Eleven States Join California at the Supreme Court

[squid5580]

So, they'll restrict sales of 'm' rated games to minors?
Something like already exists for, say, pornography?

Could someone tell me why this is bad?
I'm genuinely curious.

Are u american? if not its irrelevant to you.

If you are and would like to see your government follow the laws(amendments) it set for itself WITHOUT EXCEPTIONS, then this is very important ^-^

Youre giving the government an excuse to enact other amendment breaking laws if you let this slip. I just dont want there to be an exception if its based on an issue as frivolous as this one.

As Andy points out, the videogames industry ALREADY restrict sales of M-Rated games to minors. So y is there a need to make a LAW out of it all of a sudden? and at the same time make interactive media unprotected under the first amendment in the process?

WTF are you seriously that dense? You don't think this will have a bigger impact than your little country? Jesus if America enforces this they will invade any country that doesn't follow suit. Or the industry will lose another country that can't sell M rated games and soon enough not bother because they will be losing a large part of their consumers. And that effects all of us no matter where we live (except Japan).

good trolling

Good arguement. I can see you put all your thought into it.

 

[Dexiro]

Ah Florida, I might have known. It is of note that my...fine state, is ranked bottom 25% in education ratings.

I'm all for it. Kids shouldn't be allowed to buy anything that's above their age rating, even if they're singling the age ratings for games it's still not too much of a fuss.

As long as they don't do something ridiculous and stop violent games completely like they seem to be doing in Australia.

Even though I don't see the need in more legislation regarding video games, I don't see exactly how this is as big of a deal as some are making it. Violating free speech? How? M rated video games will still be sold and I'll still be able to buy them. I also can almost guarantee there will be no change in how many minors play M rated games either.

You guys are both missing the point. Currently movies, music, and video games are all internally regulated as to who can/should buy certain content. This does not actually violate any rights. No one is obligated to sell you a product. Federal regulation would change the game, it would not be the content creator, or the viewer that is deciding who can/should view it, but rather a 3rd party, being your government.

Wait wait wait. It was my understanding that they were only restricting sales, that's how it works in the UK and it works well. Kids can't go out and buy an 18+ game but their parents can go out and buy it for them if they think it's suitable for them.

Kids are fully allowed to play violent games in their possession, whether they get hold of them is ideally up to their parents.

 

[Hiphophippo]

Sure, but my parents were still able to keep tabs on what I bought, what I watched, etc. Buy something they didn't approve of? I had to take it back. If I was caught "smuggling" items they felt were inappropriate, I lost my TV privileges, and if that didn't curtail me, I wasn't allowed to be home alone.

Current Gen consoles all have parental control systems in place to limit what ratings require a password. You can do the same thing on a computer.

Parent your own damn kids. Don't let the government do it for you.

Sorry we disagree. I'd rather my daughter not be 13 years old and sneak a copy of GTA7 when it comes out. Don't discount the ingenuity of children. I bought myself extra controllers and AV cables for when I got grounded. My parents wouldn't take the system away from me just the stuff needed to play it.

However, if my daughter came to me and asked if she could buy GTA7 and I felt she was mature enough to play it, I'd get it for her. In your world, I'm letting the Government parent my child, but in mine I'm being an active part of her life. I would anyway because there's nothing more important to me than her, but if I can get a little help behind the scenes I don't mind it.

Parents can't be everywhere at all times.

edit

This isn't the end of the world people. It's my experience that most places (at least those local to me) already enforce the esrb rating system so little changes should this law pass.

 

[MagicMouse]

I have an idea. Put all the M games on the high shelf, therefore little kids can't buy them.

Oh w8 we already have a system for this, its called the ESRB and every store I've been to checks your age before selling.

This is just another example of politicians fear mongering to garner votes by making "feel good" laws that restrict rights just a tiny bit more.

Bullshit if you ask me. I'm just glad I don't live in any of those states.

 

[IxionIndustries]

Damn it, no! We will not be a new Australia!
Bad government! Bad!

Just wait till the spiders get here...

 

[Jaded Scribe]

Sure, but my parents were still able to keep tabs on what I bought, what I watched, etc. Buy something they didn't approve of? I had to take it back. If I was caught "smuggling" items they felt were inappropriate, I lost my TV privileges, and if that didn't curtail me, I wasn't allowed to be home alone.

Current Gen consoles all have parental control systems in place to limit what ratings require a password. You can do the same thing on a computer.

Parent your own damn kids. Don't let the government do it for you.

Sorry we disagree. I'd rather my daughter not be 13 years old and sneak a copy of GTA7 when it comes out. Don't discount the ingenuity of children. I bought myself extra controllers and AV cables for when I got grounded. My parents wouldn't take the system away from me just the stuff needed to play it.

However, if my daughter came to me and asked if she could buy GTA7 and I felt she was mature enough to play it, I'd get it for her. In your world, I'm letting the Government parent my child, but in mine I'm being an active part of her life. I would anyway because there's nothing more important to me than her, but if I can get a little help behind the scenes I don't mind it.

Parents can't be everywhere at all times.

edit

This isn't the end of the world people. It's my experience that most places (at least those local to me) already enforce the esrb rating system so little changes should this law pass.

So, because your parents made a stupid mistake and didn't take away your console, then we should roll over?

The issue here isn't just about parenting. But the larger picture. This does a great deal more than turn into Law what is already common policy in most retailers. Having this law go through will do severe harm to the industry. The reasons why have been detailed out many times.

Most of the kids I grew up with usually respected their parents' boundaries, if reasons for those boundaries were laid out. If they didn't, they were punished.

Why not discuss that M-rated game with her *before* it's released?

If this law is only going to apply to "interactive media" and not all media equally, then it's not right, and should not be passed.

I would rather parents learned how to control their kids.

 

[Low Key]

snip

It is illegal to sell porn to minors, is it not? Aside from the fact that there aren't boobies in mass quantity, wouldn't making it illegal to sell M rated games to minors be the same thing? The porn industry, despite their own claims thanks to piracy, is still very much alive and kicking, and by no means is it impossible for minors to view such material. Before the internet came along, I remember looking at porn magazines when I was a young pup.

I guess you are right in that I don't see what all the commotion is about, though I think you are blowing it a bit out of proportion. No one is saying that a 17 year old can't play the games, they just can't buy them. Same thing with alcohol though. There is actually a few laws on the books that say teens 13 and older can drink alcohol in presence of their parents as long as they are on private property. That doesn't mean a teenager can just walk into a liquor store and buy booze.

Don't worry though. I'm still going to write my attorney general (Minnesota) because I think they have more important things to worry about than video games.

 

[Dexiro]

snip

Don't worry though. I'm still going to write my attorney general (Minnesota) because I think they have more important things to worry about than video games.

I can't tell what point you're trying to make! Your paragraphs seemed like they contradicted each other. Are you arguing that the law wouldn't make enough of a difference?

It would be the same as not selling booze, cigarettes and porn to minors and there's nothing wrong with that

Porn would be a cause for concern too if kids could casually go and buy it. We know violent games aren't anywhere near as bad but it makes the parents feel like they have more control. Maybe after a while they'll start seeing that correlation doesn't equal causation.

 

[FinalHeart95]

It's not going to make a big difference either way. It's just a waste of tax dollars from California on legal fees, really.

Honestly, the video game industry has been doing what these guys want to do for YEARS. These guys probably think the point of games is still to get the high score too.

 

[Outamyhead]

Before I had even read who those 11 states were I thought "must be from the south and mid-west" sure as shite, they were!

America has bigger problems than video games, like under age drinking, sex, smoking (because everyone needs a smoke after sex right?), and drug abuse.

Blumenthal said. "I am calling on the videogame industry to follow the leadership of the motion picture industry, which sensibly stops unattended children from viewing violent or graphic movies." 0.o Err yeah...because it's not disturbing their mind at all when they are with their parents, well maybe the mom and dad I witnessed bringing in a couple of 4 year olds, and the two year old brought to watch Nightmare On Elm Street were a little disturbed?

If Blumenthal is content with kids being supervised by an adult or parent when watching an R-rated movie, then it should be the same rules when it comes to video games being bought, which is normally the damn problem to start with, how do they think kids get to play these games?

This law is pointless, especially in at least this area of California, they already are stringent on not selling rated games to children under the age rating on the product, my nephew keeps getting asked for ID, and he's 18 (looks older, more like 21), they even give me a lecture at some stores "this game has mild violence and gore", yeah I know "it may have some nudity and sexual content", no shit Sherlock?, and I'm 34...maybe I look young for my age.

 

[silver wolf009]

I have, for the longest time played M games even when im not supposed to. My parents made the desicion that i had enough of a grasp on reality to seperate games from reality. Now with that said i think that those who support this movement will fight tooth and nail to prove that people like me are being slowly posined into psychotic serial killers who make offerings to the blood gods.

 

[walkingdead127]

"He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither." - Ben Franklin

 

[Low Key]

...

Sorry. Looks like I quoted you instead of hyperdrachen, but yes, I am arguing that it wouldn't make a difference, except for the employee of a retail outlet that knowingly sells material meant for adults to children.

I work at a liquor store and the same rules apply. If I sell booze to someone who is under 21, I get in trouble. Now, if I were to sell booze to someone 21+ and they go and give it to someone underage, that's their problem. In the case for video games, however, as long as someone 18+ buys it for a minor, there is no crime being committed, the minor just can't buy it themselves. Basically, there would be no change in what has been happening already.

 

[Hoplon]

Okay, that makes a little more sense, but to formalise it in law as far as I can tell does not curtail free speech in any manner. Only if there was censorship of a movie for it to be approved for a rating (as we have here in the UK) Then is just not letting children see thing they won't understand yet anyway.

Really I dont see it as a big deal either, I mean from what I can tell nothing at all will change in the way video games are sold. I think its just the US blowing things way out of preportion as usual. When they think of this they think of Australia (which is quite different) instead of the dozens of other countries where laws like this work perfectly fine.

Really though their is no point to this law, it will do exactly the same as the ESRB but it will cost taxpayers millions of dollars to enact and enforce with little gain.

Indeed, in fact I would give the mandate to the ESRB (and whom ever does it for Movies) and let them get on with it, but make clear it is not for them to comment on the merit or lack there of, only to make sure that it is clear that certain ages groups it is likely not suitable for.

There is a clear need not to let in censor ship via the back door, i understand that. but at the same time people do not trust industries to self regulate and frankly I am with them on that.

 

[Motiv_]

At the Gamestop up the road, they ask for ID if you want an M rated game, no matter how old you look. I fail to see the point of this law. I have yet to be somewhere or know someone who has been somewhere that willingly sells games to minors.

All this is going in my humble opinion is tying up the court system and wasting taxpayer's money.

Even if this gets passed, they can just get their parents to buy it for them like they've always done.

I also laughed at

Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal issued a press release explaining his decision to become involved in the case, saying that parents "need and deserve help" to protect their children from "digital danger."

Is he really openly admitting that parents are too stupid or lazy to check the fucking rating label on the back of the box? It's rather simple really, M = Not For Kids. They even have a neat little list of reasons as to WHY it's rated as such.

 

[Low Key]

Here's the letter I just typed up to send to my State office (non-MLA format & contains HTML code):

Spoiler

Minnesota Attorney General's Office
1400 Bremer Tower
445 Minnesota Street
St. Paul, MN 55101


Dear Attorney General Lori Swanson,

[p]     I have read in several sources that you, along with 10 other Attorney's General, have endorsed California in legislation against "M" rated video games. I find this to be a gross misrepresentation of taxpayer revenues and Minnesota deserves better.[/p]

[p]     In the case of said "M" rated video games, taking action against retail stores for selling to minors is a non-issue. It has been documented several times by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC File No. P994511 & 08 Secret Shopper Survey) that video game sales to minors are more controlled in a retail environment than "R" rated motion pictures by at least an 8% margin, and a 50% margin compared to music sales. There is no need for further legislation on the matter.[/p]

[p]     Until underage video game sales by retailers reach numbers worthy of criminal legislation, I suggest removing your endorsement of California's motion. We, as Minnesotans, American citizens, and retail employees, are already doing our part to keep adult content out of our childrens' hands. It's up to the parents to decide whether or not to allow said minor to partake in such activities, as on par with Minnesota statute 340A.503, Subd. 3.[/p]

[p]Signed,
Yadda Yadda Yadda
(Removed for obvious reasons)[/p]

Not bad for someone who is legally intoxicated. Haha

Feel free to use this as a template. The end of my letter is pretty specific to my state, but that shouldn't stop you from finding the same law in your own state.

 

[InsanityRequiem]

I'd say it's best to explain what 'Interactive Media' means. As the lawyers against video games plan to use that as a means to pass it.

Main Entry: in-ter-ac-tive
Pronunciation: \-ˈak-tiv\
Function: adjective
Date: 1832
1 : mutually or reciprocally active
2 : involving the actions or input of a user; especially : of, relating to, or being a two-way electronic communication system (as a telephone, cable television, or a computer) that involves a user's orders (as for information or merchandise) or responses (as to a poll)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/interactive

Main Entry: media
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural me-di-as
Usage: often attributive
Etymology: plural of medium
Date: 1923
1 : a medium of cultivation, conveyance, or expression; especially : medium 2b
2 a singular or plural in construction : mass media b plural : members of the mass media

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/media

By these definitions, 'Interactive media' would not only encompass just video games, but it would also encompass the internet, radio, newspaper, TV, magazines, books, art, speech, and even clothing. Therefore, if the Supreme Court agrees with the States instead of the ECA, then it opens the door to an entire new wave of censorship against everything. 'To protect the child' can be used as a guise for adults to sue nearly every facet of life. Be it false accusations or not. Basically it would destroy the First Amendment as a means to 'protect the children from sexual and/or violent actions'.

 

[Treblaine]

Why is it always that these "liberal" states are constantly being taken to the supreme court on charges of shitting all over the Bill of Rights.

Americans are crazy, if think IF there is a law the restricts sales of certain games to minors they won't be reasonable and bend the rules like in the UK, there will just be a heap load of bullshit as companies over-react, everyone gets paranoid of indignant and vindictive litigation and liability.

One thing this COULD do is destroy games like Halo and Gears of War, M-rated games that have that "certain type of content" that appeals more to young teenagers. Maybe then it will go back to the "good old days" when FPS games were on PC and hardcore & mature by the very nature of how the complexity in getting them to run was in effect an maturity barrier, you needed a certain level of maturity and competence to install it with sound working, etc.

 

[Hiphophippo]

Sure, but my parents were still able to keep tabs on what I bought, what I watched, etc. Buy something they didn't approve of? I had to take it back. If I was caught "smuggling" items they felt were inappropriate, I lost my TV privileges, and if that didn't curtail me, I wasn't allowed to be home alone.

Current Gen consoles all have parental control systems in place to limit what ratings require a password. You can do the same thing on a computer.

Parent your own damn kids. Don't let the government do it for you.

Sorry we disagree. I'd rather my daughter not be 13 years old and sneak a copy of GTA7 when it comes out. Don't discount the ingenuity of children. I bought myself extra controllers and AV cables for when I got grounded. My parents wouldn't take the system away from me just the stuff needed to play it.

However, if my daughter came to me and asked if she could buy GTA7 and I felt she was mature enough to play it, I'd get it for her. In your world, I'm letting the Government parent my child, but in mine I'm being an active part of her life. I would anyway because there's nothing more important to me than her, but if I can get a little help behind the scenes I don't mind it.

Parents can't be everywhere at all times.

edit

This isn't the end of the world people. It's my experience that most places (at least those local to me) already enforce the esrb rating system so little changes should this law pass.

So, because your parents made a stupid mistake and didn't take away your console, then we should roll over?

The issue here isn't just about parenting. But the larger picture. This does a great deal more than turn into Law what is already common policy in most retailers. Having this law go through will do severe harm to the industry. The reasons why have been detailed out many times.

Most of the kids I grew up with usually respected their parents' boundaries, if reasons for those boundaries were laid out. If they didn't, they were punished.

Why not discuss that M-rated game with her *before* it's released?

If this law is only going to apply to "interactive media" and not all media equally, then it's not right, and should not be passed.

I would rather parents learned how to control their kids.

It's interesting having this discussion with you because it's clear to me that despite the "sky is falling, change is terrible" mindset you seem to have concerning this law we both feel the same way about it. You'll note I'm not advocating government holding our hands with regards to raising our childs, or indeed anything else. In both of our preferred outcomes the parents takes responsibility for the child and is involved in their life and entertaining buying choices.

I totally agree with you, and I'm at least one parent you won't have to worry about making ill informed decisions about my daughters gaming habits should she decide to get into that.

But I'm also a realist. You and I both know that there ARE parents out there that are ill informed or just don't give a shit. For the life of me I can't see any reason why it's bad to have a fall back system in place to pick up where the parents dropped the ball. Especially if nothing really changes by putting it into place.