Schwarzenegger Urged to Keep Mum On 'Unconstitutional' Game Law

[Logan Westbrook]

Schwarzenegger Urged to Keep Mum On 'Unconstitutional' Game Law

Leading Californian newspaper, the Los Angeles Times, is urging Governor Schwarzenegger not to appeal against the decision of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that a law limiting the sales of violent games to minors is 'unconstitutional'.

The law, authored by Democratic senator Leland Yee and signed by the Governator on October 7th 2005, would make the sale of games featuring 'virtual harm' to humans or "characters with substantially human characteristics" illegal to anyone under the age of eighteen.

The videogame industry was understandably unhappy about the law and filed a suit to block the law ten days later. After nearly two years of legal battling, the law was declared unconstitutional on August 6th 2007.

Governor Schwarzenegger decided to appeal this decision, saying: "We have a responsibility to our kids and our communities to protect against the effects of games that depict ultra-violent actions. These games are for adults, and the law I signed ensures that parents have the chance to determine which video games are appropriate for their children."

Fast forward to today, and the 9th Circuit Court of Appeal upheld the original verdict and the Governor is said to be considering taking his appeal to the Supreme Court. This is where the L.A. Times steps in.

In an editorial [http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/editorials/la-ed-games28-2009feb28,0,4975089.story] published yesterday, the newspaper implores Schwarzenegger not to appeal the ruling a second time. Describing the law as a 'bipartisan blunder', they had this to say about not only the law in question, but videogame legislation in general:

"Important as it is, the court's legal analysis doesn't identify an easy alternative for parents who are justifiably concerned about the effects of violent video games, films or comic books on their children. But the primary responsibility for protecting minors from potentially harmful influences lies with parents, as it did long before video games were a twinkle in a programmer's eye.

Parents don't need a law to urge makers of video games to strengthen their current voluntary ratings systems. More important, they don't need permission from a legislator or judge to keep an eye on what their children are doing -- or playing."

At a time when California can ill afford another costly legal battle, we can only hope that Governor Schwarzenegger won't be back, at least not to court.

Source: Game Politics [http://www.gamepolitics.com/2009/02/28/la-times-don039t-appeal-california-video-game-law-supreme-court]



Permalink

 

[Jumplion]

I couldn't not chuckle at the thought of Schwarzenegger trying to prevent "violent" games in the hand of children.

I don't think I know why though....

But still, I'm glad he's on our side...right?

 

[Fenring]

Would jumping on enemies in a Mario game count as "virtual harm" to "characters with substantially human characteristics?"

 

[Lord_Ascendant]

i don't think he's given this enough forethought

Microsoft might get miffed.

 

[whaleswiththumbs]

hmm.. the worst move he could make, i mean they ahve Silicon Valley in their state, if they move out thats just a green grass filed places where who knows what may happen(i'm thinking evil hobos, but I've been waiting for SR2 to finish installing)

I should make a list of enemies to gaming, we alreadynow know of two(that i can name off of me head) Jack Thompson and Arnold Scharwfashfac-ger(maybe just Arnold)

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

*loud coughing*

 

[Jamash]

*loud coughing*

I'll see your loud coughing and raise you;

Spoiler: *coughing so hard I sicked up a little bit in my mouth*

Is a metal exoskeleton a "character with substantially human characteristics" and does ripping it's arms and legs off constitute as "virtual harm"?

I suppose this truely is a case of, "Do what I say, don't do what I do".

It hard to take this seriously, since there are so many violent (and crap) games out there with his (often mutilated) mug plastered on the front cover.

Anyway, I thought the E.S.R.B. already did this anyway, or does he want stricter ratings and harsher punishments?

 

[Simriel]

I don't agree with censorship, but selling games meant for Adults to children, is ridiculous. In the U.K some games with extreme content have a legal certificate. Most games don't but something like Manhunt, or Gears Of War does.

 

[dead_beat_slacker]

wow He retarded. This guy was like king of anything violent back in 80's day I know cause when I was a kid I used to watch him alot fans of this jack ass became fans when they were kids. So this is highly hypocritical of him. If games are being sold to minors that the fault of the stores that are selling them they know they're not supposed to be selling games to minors to begin with.

 

[tthor]

*starts chanting*
ONE TWO THREE FOUR!
the law is CENSERSHIP and nothing MORE!

FIVE FOUR THREE TWO!
THE NAZIS DID IT AND SO DO YOU!

 

[Siris]

Yup. More bloody idiots talking out the wrong end about 'violence'. If you wanted to protect people from 'ultra-violence', pull your troops out of your 'war'

 

[Logan Westbrook]

*starts chanting*
ONE TWO THREE FOUR!
the law is CENSERSHIP and nothing MORE!

FIVE FOUR THREE TWO!
THE NAZIS DID IT AND SO DO YOU!

It's not really censorship though, is it?

 

[elricik]

I will raise the coughing ante!
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/b/b6/T3_redemptbox.jpg/256px-T3_redemptbox.jpg

 

[tthor]

*starts chanting*
ONE TWO THREE FOUR!
the law is CENSERSHIP and nothing MORE!

FIVE FOUR THREE TWO!
THE NAZIS DID IT AND SO DO YOU!

It's not really censorship though, is it?

to an extent, but its really more of just everyone jumping on the 'anti videogame' bandwagon

all these adults today seem to just seek to blame anything they can for their childrens faults, primarily videogames and tv,

"the reason little bobby weighs 300 pounds is because he watched the cookie monster eat a cookie!(and not because of the 20 pounds of food i feed him a day)"

"the reason timmy went on a killing spree was because he once played a violent videogame!(and not because of the constant physical/verbal abuse and already poor mental state)"

 

[TheKreeperAndMe]

Jesus, isnt this stuff protected in the constitution?

Maye you could look it up in a library Mr.Schwarzenegger if you have any left after you finish burning all the books!

 

[Avatar Roku]

To an extent, isn't Arnold just saying what we've been saying? That games aren't just for kids? Granted, he's going about it in the wrong way (and the LA Times was also right in that it's the parent's responsibility), but he wasn't as wrong as some people here are painting him.

 

[[Gavo]]

NOOOOOOOOOOO.

If this passes, I will be sooooooo pissed, because I live in California. FUUUUUUUUUCK.

Please don't make "M" games illegal. Please don't appeal.

 

[Skeleon]

Hm, he's not trying to stop violent games, just prohibit selling them to kids. Can't say I disagree too much.
The whole "lol, he be violent movies!!1!eleven!"-argument is flawed because obviously those movies aren't intended for children, either.
Anyway, even if this law was to pass, I doubt it'd have much effect.
Kids would still get those games, illegally if necessary. Like somebody posted already: How to enforce such a law?!
Nigh impossible.

 

[tthor]

Hm, he's not trying to stop violent games, just prohibit selling them to kids. Can't say I disagree too much.
The whole "lol, he be violent movies!!1!eleven!"-argument is flawed because obviously those movies aren't intended for children, either.
Anyway, even if this law was to pass, I doubt it'd have much effect.
Kids would still get those games, illegally if necessary. Like somebody posted already: How to enforce such a law?!
Nigh impossible.

you bring up an interesting point..
this law could actually increase videogame piracy