Schwarzenegger Urged to Keep Mum On 'Unconstitutional' Game Law

[The Black Adder]

Would jumping on enemies in a Mario game count as "virtual harm" to "characters with substantially human characteristics?"

You feel that turtles, mushrooms and sheets look substantially human, you might have a bigger problem than videogame violence. Like the 20 grams of LSD you must be on.

What are you talking about? You'd be dead even before you got to taking 1 gram of LSD.

 

[Lucane]

*loud coughing*

I'll see your loud coughing and raise you;

Spoiler: *coughing so hard I sicked up a little bit in my mouth*

Is a metal exoskeleton a "character with substantially human characteristics" and does ripping it's arms and legs off constitute as "virtual harm"?

I suppose this truely is a case of, "Do what I say, don't do what I do".

It hard to take this seriously, since there are so many violent (and crap) games out there with his (often mutilated) mug plastered on the front cover.

Anyway, I thought the E.S.R.B. already did this anyway, or does he want stricter ratings and harsher punishments?

Actually for some reason clearly defined robots are completely ok to be killed, broken, cut up, shot, stabbed, sliced, melted, exploded, etc. I mean look at Samurai Jack they'd never get past the 2nd episode if in the future the robots working for Aku we're alive

Basiclly replacing Blood with Oil and Flesh with Metal euqals no harm no foul,but I do see your point though.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

Anyway, I thought the E.S.R.B. already did this anyway, or does he want stricter ratings and harsher punishments?

The ESRB ratings are entirely voluntary, although many retailers will not carry an unrated game. The ESRB does not prohibit the sale of 'M' rated games to minors however, which is what the law was all about.

Video games are considered protected speech by US Courts, and so efforts to limit their sale without good reason are considered unconstitutional.

 

[YoctoYotta]

I don't really care either way, but it seems like the only reason the video game industry has to complain is that they know this will cause a measurable drop in revenue coming from children under whatever the law deems the legal age. As much as it sucks for kids who appreciate good games, I don't see how the ESA lobbyists and LA Times can argue this is unconstitutional any more than one could argue that the drinking age, the driving age, or NC-17 movie rating limit is unconstitutional. It's a poor argument from what I've read. That said, I definitely agree with most that violent media does not harm normal kids in any way, but violent media's effect on kids with pre-existing mental and social issues might help push them over the edge . . . that definitely needs more investigation.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

Proponents of the law justified it by citing assorted studies linking violent video games to what one researcher called "increases in aggressive behavior, aggressive cognition, aggressive affect and cardiovascular arousal, and to decreases in helping behavior." Yet the appeals court pointed to disclaimers by the same experts in concluding that none of the research established a causal link between minors playing violent video games and psychological or neurological harm. In the absence of a connection, the court said, "the state has not met its burden to demonstrate a compelling interest" in limiting free expression.

Willful misrepresenting of scientific studies to push your agenda? Perhaps that should be made illegal first.

 

[Shurikens and Lightning]

why do people care??? there is no corelation between violent games and violent behavior, and it is the parents fault for letting their kids buy the games...

Didnt some kid kill a cab driver because he thought it was cool in gta4? I agree with you though.

Why the hell cant parents just say No to the kid, why do they need a law telling them that? it is so unbelievably stupid that normal people have to now obey a law just because a dumb fucking parent (scuse my french) cant control their kid?

 

[tthor]

Didnt some kid kill a cab driver because he thought it was cool in gta4?

didnt some guy torture and kill a bunch of women just to hear them scream?

the point is there are many nutjobs out there, just because a few of them played GTA does not mean it was GTA that made them insane

 

[Joeshie]

I don't agree with censorship, but selling games meant for Adults to children, is ridiculous.

Why is selling a product that has absolutely zero credible evidence of harm to children bad? You say censorship is bad, but then advocate the censorship of certain material for children.

Tell you what, lets just ban all movies, music, and any form of media from children. That way children will be fully "protected".

I hope they do ban selling of M rated games to minors. I mean thats what the fucking M is for... You don't sell R18 porn movies or mags to kids do you? Unconstitutional my ass. Bunch of gun toting backwards ass hicks.

The only people who are "backwards ass" are the people who support this shit.

Seriously, people complain about the government killing freedoms, but then you have retards like Anonymouse who think the killing of freedoms is a good thing. Nice job supporting the problem.

I can't believe there are so many people on this website who advocate the further deterioration of personal freedoms. You idiots are mindboggling.

 

[PhoenixFlame]

I'm in the "enforcement sounds nice, but good luck doing it" camp. Like others have pointed out, this basically is a law looking to formalize the rating system. While whether or not it is unconstitutional is up to everyone here to conclude, I do think that doing something like this requires more thought than just making illegal selling over 17 games to kids under 17. If you're going to give the rating system some teeth, it needs to be organized enough so that the teeth don't fall off at the first under 17 kid they bite.

 

[Joeshie]

You see. People like you are exactly what is wrong with america. You dont think!

You are the one not thinking.

Apparently you forgot the entire fact that THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO CONFIRMED LINK BETWEEN PLAYING VIDEO GAMES AND NEGATIVE BEHAVIOR. You completely failed at fucking logic there buddy. Why the hell should we restrict behavior that poses no threat to somebody or anyone else.

Enjoy while your shitty/totalitarian government tells you what you can and can't watch/play.

PROTIP: You might want to lay off the whole strawman logical fallacy [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man]. I never suggested that behavior that poses harm to ones self or other individuals should be legal, you just assumed that I did. Try not to misrepresent my position next time.

 

[Ancientgamer]

The thing is, their not saying "Don't sell M rated games to minors", There saying "Don't sell games with violence to minors", you guys realize that's about 85% of all video games on the market, right?

 

[Joeshie]

*worthless babble*

Ya know. You are not even really worth replying you being a typical fucking american but heres my "PROTIP" so that you don't fail at reading again. READ PEOPLES POSTS! I pretty fucking clearly stated that these people are going to kill anyway but with this law it takes the blame away from gamers. God I hate dealing with stupid people. -.-;;;
I hope you are Little Timmys first victim...

You have absolutely zero concrete evidence that any killings ever were the result of violent video games. You see in the rational world, we use evidence to support our claims, not ridiculous heresay.

I also find it absolutely hilarious that you go on to claim that I should learn to read when you are the one who completely misrepresented my original argument.

 

[Doug]

I don't agree with censorship, but selling games meant for Adults to children, is ridiculous. In the U.K some games with extreme content have a legal certificate. Most games don't but something like Manhunt, or Gears Of War does.

Indeed. I do think he has a point, although 18 is a tad extreme. Plus it depends on how much voilence/harm constitues "virtual harm". For example, would a Saturday morning childrens cartoon count or not?

As for Manhunt vs Gears o' war, I think its a matter of presentation. In manhunt your Average Joe and you get up close and personal views of how to kill someone. a) It might actually teach people how to effectively murder, and b) it lacks the distance of unbelievability that Fernix's frigging extremely over the top muscles have.

EDIT:

To an extent, isn't Arnold just saying what we've been saying? That games aren't just for kids? Granted, he's going about it in the wrong way (and the LA Times was also right in that it's the parent's responsibility), but he wasn't as wrong as some people here are painting him.

Agreed