Delaware Politician Readies for California SCOTUS Win
- Thread starter Andy Chalk
- Start date
I think if you're a "young adult" you're already aware of how to beat someone up - homeless or not, and regardless of whether you've ever done it before or not.
I worry about these people, because they're the ones who evidently can't tell the difference between a game and reality.
I worry about these people, because they're the ones who evidently can't tell the difference between a game and reality.
*sighs* At least it is very unlikely that laws like this will be come about in Washington if the SCOTUS sides with California. Also, I love ignorant politicians. Just makes me so happy about were the world is going...
this.Jonci said:
and if she is going to ban video games..then you better start banning self defense classes and just about every damn martial arts/mma group in existence, as that's more interactive than a video game imo
Hey, politician lady! Shouldn't you be more focused on the midterm results.
Man, this lady annoys me.
Man, this lady annoys me.
I read the whole transcript (all 72 pages) and those Justices were all over the place. One moment they're going against the guy trying to push the law saying that video games are no different than violent movies or cartoons, the next minute they're going against the guy pushing for the law to be hammered down by stating that the Founding Fathers could never have foreseen video games when forging the 1st Amendment 200 years ago.
I would agree with them that California's proposed law is so vague in it's points that it could cause a judicial run-over onto other media forms such as movies, television, books, comics, and more.
The prominent argument with this law is that it help parents that "aren't always there to raise their kids", so it helps to keep (deviant) violent materials out of those kids' hands. Although it's rather clear by going into any Gamestop or Walmart when trying to buy these games, that the independent ESRB is already doing a great job on that already. And, the fact that parents are not raising their kids and instead rely on the government to do so should not be faulted on the video game industry, but instead put to blame exactly on those parents.
Eventually this mass-censorship will cause us to enter an Equilibrium (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0238380/) state of control, which is not what we want.
P.S. Under the events of Columbine, a large group of parents blamed DOOM and Marilin Manson for 'corrupting' the two youths that were behind the event. A very little amount fingers points towards the parents, of who's house basement was where the two created bombs, plans, and stockpiled guns. A scapegoat was created because nobody wants to admit that in America's society, the way parents raise their kids as apposed to 50 years ago is going very wrong.
I would agree with them that California's proposed law is so vague in it's points that it could cause a judicial run-over onto other media forms such as movies, television, books, comics, and more.
The prominent argument with this law is that it help parents that "aren't always there to raise their kids", so it helps to keep (deviant) violent materials out of those kids' hands. Although it's rather clear by going into any Gamestop or Walmart when trying to buy these games, that the independent ESRB is already doing a great job on that already. And, the fact that parents are not raising their kids and instead rely on the government to do so should not be faulted on the video game industry, but instead put to blame exactly on those parents.
Eventually this mass-censorship will cause us to enter an Equilibrium (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0238380/) state of control, which is not what we want.
P.S. Under the events of Columbine, a large group of parents blamed DOOM and Marilin Manson for 'corrupting' the two youths that were behind the event. A very little amount fingers points towards the parents, of who's house basement was where the two created bombs, plans, and stockpiled guns. A scapegoat was created because nobody wants to admit that in America's society, the way parents raise their kids as apposed to 50 years ago is going very wrong.
I can't wait for this to be shot down just so I can laugh at how moronic politicians in today's society are.
/target wall
/use head
Why is it so hard for American politicians, you know, those silly people that were supposed to have a law degree, to realise this law isn't about young children playing such games, it's about putting the power to stop that in the hands of the government, instead of the facilities already in place (and doing their jobs) as well as the parents? You know, like with every other fucking medium?
Also, this is seeming to be a completely political act. If she really stood behind that law, she'd have lined up with the rest of the idiots, instead, she's just saying "I'm gonna jump on whichever horse wins so I can take a smiling picture with a baby from the winning group"
/use head
Why is it so hard for American politicians, you know, those silly people that were supposed to have a law degree, to realise this law isn't about young children playing such games, it's about putting the power to stop that in the hands of the government, instead of the facilities already in place (and doing their jobs) as well as the parents? You know, like with every other fucking medium?
Also, this is seeming to be a completely political act. If she really stood behind that law, she'd have lined up with the rest of the idiots, instead, she's just saying "I'm gonna jump on whichever horse wins so I can take a smiling picture with a baby from the winning group"
"Good Luck winning, Mr Morazanni is doing just fine in court, Its not like he's tripping over his own arguments and being a total dipshit in general, And of course he has played the games he is even arguing about, he is not being a total asswipe who does not know what he is talking about"
Sarcasm 101: Ms. Keeley, Thats how you do it!
Sarcasm 101: Ms. Keeley, Thats how you do it!
You have just proved my point, thank you good sir.SelectivelyEvil13 said:
Remember though that in Postal 2 you can play the game without killing anyone, Infact at the end if your kill count is 0 you get the title "Jesus".
If they are angry about the violence in Postal 2, Why in the hell are they doing it in the first place? They must be sick, sick bastards if they actually doing the pissing on people and killing them....
You can swear here. I fixed the post for you. And very true points. This is why we need new politicians.Zorg Machine said:
(sigh)
I'm not sure who fits the bill more of "counting chickens before they hatch"...
her... or us...
I'm not sure who fits the bill more of "counting chickens before they hatch"...
her... or us...
What the hell does she mean by that? Is beating up a homeless person somehow more complicated than beating up any other person? In addition: how am I going to learn to beat someone up from a videogame? Pressing B for melee attack does not work in real life.Andy Chalk said:
I still find it hard to fathom that these witless morons are using Postal 2 to say that all videogames should be restricted. That's like reading Twilight and then saying all books are pornography aimed at teenage girls. The fact that such vindictive, willfully-ignorant individuals can get elected is truly amazing.