Connecticut Considers Violent Videogame Tax

[aelreth]

What was the composition of the California Assembly? Also the California Senate?

See previous post, read again:
"The vote on that also was pretty much republicans in favour of the censorship, democrats opposed. Yee was an exception in his camp really."

"AB1179 was passed by the California Senate yesterday by a vote of 22-9. The bill then went back to the Assembly, where it was approved 65-7. Now the bill goes to the desk of California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, who must sign or veto the bill by October 9. " Source Gamespot

Composition in 05 in CA Senate 25 D 15 R
Assembly 48 D 32 R

How In the heck did those republicans manage to pass this thing when they were in the MINORITY.

My statement was simply "Find me a republican controlled state that is banning or taxing video games"

First, this wasn't a ban or a tax.

How the heck do you call this republican control?

Also there's some republicans who realise that lobbying openly for censorship is not a move that draws votes. They already have the Christian zealots on board, censorship or not. Endorsing censorship in the form of a game ban would alienate many.

You are aware that the population of Utah and Oklahoma is dominated by "christian zealots" right? It would logically be in the best interests of the "Christian zealots" that run those states to simply do what "Christian zealots" do (which in your world is Ban violent video games and pass taxes on them). This would rally the "Christian zealot" vote in those states. Who would they be alienating? The "Christian zealots" have no opposition. After all those "Christian Zealots" can't control themselves, why, they are "conservative".

I simply want to know why they are not doing so?

Also, most Americans know that Utah is filled with Mormons (a brand of christian zealot), Mormons are NOT allowed to drink alcohol or caffeine, since they are christian zealots, shouldn't they be making the entire state dry?

 

[soren7550]

Didn't the Escapist post an article about the same exact plan a month or two back, only it was happening in Connecticut or some shit?

 

[Twilight_guy]

No. No you may not appease your frightened constituent base by arbitrary violating an entertainment medium. You may not ride on panic to stifle freedom of speech. I don't care how unintentional stupid and well-meaning you are, I don't care if you know how stupid this is plan to ride it for fame or don't think it will pass in a million years, I don't care what your political game is lady, you are poking a sharp stick in the eye of of favorite media for your own goals. I'm mad as hell, and I'm not going to take it anymore! This tax puts video games (at least some of them) on the same level as cigarettes and I will not have the two put anywhere near the same plane. You're out of order lady!

 

[emeraldrafael]

I was upset witht his, but then I thought about how New york is doing a fat tax and how thats accepted as good, so i guess I cant really disagree with this much.

 

[Frostbite3789]

How do republicans in a state in which they hold 31% of the state senate & 34% of the state house pass a video game tax?

& When did Glenn Beck begin advocating for taxing free speech?

Find me the Republican controlled state that is banning or taxing violent video games.

Well, the article listed 3 that are Republican controlled that have had it proposed much like Connecticut is doing here. Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Party doesn't matter when you're taking a PR moral stand.

 

[mysecondlife]

Using death of children to make profit. Nice!

 

[bananafishtoday]

Clearly unconstitutional, but there's nothing stopping the state from passing this. Legislatures enact unconstitutional laws all the time. They're only invalidated when they're used against someone and that someone brings it in front of the courts.

That said, yeah, it's prolly hot air. This is the sorta bill that politicians introduce while fully expecting it to die. It's just "I took a stand!" nonsense for the reelection campaign.

 

[aelreth]

How do republicans in a state in which they hold 31% of the state senate & 34% of the state house pass a video game tax?

& When did Glenn Beck begin advocating for taxing free speech?

Find me the Republican controlled state that is banning or taxing violent video games.

Well, the article listed 3 that are Republican controlled that have had it proposed much like Connecticut is doing here. Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Wisconsin.

Party doesn't matter when you're taking a PR moral stand.

Complete grandstanding, I agree. However, I think that this state, has the highest degree of passing.

Wisconsin is too slim, OK had their chance last year just to watch it be murdered in subcommittee, PA has the pubs in the majority and that majority is very temporal.

No majority wants to be the group seen taking the lead on this.

 

[Strazdas]

education concerning the danger of violent videogames.

im not a native english speaker, so correct me if im wrong, but that is not a logical sentence. Shouldnt a state representative know english? (then again we elected a guy that barely speaks lithuanian with horrible russian accent so i guess....)


First of, ESRB ratings are FAR from perfect and that are really something we dont even need, and your going tax based on voluntary ratings? crazy.

"to educate families on the warning signs of videogame addiction and antisocial behavior."

well at least its beter than "signs of videogames turning them into mass shooters" but how does antisocial behaviour necesary a problem of the state is beyond me. ill be as antisocial as i want, becuase i think societal norms as we have now are completely riduiculous.

You. Your campaing. My vote and the vote of all gamers everywhere.

When do you start your political campaing?

I doubt he wants to commit suicide. because campaignign in US without beinding over to one of the two republican parties is a suicide. especially if you have more than 100 supporters.

If this was passed most people would likely just go to digital distributors and online retailers, hurting not only the physical retailer in the state but a portion of their own sales tax revenue.

Or does Amazon have a state tax on items now?

actually, looking at it this wa, i agree with the conencticut. we need to push retailers out the sooner the better.

In any case, it doesn't matter how you tax it or put more warning stickers on the box. If dad caves in to kid and buys him the media that was not designed for that age range then all the legislation in the world won't mean a thing. This applies to anything that has an age rating. However, politicians will always shy away from exposing how their electorate is part of the problem. Never blame the individual, noooooo, it's always the business and industry, or the government.

what if dad is smart enough to know whats fit for his child better than some rando dudes reviewing the game?

They did the same thing wit the Global Warming tax here in Australia. How exactly do they think charging extra tax is going to fix anything?

actually enviromental taxes are not mean to make revenue for goverment, but to highten incentive to create less bad gases. and it works. everywhere where such tax was enacted, the amount of enviromental damaging substances were lowered considerably. this is because its easy to do that, its just that without the tax there is no incentive. what, you expect businessmen to be responsible on thier own? with the western business model of "throw money on it and light a big fire"?

How about a stupid politician tax? You know where politicians would be taxed for every stupid proposal they make.

Then they would all be to busy filing for bancrupcy and would not do anything useful anyway.

IOT: Gamers generally don't give a damn about anything else governments do beyond snarking about it.
Great.

i Guess thats why our religion and politics board is dead right? or why such things like "pirate party" even exist? we care about everythign government does, its jut that this, being a gaming website, report on things they do in relation to games.

So... they want "to educate families on the warning signs of videogame addiction and antisocial behavior" by taxing video games that aren't actually made for, or marketed to either families or children?

Somebody help me here, I just can't join these dots up by myself...

ok, ill help.

I was upset witht his, but then I thought about how New york is doing a fat tax and how thats accepted as good, so i guess I cant really disagree with this much.

except that fat actually has legit medical concerns.

 

[uchytjes]

You know what? I would support this if it went towards educating people about gun safety and improving systems to correctly identify people that could go on mass-murder sprees. As it stands, NOPE.

 

[The Lugz]

people become violent because other people aggravate the crap out of them
does this look like a brake from the norm? taxing them because they are clearly 'uneducated'
this will solve nothing and serves only to aggravate people more

 

[Do4600]

America is fucked, we're going to lead a new dark-age. For a long while we actually had enough people with sense in government to suppress insane ideas that have no connection to reality; we've lost the battle, I'm sorry to say reality is no longer considered in our government anymore and I apologize to everybody, everywhere who will almost certainly be damaged in the next 100 years because of it.

Connecticut wants to levy a 10% tax on violent video games to fund a program that educates people about a phenomenon we've yet to prove exists.

Violent media does not provoke violent action, we've been performing scientific studies on this for almost 80 years and none of them have both proven correlation and stood up against scientific rigor, it does not exist, there is no correlation according to our decades of research.

I call foul when you want to tax us to educate us on something that 80 years of 'fuckin' research cannot 'fuckin' confirm, not only that, if we can't prove it exists then we also have absolutely no 'fuckin' chance of knowing what kind of education would prevent it!

Books, magazines, comics, toys, music, radio programs, movies, television shows, video games and the internet do not cause people to be violent, humans have always been violent, I see no reason why we would ever stop being violent, that is why our media is violent, it is a reflection of us, we are not a reflection of it.

 

[SteewpidZombie]

Okay, this shit needs to stop. The public should try and get a 'Bill against idiocy within government and media' passed.

Something that basically says: "If a representing group or individual of the Media or Government attempts to commit a act of idiocy (Passing absurd laws/bills, using tragedies to further a agenda, or simply making one-sided statements that slander another group and/or individual, ect.), that group and/or individual can be legally required to be removed from their position of influence."

Or something along those lines. Some sort of law/bill that would allow the public to hold a vote to overturn decisions or proposed bills by their officials. So that if a group is focusing on Videogames or what people eat (I'm looking at you PETA), then they can be removed or forced to focus on REAL problems like dealing with poverty and the homeless, economic problems both locally and internationally, and treatment/cures for diseases and illness.

 

[Not Matt]

if so i demand a tax on sappy romantic comedies and tween music.

Spoiler: dear Debralee Hovey

 

[kael013]

"Warning signs of videogame addiction?" Hell, who would come up with the literature enumerating and describing them? What vaguely qualified person in the field of psychoanalysis or addiction treatment would risk their reputation on something so frivolous and chimerical

"Warning signs of videogame addiction", by SnipingN00bs, phD.

The one and only Sign: Obsession with videogames to the point that the obsession interferes with the person's ability to function in society (like by unable to perform a job without talking about videogames).

Now Connecticut, hurry up and pass this bill because it's clear Mrs. Hovey has a severe case of addiction! I suggest a spot in this course and a trepanning, just to be on the safe side, since, you know, we're in the bloody Dark Ages.

OT: This is stupid, she is stupid for suggesting it, and now we're all stupider from hearing it. God, I can't wait for my parent's generation to die off, just so I won't have to hear this idiocy every time a nutjob makes the news.

 

[Kahani]

Money raised by the proposed tax will help fund "education concerning the danger of violent videogames."

I don't really see a problem here. It doesn't take much money to write "There isn't any", so presumably this proposed tax would be so small as to be completely unnoticeable.

 

[Gearhead mk2]

...please, just stop. STOP with the stupid laws. STOP with the blatant bias. STOP with the shoddy tests and studies. STOP trying to prove that gaming equals Satan. Because it doesn't. It's just an entertainment medium like any other. What you should be talking about is gun control, the mental health system, the news networks turning killers into anti heroes to get more ratings. Please, I beg of you, have some common sense.

 

[Strazdas]

They did the same thing wit the Global Warming tax here in Australia. How exactly do they think charging extra tax is going to fix anything?

actually enviromental taxes are not mean to make revenue for goverment, but to highten incentive to create less bad gases. and it works. everywhere where such tax was enacted, the amount of enviromental damaging substances were lowered considerably. this is because its easy to do that, its just that without the tax there is no incentive. what, you expect businessmen to be responsible on thier own? with the western business model of "throw money on it and light a big fire"?

Yes, but they've done it all wrong. It was drafted to target large industries like Australia's coal and mining industry, which puts out a huge majority of our carbon emissions. But it took two seconds of said industries whining about not being able to take on such taxation and remain profitable (lying out of their arses) so the government instead put the tax onto home owners.
So... they're taxing citizen X... so that big company Y will feel pressured to produce less emissions...
I can only assume our government at some point forgot what problem they were trying to fix.

ah, down here in lithuania they did indeed tax the companies as they should. and actually they even "sell" the permits for "x amount of CO2" and the like, so its limited and taxed.