Australian Attorney General Calls For Violent Videogame Ban
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
There's no censorship in the narrower sense in Germany, i.e. there's no government agency that censors games/movies, but because of the pretty strict ratings a lot of publishers 'voluntarily' release versions they hope will achieve their target rating (USK 16 for example), similiar to the laughable PG13 horror movies.Creator002 said:
Ratings for both games and movies in Germany are enforcable by law, a shop can get fined if they sell a USK18 game, DVD etc to a minor. Games without a rating, ie. most imports, are considered to have an USK18 rating, but are otherwise not restricted (I import a lot of my games from the UK because they are usually cheaper, even after shipping fees).Edit: About the free speech issue - every democarcy guarantees free speech, but not every country enshrines it as much as the U.S.; in the U.S. free speech is such a fundamental right it is almost unrestricted, while in a lot of other countries with different cultural and historical backgrounds other rights can take precedence over it under some circumstances. It's easy to condemn that from an 'american centric' standpoint, but those restrictions were often establishes for plausible reasons, at least at the time (for example a lot of bans in Germany regarding Nazi propaganda and symbols, to prevent a new descent into facism).
Let me break it down like this, people are people, and people have ulterior motivations. Even if you get a board to be the defacto decider of what is and isn't appropriate for video games chances our their biases will leak through and games with hard hitting themes can get mowed down simply for being "violent" because the reviewers do not agree with the views expressed, though they will not admit it to be the case and can use the unclear definition of justified to their advantage. This is only one example, a system like this is so difficult to run fairly, and even if they are entirely fair for a while it wont stay that way.Saris Kai said:
Free UNREGULATED speech is the cornerstone of progress, the more free you are to express your views the more likely there will be people expressing the correct view and upon further examination can be shown to be correct, while in a situation where the censor holds law the good ideas take a lot longer to take hold especially if it is not the popular belief at the time.
[sub]Must resist urge to go to Australia just to punch that man in the face[/sub]
Seriously though, if games were going to turn people into mass murdering serial killers, you would think we would have a problem by now.
Besides, 'It doesn't help anyone', fair enough, but it doesn't harm anyone but the pixel lady of the night.
Seriously though, if games were going to turn people into mass murdering serial killers, you would think we would have a problem by now.
Besides, 'It doesn't help anyone', fair enough, but it doesn't harm anyone but the pixel lady of the night.
Exactly, let's start a petition!redisforever said:
Actually, I meant that people will still be able to play 'R18' games, even if they're banned. But, a petition will show the politicians that we have a voice too, and we can be mature, and civilized.CardinalPiggles said:
I'd be happy if someone told politicians who meddle in things they don't even like "Now you are banned after your previous affairs involving a prostitute giving sexual favors for money to your grumpy ass in a car."Lord Mountbatten Reborn said:
Let's pretend that some politician started spouting off "I want to ban all violent movies!" What justification is there beyond one person's sanctimonious bullshit? How would that politician feel if suddenly someone just took away his/her favorite genre of music? Or dance? Or any otherwise legal and reasonable hobby or general interest because "I don't think it's good." In the end it becomes not only a direct interference with the rights of others, it becomes a childish game of "do what I want you to do!" Just because a politician believes that Xboxs and Playstations have the real-life equivalent to cooties doesn't mean that they should actually have the ability to involve themselves with the perfectly legal entertainment others partake in without any rational explanation or evidence supporting their ludicrous beliefs.
The proof is in the pudding, folks. If video games did turn people into mindless, massacring zombies, these loud-mouths would all have been taken down a looooooong time ago. If anyone has shown themselves to be the most mature, it is those in support of video games. Last I checked, there hasn't been a pro-video game effort with an asinine, free-speech inhibiting demand like fake hair pieces lead to calls to war by politicians so they should be banned.
Those who respond negatively to video games are a minority that should not be accounted for as solid proof of anti-video game claims due to preexisting mental instability, just as the ineffective, self-righteous politicians who stand on a solitary non-issue to feign interest in the populace should not be the single example of all politicians due to a preexisting mental instability.
So this guy is saying if you want to play violent games, you got to import it and not support Australian business. I can see why he's an AG.
I find it funny how he complains about prostitutes in-game when NSW have legal prostitution.
I find it funny how he complains about prostitutes in-game when NSW have legal prostitution.
In Fable II and III, you can shoot your wife in the head right in front of your baby. So presumably that game should be banned too, then?
Just because you can do something in a game doesn't mean there's any encouragement or rewards from the game for doing so. By this logic, they should ban the army because it rewards violence with money and promotions, and ban sex in real life because people might consider orgasms or the conception of a child to be a "reward" or "incentive" for sexual activity, and ban contact sport for encouraging and rewarding violence, aggression and competition.
Because that's basically their argument. Their argument is that interactive actions and incentives in games influence real life thoughts and actions. I think real life influences behaviour a hell of a lot more. So ban all advertising that associates an action with a reward. Ban any show with any violence or sexual content that rewards viewers for watching. Ban any film with any of this content that comes with any promotional material or creates any positive mental responses in the audience.
...BAN POLITICIANS!
Just because you can do something in a game doesn't mean there's any encouragement or rewards from the game for doing so. By this logic, they should ban the army because it rewards violence with money and promotions, and ban sex in real life because people might consider orgasms or the conception of a child to be a "reward" or "incentive" for sexual activity, and ban contact sport for encouraging and rewarding violence, aggression and competition.
Because that's basically their argument. Their argument is that interactive actions and incentives in games influence real life thoughts and actions. I think real life influences behaviour a hell of a lot more. So ban all advertising that associates an action with a reward. Ban any show with any violence or sexual content that rewards viewers for watching. Ban any film with any of this content that comes with any promotional material or creates any positive mental responses in the audience.
Well, he is a politician. Politician + Prostitute = Body in a garbage bag in a river.Jamash said:
...BAN POLITICIANS!
The only people who get jobs in politics are idiots. Because anyone with a brainstem attached realised long ago that its a job for morons or those who were so bullied as kids they went into politics on a massive and dangerous power trip.Metalrocks said:
No I am not talking about Julia Gillard and Kevin Rudd respectively...
On topic these idiots will be gone soon to be replaced by younglings who understand the will of the people (hopefully). I am sure when gen Y is old, decrepit and in politics we will be harumphing and banning the same sorts of things.
Australian government, I am disappoint.
We allowed a movie like Wolf Creek to be seen by adults. We allow Boogeyman 2 to be seen by adults. So what is wrong with games like GTA being allowed here? Here's to hoping Yahtzee goes all out on this.
I wonder, with all the time Australian politicians sit around shouting at eachother, can't they spend some and play a videogame for 5 minutes?
We allowed a movie like Wolf Creek to be seen by adults. We allow Boogeyman 2 to be seen by adults. So what is wrong with games like GTA being allowed here? Here's to hoping Yahtzee goes all out on this.
I wonder, with all the time Australian politicians sit around shouting at eachother, can't they spend some and play a videogame for 5 minutes?
The mere ability to kill a prostitute after sex... is that "sexual violence"?
It's old fashioned passionless mugging, just because the character is a prostitute does not make her inherently sexual in all aspects. Isn't that being a bit unfair on sex-workers, to judge everything on their sexuality. Maybe the player is jsut greedy and wants his money back.
Sexual violence would be something like a rape simulator, or a game where you could beat up naked people. Not ANY violence to do with women or sex-workers.
See I wonder why these sort of people focus on the ability to kill prostitutes when:
(1) it is 100% your choice, you can kill anyone at any time
(2) why not focus on killing old ladies, police officers or anyone else you meet on the crazy streets of Liberty City.
I think he is trying to make out GTA to be something it isn't. It's just as bad to kill a prostitute as to kill a cop, the thing is you can imply sexual-violence with sex-workers that you can't with police. And that's what people get paranoid about.
It's old fashioned passionless mugging, just because the character is a prostitute does not make her inherently sexual in all aspects. Isn't that being a bit unfair on sex-workers, to judge everything on their sexuality. Maybe the player is jsut greedy and wants his money back.
Sexual violence would be something like a rape simulator, or a game where you could beat up naked people. Not ANY violence to do with women or sex-workers.
See I wonder why these sort of people focus on the ability to kill prostitutes when:
(1) it is 100% your choice, you can kill anyone at any time
(2) why not focus on killing old ladies, police officers or anyone else you meet on the crazy streets of Liberty City.
I think he is trying to make out GTA to be something it isn't. It's just as bad to kill a prostitute as to kill a cop, the thing is you can imply sexual-violence with sex-workers that you can't with police. And that's what people get paranoid about.