor's hands).

Also it will involve parents into the decision making process.
Click to expand...

It will completely remove them from the process. The government will be taking over this process.

Also if you think long-term, lawsuits blaming violence on videogames will have less clout; if all M rated games have to be bought by a parent of a minor, they can't blame the game company or the store for any bad influence since they would be fully aware of what little Johnny's playing.
Click to expand...

People won't stop trying. They'll say the laws aren't strong enough.
 
elwoodcuse
But when his drinking and lusting and his hunger for power became known to more and more people, the demands to do something about this outrageous man became louder and louder.
Click to expand...

Boney M?
 
I don't see anything wrong with it, and if some kid is gonna play GTA it would be best if the parents knew what kind of game it is.
 
If this thing passes it would be bull. This kind of thing needs to be across the board first of all, if anything.
And it would have detrimental affects on the industry. All of a sudden games are toned to down to T, say goodbye to your GTA's and anything intense.
It's crap, a 13 year old can go and rent Pulp Fiction (legally) and not GTA? Give me a break.

Most parents don't know about the ESRB because they are morons and give half the attention they should be giving to their kid. Did your parents bitch because you had to read 'Flowers in the Attic'? Hell, did they even know?

People still bitch about content on TV, but do they research the V Chip that is standard in TV's today? No. People like to look stupid and just complain. This whole thing is propaganda for getting voters. Just like Hillary Clinton.

Hell, we should ban selling condoms and birth control to people under 18 too as it teaches them sex and nudity is okay.

You know, if it was illegal for a child to play the game or have it in their posession (a la cigarettes,alcohol, porn) or for someone giving it to them (parents) - then I'm all for it. But this half-assed bull, hell no.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top