I think Hell just froze over
- Thread starter DuplicateValue
- Start date
Recommended Videos
From what I have read, and I could be wrong about this, the bill also penalizes you if you buy the game for someone else, say if you are a parent buying the game for your child.scnj said:
This is another step on the road of becoming the Peoples Republic of America. It upsets me when people like Jack Thompson use video games as a scapegoat for a hand full of kids that decide it would be cool if they were to imitate GTA. It's not the game's fault! It's whoever let them play the game's fault! Doesn't anyone learn this...
The same way they regulate piracy... horribly! Either that or a shit ton of people are going to jail. Lets just hope it's not the latter.RebelRising said:
I'm not sure they really care. As far as I can see, proposals like this are merely publicity stunts, so that they can show the world that they are "Doing something to fight the scourge that is video games."RebelRising said:
I think your right. I just heard news of Duke Nukem Forever being released, a game has surpassed Metal Gear Solid 4 in awesomeness and I just got a girlfriend.
The world will probably end any day now.
The world will probably end any day now.
When i first read the title i thought somthing along the lines of...
OMG Valve released a game on it's original due date
Then i read the article and tillted my head slightly. After reajusting i said ...
OMG Valve released a game on it's original due date
Then i read the article and tillted my head slightly. After reajusting i said ...
Somthing along the lines of that...Iwata said:
I think this is an issue related to gaming in general, and as such while it involves politics it doesn't nessicarly belong on the politics board which exists to seperate things from gaming discussion and the like.
As far as the law goes, I think Jack Thomson is simply saying the law won't work, not that he doesn't approve or anything. He's right to be honest, because similar things have been tried with Cigarettes and the like. Most of the pressure had to be put on the people lying about their age to buy smokes rather than the merchants because it can be nearly impossible for them to accuratly tell what age someone is in this world of fake IDs and such.
A way of achieving the same effect would be to enhance the penelties and policing aimed at the consumers themselves. Basically holding kids or parents responsible for the purchuse of such games. So basically if Jr. is caught going into a store and using a fake ID to try and buy an AO or M game he can be (in theory) packed off to Juvie, or his parents could be fined. Of course even then this is pointless because you have parents buying the games for their kids anyway (as many parents buy cigarettes for their teenagers), and kids will use proxies of the proper age to make purchuses for them.
The bottom line is that it's a huge mess, as it puts unreasonable expectations on the shopkeepers and merchants (ie, can a minimum wage clerk spot a fake ID?), and there are simply too many variables.
Still I could see Jack Thomson trying to back similar policies to what they use for Alcohol or Cigarettes, simply because it's a tool. Not one that works extremely well, but still something. I disagree with it of course though.
To make a political comment though, I will point out that since it occasionally comes up, that you'll notice that again all 4 of the politicians mentioned in articles connected to this as supporting/sponsoring the law are Democrats. While the issue goes accross party lines, it's mostly a left wing one right now and that is why it has taken off so much with the current change of administration. Something to keep in mind when you vote (though stil you need to know WHO you are voting for specifically, not just the party).
Such are my thoughts/observations/opinions.
As far as the law goes, I think Jack Thomson is simply saying the law won't work, not that he doesn't approve or anything. He's right to be honest, because similar things have been tried with Cigarettes and the like. Most of the pressure had to be put on the people lying about their age to buy smokes rather than the merchants because it can be nearly impossible for them to accuratly tell what age someone is in this world of fake IDs and such.
A way of achieving the same effect would be to enhance the penelties and policing aimed at the consumers themselves. Basically holding kids or parents responsible for the purchuse of such games. So basically if Jr. is caught going into a store and using a fake ID to try and buy an AO or M game he can be (in theory) packed off to Juvie, or his parents could be fined. Of course even then this is pointless because you have parents buying the games for their kids anyway (as many parents buy cigarettes for their teenagers), and kids will use proxies of the proper age to make purchuses for them.
The bottom line is that it's a huge mess, as it puts unreasonable expectations on the shopkeepers and merchants (ie, can a minimum wage clerk spot a fake ID?), and there are simply too many variables.
Still I could see Jack Thomson trying to back similar policies to what they use for Alcohol or Cigarettes, simply because it's a tool. Not one that works extremely well, but still something. I disagree with it of course though.
To make a political comment though, I will point out that since it occasionally comes up, that you'll notice that again all 4 of the politicians mentioned in articles connected to this as supporting/sponsoring the law are Democrats. While the issue goes accross party lines, it's mostly a left wing one right now and that is why it has taken off so much with the current change of administration. Something to keep in mind when you vote (though stil you need to know WHO you are voting for specifically, not just the party).
Such are my thoughts/observations/opinions.
Heh, I was surprised, but if you read the article it says he's going to "help them" revise the bill.
This bill just seems to implement the same system that we have in the UK. I'm not mazing at American politics, but as I understand it, it's saying that you can'y sell Mature or Adult Only games to minors, but if you're a parent/legal guardian than you can buy it for your child (that's what it means by affirmative defense, right?). In that case it's pretty much what we have over here, and we haven't descended into an apocalyptic hell where all video games are banned yet.