U.K. Prime Minister Investigation New Rules for Violent Videogames

[Andy Chalk]

U.K. Prime Minister Investigation New Rules for Violent Videogames

U.K. Prime Minister Gordon Brown has said he will study the possibility of implementing new regulations for violent videogames.

A report by the Daily Mirror [http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/topstories/2007/09/04/game-over-89520-19730540/]said Prime Minister Brown is reexamining the possibility of banning violent videogame sales to teenagers. He said he was aware of the "growing concern" about the effect of simulated violence on children, and said new laws covering videogame advertising would also be investigated. The plan would be presented to a "citizen's jury" which will allow members of the public the opportunity to offer opinions and suggestions on new policies.

"Parents are concerned about whether children are exposed to harmful violence and sexual imagery in video and computer games and on the internet," Brown said in a speech on Monday. "So as we launch the consultation on our children's plan we will be looking at all the evidence on the effects of this material; whether we need new rules on the advertising and sale of these products to children and young people; and what more can be done to help parents regulate access to inappropriate material on the internet."

Videogames in the U.K. are classified under the advertisements [http://www.pegi.info/en/index/id/175]for online gambling was also put into place in August.


Permalink

 

[Andrew Armstrong]

So they are looking to ban the internet next? Gah, stupid stupid stupid really.

David Cameron was the person recently who brought it up (he's the Opposition Party leader), of which this was probably something spinned from "just so I really do react to my opponents" in passing. I'll follow it with some interest, this is an interesting time to bring it up, considering the BBFC essentially did what he Daily Mail wanted it to do, and ban all these bad nasty videogames (or at least, one of them, but obviously, that's not enough...hmmm). The story lacks some vital details of exactly Mr Brown means, in typical Daily Mail fashion, so it'd be good to get the full plans in the future.

Malygris; You might note that you forgot/didn't know, any games which contain violence or sexual imagery must be put before the BBFC and rated, they don't just ban random games. BioShock for instance was rated "18" with the note "Contains strong bloody violence" like a film descriptor, meaning it couldn't be legally sold to someone under 18, like a film rated 18.

And it seems (from the lacking article) that movies won't come under the same scrutiny, despite them being rated by the same ratings body and coming under the same laws (!?!?) I'm totally and utterly confused, how on earth this can be an issue in that comparison.

Oh, and the Irish film board has nothing to do with the UK government (its in Ireland, right? Even your little map shows that its not part of the UK ). I think the Irish members of the forum might be a little annoyed at the inclusion of it in a UK news article. Just a tip

I didn't know about the advertisement's ban though, or I plain forgot, hmm...

 

[Deus_Diablo [deprecated]]

Seeing as all games are certified by the BBFC as well as PEGI this _should_ already be happening. However there seems to be a growing feeling in the public that the BBFC's age restrictions are ignored and children are playing unsuitable games. Some even say that the ban on Manhunt II was a mark of the BBFC's lack of faith in its own system. Of course in my experience the core system works perfectly fine and retailers do not sell games to those under age. Unfortunately parents choose to buy their children unsuitable games as they feel they are _just_ games and not as bad as films. I know plenty of parent's who have bought their under tens a GTA game. The answer is education not legislation.

 

[Andrew Armstrong]

Not all games are certified by the BBFC - it is voluntary unless it has violence or sexual content (ie; anything that would get a 15 or higher). I do entirely agree its education however, as I've never seen "deep flawed problem: retailers are selling games to underaged people!" as a news story before, since if they were doing, it'd be the same for any BBFC rated media (ie; films, TV too), and they'd also get a fine.

 

[Andy Chalk]

I'm absolutely aghast at the idea of banning games. Keeping Manhunt 2 out of the hands of kids is laudable, but refusing to allow it to be sold to anyone is completely unacceptable. As an adult, I can go to my local video store and rent Hostel or Saw or the latest volume of Buttfuck Sluts Go Nuts, and nobody bats an eye. Why can't I do the same with videogames? What really saddens me is that I've come to expect this sort of knee-jerk response from the US (no offense, guys, sweeping generalities here) but I'd always held out the hope that the UK was a bit more of a bastion of common sense, with properly grounded ideas about letting adults decide for themselves.

As to the aside about the IFCO, I mentioned it in the original article about the Manhunt 2 ban because it dovetailed nicely with the BBFC ban, and it just slipped through with this one. Besides, you're all the same to us anyway.

 

[SteveBosman]

Personally, I'd like to see an advertising campaign aimed at stupid parents.

Yesterday a colleague was saying how his young kid enjoys watching him shooting people in the head in an FPS. With parenting like that a ban on sales to teenagers will have little effect.

 

[Andrew Armstrong]

If you actually read some of the UK newspapers like the Daily Mail Malygris, you'll agree that no, not everyone in the UK is a bastion of common sense (far from it). They love "scare stories" and the like, just like "video nasties" in the 80's, and now "videogame nasties" despite the law already being in place for it, which is, I think, over the top compared to many countries but we still are stuck with it.

And I detest the banning of Manhunt 2, be it noted.

 

[Lord_Sammael]

I can see the reasoning behind why they want to ban sales to teenagers. However this will do very little to stop them from getting their hands on the games since most can just ask their parents, however some have friends who are above the age limit of a certain game they want and can ususally ask them to buy it for them.

What I think is that parents need to take the responsibility for their children. Any idiot can have children, however not everyone can drive a car. And if we use the reasoning most people have nowadays we might as well just get a license for being parents as well since most seem that they don't want to be bothered with what their children do on their freetime (note: don't take this personally if you are a parent. I am not attacking you specifically if you take interest in your children's gaming habits. However if you don't I seriously recommend that you at least look into it) And so if their children asks if they can get a certain game that has gotten the 18 year rating they will buy it and think no more of it.

I wish people would stop pointing fingers at the gaming community every single time someone gets murdered and the murderer claims to have played Manhunt or something as such. Heck not long ago they blamed movies for the same damn thing. I know parent's don't take their 10 year olds to see the new hostel movie, so why blame the gaming community for their own poor judgement.

 

[Arbre]

Personally, I'd like to see an advertising campaign aimed at stupid parents.

I'd actually love to be part of the creative team for this campaign!

 

[fnph]

Stupid Mr. Brown, I thought he had some brains in that head of his. He's obviously not aware there already are laws limiting the sales of violent games to children.
This reminds me of a high profile story from a while ago in which a boy was murdered by another boy. The blame was placed serverely on violent videogames, the original Manhunt if I remember correctly. In the end it turned out that the kid that got killed owned Manhunt while the murderer had never even played the game.