While this is a bit extreme its nice to finally see someone pick up on the fact that parents are the ones in the end who are responsible for keeping R and M rated games away from their kids. Jail Perhaps not. Fines..... might work.
UK Researcher Wants Parents Arrested for Buying Kids Violent Games
- Thread starter Timothy Chang
- Start date
Recommended Videos
Does he support arresting parents who take their kid to see "The Dark Knight Rises"?
If not, he's a bloody hypocrite.
If not, he's a bloody hypocrite.
The whole point of a rating system is to help parents choose what their kids are ready for. Some kids are ready to play M games at 10 years old. God dammit I hate these people so much.
Ratings systems are nothing but arbitrary bullshit anyway. Why would I be simply unable to hear "Shit" as an 11 year old without turning out mentally broken, but the moment I hit 12 I'm perfectly fine? Why does the lack of blood bring "Tom and Jerry" a U/PG rating when the inclusion of blood would no doubt make that incredibly violent (and awesome) cartoon an 18/MA?
I agree there should be something in place to prevent adults buying adult games for their children. In my experience, there's nothing worse than having to serve a parent with their kid as they buy the latest COD game, when you know full well it is for the kid, but the parent just doesn't give a shit.
What is wrong with parents buying games for their kids when they think they can handle it? I have always said 3 things about ratings.
1: If it's not meant for a child, don't complain about when your child plays it, take it away from them.
2: If you buy it for your child, you take responsibility for what your child sees so be active in the media they enjoy.
3: If you want to buy it for your child, it is entirely possible.
Why fine and prosecute parents for this? It is their decision how to raise their child. We want responsibility to lie with the parents. How does prosecuting them give them responsibility? All it does is take it away because now they are unable to buy the games. You are not responsible when you drive below the speed limit, you are just following the law. That's not responsibility that not doing what is illegal.
This is a stupid idea and would basically mean that everyone here on this forum would have had their parents fined at least once in the past. Because I believe for not a single fucking second everyone on this forum followed the PEGI ratings. Hypocrites.
1: If it's not meant for a child, don't complain about when your child plays it, take it away from them.
2: If you buy it for your child, you take responsibility for what your child sees so be active in the media they enjoy.
3: If you want to buy it for your child, it is entirely possible.
Why fine and prosecute parents for this? It is their decision how to raise their child. We want responsibility to lie with the parents. How does prosecuting them give them responsibility? All it does is take it away because now they are unable to buy the games. You are not responsible when you drive below the speed limit, you are just following the law. That's not responsibility that not doing what is illegal.
This is a stupid idea and would basically mean that everyone here on this forum would have had their parents fined at least once in the past. Because I believe for not a single fucking second everyone on this forum followed the PEGI ratings. Hypocrites.
Brilliant. If telling somebody your side of an argument doesn't convince them you're right, make it illegal for them to disagree with you.
I didn't know they could give out a PhD in douchebaggery, but if anybody deserves it, Dr. Nick Robinson certainly does.
I didn't know they could give out a PhD in douchebaggery, but if anybody deserves it, Dr. Nick Robinson certainly does.
More or less agree. I remember following the Columbine shooting people were trying to blame video games. I said then and I say now that if video games had been found to be responsible, in any way, for the incident and the parents bought said games for these kids, the parents should be serving time right along with their kids.
This doctor, however, seems to be taking it a step too far.
This doctor, however, seems to be taking it a step too far.
As they should, but I don't think we shouldn't impose legal ramifications for the consumption of media regardless, as I indicated in the second paragraph of my...really large post. I find that barring an artistic medium to children based on what's already an extremely arbitrary rating system serves as a developmental burden. There shouldn't be a "legal playing age" required to play DX:HR, or Skyrim, or ME2. It's silly. I'm under 17, and have probably broken the legal limit several times regardless, and I figure I'm better for it. They served as an excellent emotional and intellectual outlet, and launched me into a plethora of technical hobbies (3D art, Coding, etc).Abandon4093 said:
Point condensed, it's ageist, unfair, censorship, and I almost feels like it condescends a specific youth demographic big time. There are plenty of 13-17 year olds perfectly capable of handling mature content. Hell, most kids are having sex and shooting up before their adult years regardless, (USA), and we think inappropriate media is the largest roadblock in stable emotional development? Naw.
Just on a side note, I think that more games need to include optional censorship as well. There are some games out there that I'm confident i'd like the gameplay, but the excessive gore puts me off. A good example of this was in Brutal Legend. I really liked the game and enjoyed it when i played with gore switched off, but as soon as I tried switching it on It became repulsive and I didn't want to play. This could probably help the issue as well.
This is just wrong on so many levels; first off it assumes that parents don't know their own child well enough to be able to judge whether they're mature enough (or not) to deal with the concept of the game. Second, it's always more than a little creepy when the government decides what's good for you; 'innapropriate' seems an awful flexible word to me.
Yes it's true that there are many children out there playing games that are probably too mature for them to process (I mean you still hear about the nine year olds ploughing through people on GTA), but this is -not- a good way to try and stabilise everything. Hell, if you wanted to do some real good, try your best to promote discussion within the family, for parents to get to know their children well so they have an idea of what their kids are ready, or not, for. And for some reason I think that it could be done nicely without making something an imprisonable offence. The other thing the government could do would be to actually educate people about the age rating system, tell people what sort of things you can expect under each band and explain to people why it's in place. Now I get that this wouldn't work 100% of the time, but surely it's better than trying to criminalise people?
Yes it's true that there are many children out there playing games that are probably too mature for them to process (I mean you still hear about the nine year olds ploughing through people on GTA), but this is -not- a good way to try and stabilise everything. Hell, if you wanted to do some real good, try your best to promote discussion within the family, for parents to get to know their children well so they have an idea of what their kids are ready, or not, for. And for some reason I think that it could be done nicely without making something an imprisonable offence. The other thing the government could do would be to actually educate people about the age rating system, tell people what sort of things you can expect under each band and explain to people why it's in place. Now I get that this wouldn't work 100% of the time, but surely it's better than trying to criminalise people?
I am currently reading a book that describes someone taking a bag filled with glass being pulled over a person's face and kneaded while the victim screams in agony and bleeds to death as the torturer takes perverse pleasure in the act. A book that could be bought and read by an 8 year old without anyone complaining.
Would someone seriously pound some sense into these people? Seriously, how does this level of stupidity still fly in today's society?
Would someone seriously pound some sense into these people? Seriously, how does this level of stupidity still fly in today's society?
I'm of the opinion that the parents should be punished if, and only if, they buy the game for their child and their child acts in a violent manner that would get said child punished. The mere purchase of a game for a child that is underage should not be a crime, it is only if said purchase leads to a crime that there should be punishment for the parents.
Basically if you are a parent and feel your child can handle the content of a specific video game you should have that freedom. However, if your child acts out the content of that video game in real life not only should the child be punished by you should be as well.
Basically if you are a parent and feel your child can handle the content of a specific video game you should have that freedom. However, if your child acts out the content of that video game in real life not only should the child be punished by you should be as well.
Terrible idea. While many parents are lazy, this takes away the decision of whether or not a game is appropriate for an individual minor AWAY from the parents. You know your 16 year old is very mature and reasonable and decide he's ready for GTA? NOPE, government knows your kid better than you do.
And how would they even enforce this? The government would have to monitor what games people buy and play.
And how would they even enforce this? The government would have to monitor what games people buy and play.
Yea yea I know everyone thinks this guy is a moron. But we also know lazy parents are the first ones to argue that violent games are damaging to children, when they refuse to even look at what they are buying their kids.
So, anyone got a better idea on how to punish them, or at least make them aware? I understand this guy is trying to get to the root of the problem, but this is not the way. I mean, finding out if kids are playing them in the first place is kind of intrusive in what goes on in people's households, and that's something we don't want isn't it.
So, anyone got a better idea on how to punish them, or at least make them aware? I understand this guy is trying to get to the root of the problem, but this is not the way. I mean, finding out if kids are playing them in the first place is kind of intrusive in what goes on in people's households, and that's something we don't want isn't it.
But how do you prove, beyond any doubt, that the game was behind the crime? Kids, if they possibly can, will blame someone else for their actions. Christ, even adults do that. If a kid steals, it is more likely it was the company he was with that influenced the act, not GTA. If he beats up someone, I highly doubt it was because he played Final Fantasy XIII when he was 15 or Skyrim, when he was 17.Jodah said:
I don't believe violent games lead to violence. I believe there are crazy people out there, who will do crazy shit regardless of the entertainment they had. There are thousands of criminals in the world who have committed crimes and never played M-rated video games, as there are thousands of people in the world who have played violent games and never even ran a red light.
Parents need to take responsibility when they buy games for their kids, but they should not be blamed if a kid commits a crime. With your suggestion we could always blame parents for anything anyone does, because we could just swing "bad parenting" at them. Someone stabbed a fellow commuter? Must be bad parenting, lock up mum and dad. They should have done their job better.
Why the child? If the parents are responsible for giving a game to the kid, then surely by your standards, the kid is innocent.
I don't think the mature themes are a problem at all. But I think there's a number of problems that all seem to merge together. In my opinion, they are:
1.) The fallacy (or phallus-y *rimshot*) that children can't handle the imagery and themes.
Children with good parents can indeed handle it - This is nearly all children. It's the ones with chavvy and neglectful parents who allow their games console to become the childen's nanny.
2.) How to separate idiotic children from the rest of us:
There's no workable way to keep games away from impressionable children with neglectful parents other than allowing retailers to refuse sale if they think that sloppy parenting is going on. Parents get the final say in their purchases - but the neglectful ones - parents of screamin' kids only see the game as a means to keep little Johnny Boy out of their hair and ignore it when they make a nuisance of themselves for others.
The screaming shitheads we see on X Box Live aren't raging about war, sex, violence or anything like that. They're just raging that they got beaten by better players. This can be remedied by not including headsets in the next console or by putting in an auto-mute function.
I do think that ideally, idiots shouldn't be playing the games as they cannot take being bested by others.
3.) If all else fails:
If there's enough legitimate complaints about a single gamer from the community at large, their console gets banned from Live. While this system is already in place - it's simply not staffed by enough people.
Failing that, if gamers cannot be trusted to play the game without turning into arseholes - we're all going to have to rely upon referees and adjudicators. Someone glitching, bitching, boosting, cheating or generally being an arse - Ref'll boot 'em out of the lobby and hand down a three day ban or something.
Why not invite these various moral guardians at PEGI or wherever it is to monitor exactly what goes on in the games - should be an eye opener for them and a corrective jolt for any griefers or screamers.
While my ideas are ham-fisted and possibly ill-concieved - it's still better than sending folks to prison for sloppy parenting.
1.) The fallacy (or phallus-y *rimshot*) that children can't handle the imagery and themes.
Children with good parents can indeed handle it - This is nearly all children. It's the ones with chavvy and neglectful parents who allow their games console to become the childen's nanny.
2.) How to separate idiotic children from the rest of us:
There's no workable way to keep games away from impressionable children with neglectful parents other than allowing retailers to refuse sale if they think that sloppy parenting is going on. Parents get the final say in their purchases - but the neglectful ones - parents of screamin' kids only see the game as a means to keep little Johnny Boy out of their hair and ignore it when they make a nuisance of themselves for others.
The screaming shitheads we see on X Box Live aren't raging about war, sex, violence or anything like that. They're just raging that they got beaten by better players. This can be remedied by not including headsets in the next console or by putting in an auto-mute function.
I do think that ideally, idiots shouldn't be playing the games as they cannot take being bested by others.
3.) If all else fails:
If there's enough legitimate complaints about a single gamer from the community at large, their console gets banned from Live. While this system is already in place - it's simply not staffed by enough people.
Failing that, if gamers cannot be trusted to play the game without turning into arseholes - we're all going to have to rely upon referees and adjudicators. Someone glitching, bitching, boosting, cheating or generally being an arse - Ref'll boot 'em out of the lobby and hand down a three day ban or something.
Why not invite these various moral guardians at PEGI or wherever it is to monitor exactly what goes on in the games - should be an eye opener for them and a corrective jolt for any griefers or screamers.
While my ideas are ham-fisted and possibly ill-concieved - it's still better than sending folks to prison for sloppy parenting.
I don't think you understand the situation. Those people aren't the people that would be effected by this. Those are the victims they're trying to defend. The people this is trying to fight against are people who understand and trust their children enough to know that they're probably not going to turn into sociopaths by playing mature games, and that when they were a kid, they watched movies they probably shouldn't have, and they turned out fine etc etc.RatRace123 said:
IE, all the sane people.
In the end, it should be the parents call what's right for their child. Alcohol is one thing, it actually kills, all the time, and can wreak havoc on a developing person, and we have years of impartial evidence to support that. Pornography? Sure, it's crude, but I imagine any kid that wanted to look at porn was physically ready to look at porn and I honestly don't think it hurts as much as people say, but I'll grant them that.
But R-Rated movies and Video Games?
Seriously? Sure, they may seem distasteful, and if you want to raise your child in such a way that is opposed to such things, more power to you. But every piece of evidence they have against movies/games is spurious at best. The best research indicates there's no real solid causal link, and the fact that violent crime goes down and down as the game industry gets bigger and bigger, it's easy enough to argue a case that violent games are GOOD for children. I wouldn't make that case, but it could be made, with more actual evidence then the current anti-games lobby has going for itself.
Parents need to be informed. They need to make informed choices about the things they buy their kids. That's why these rating systems are a good thing in principle, because before the rating systems, there was really no way to know except maybe the box art. Now every questionable thing in the game (broadly speaking) is put right on the box, so you can make an informed choice. After that, it's really up to the parents, and unless they can show hard evidence that violent games in fact lead to prolonged violent behavior, fuck them for even suggesting such a brain dead idea as arresting parents over this shit - as people have no doubt said, your parent getting arrested has a much stronger causal link to criminal behavior later in life then video games ever could.
And a bit of a jerk as well. I mean: "Innapropriate for the kids". I feel that is up to the parents to decide. Continue running campaigns to increase awareness is good but prosecuting parents, who I feel should decide for their child, is taking it a step too far. There are irresponsible parents, sure, but prosecuting them will just throw the whole thing into contention again. Parents will say "we didn't know" or "why do they even make games this violent" and someone will suggest an even more radical thing to do. So yeah, I'm against this.The Lunatic said: