Violent Video Game Restriction Struck Down 318
Nutsquasher was the first to submit news that a ban on selling violent video games to minors has been struck down, reversing an earlier decision in this case that held that video games were not a constitutionally protected form of speech. The decision (pdf) is available. Since the Federal government has been considering a national law along these lines, these decisions on local laws may be important soon.
The ball is not in our court (Score:5, Insightful)
The corporations have all of the money and weild recently gained legistlation, so you have to expect that the momentum will favor them. Consumer backlash won't hit a politician's radar until the outspoken make up a large number of their own constituents (or consist of a few of their wealthiest constituents). The courts will continue to side with the corporations more often then not, because again, it's still their home turf. Until the ripple effects of the DMCA start to annoy more people (not just the "technically inclined" or the random college student), the bulk of the rulings will go towards the corporate masters.
Re:The ball is not in our court (Score:5, Funny)
So unless Kyle's mom hates the DMCA, nothing can be done?
And the 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals scores a (Score:5, Funny)
Whew. I was worried about my niece. (Score:5, Funny)
That's good (Score:5, Funny)
Re:That's good (Score:2, Funny)
How is this different from porn? (Score:5, Insightful)
If I take 'Debbie Does Dallas 24' from a DVD, add some interactive components, like some sort of with-your-mallet-hit-the-boobs thing, can I suddenly go out and sell it to minors?
Re:How is this different from porn? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:How is this different from porn? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:How is this different from porn? (Score:5, Insightful)
To me, violence is far more obscene than sexually explicit material.
Re:How is this different from porn? (Score:5, Insightful)
"We train young men to drop fire on people, but their commanders won't allow them to write 'Fuck' on their airplane... Because: it's obscene".
- Apocalypse Now
Re:How is this different from porn? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:How is this different from porn? (Score:3, Funny)
>
> Hence why the law was struck down on the fact that it also outlawed violence. The judge (imo correctly) ruled that violent images are not obscene, and thus protected by the 1st amendment.
So the solution to the poster's problem is not to make a game of "with your mallet hit the boobs", but "like a
2 steps, and i agree with you (Score:5, Insightful)
As for Debbie, well she may be obscene (for depicting erect penis, insertionn, or other random criteria) but tolerated in many communities, and enforcement on porno is spotty. Adding an interactive component certainly will not make it less obscene. Indeed what carried the day here was that it was violence and not sex, which if you at the movies is far more tolerated in our culture, and i'll be the first to concede *that* is the real sickness. I vote for more sex, less violence.
Re:How is this different from porn? (Score:3, Insightful)
The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that certain types of material can be declared "obscene." This differs from material that is just offensive. Obscene material offends the sensibilities of the community it is in so much that the rights of one person to have/view that material infringe
Re:How is this different from porn? (Score:2, Insightful)
Just ask anybody at my school. They couldn't give a shit less, either way. They act like the school's discouragement towards talking about the blow-jobs they got/gave last weekend, the mishaps they had with their tampons, and the frequency of their masturbation is totally ridiculous.
Aside from that, just talk to somebody on IRC. Most people there don't seem to have any problem whatsoever discussing sex in full and gruesome detail.
I guess i kind of see where you're coming from, though, a litt
Re:How is this different from porn? (Score:2)
Video games don't breed violence... (Score:5, Insightful)
Professor Jane Healy discusses this in her book, Endangered Minds.
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:5, Funny)
Frankly, if they went on a killing spree it would be a relief...the authorities would finally remove the mad little fuckers from our house...
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:3, Funny)
Ignotance begets ignorance.
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:5, Insightful)
Good parenting can minimize the violence, but poor parenting doesn't necessarily cause violence. Neither can you say with 100% certainty that violent games do not cause violent behavior - it depends on too many different factors - but violent games by themselves cannot be proven to definitely cause violent behavior.
(If that wasn't a muddle confusing mess, I don't know what is)
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes I can.
The reasoning goes like this: Was there violent behaviour before videogames? Yes? Then videogames are not the cause of the violence. Pretty simple. : )
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:2)
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:2)
The Simpsons are the vehicle of funny...its avatar if you will.
People falling down flat on their faces was the cause of funny : )
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:5, Insightful)
From what I've seen, it's that parents don't correct their kids soon enough. Maybe I'm just a sadistic bastard, but a parent sometimes needs to resort to some less than savory method to correct their kids (spare the rod and spoil the child and all), but most parents don't seem to want to get their hands dirty with the nitty-gritty of being a parent.
Not to beat a dead horse, but I feel safe in saying that the only reason why games get so much bad attention is that parents want a scape goat, an easy way out of responsibility. Perhaps responcibility is a concept long lost to most American parents these days, and the ones that do try to take responsibilty do so by censoring out the world. This in itself is, imo, flawed in concept and dangerous for the child. A child whom is given options will, with positive assistance and advice fromt he parents, make better decisions. From what I've seen, the most violent children are children whose parents were over protective. It is their insatiable urge to be freed from the bounds of their parents that seems to drive their violence. This, of course, doesn't call into account the poorer groups in society, where violence stems from much more conviluted sources, but its the middle class that purchases the most games.
I know that some children shouldn't play violent games because it does increase their violent behavior. as much as i love FPS, i accept that some people are too impresionable for them. The trick, as I see it, is to instill maturity and decision making skills into the child, and to remind them that you love them. After that, it is up to them to find their way in life. I know that I've made mistakes that could have been avoided, but I've learned through trial and error that violence is wrong, and society is better without it. And I feel that is everyones goal, to build a better society. To do so, you must teach your child how to make decisions, not to make them for them. Leave the games alone, let them choose whether or not they want to play them, and don't be afraid to punish them when their behavior gets out of line.
(hmmmm, wow, that rambles)
Subtle Difference (Score:2)
I think I can say that, and this might sound like a nitpick, but I believe that this is a very important difference.
Freewill causes violence, no matter what anyone has watched they are still the ones that choose to commit an act of violence. Now, they might be more likely to be violent
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:5, Interesting)
No, but an argument could be made for desensitization. I think I have posted this here before, but in the Corps (Marine Corps), one of the most difficult things to do in training recruits is to get them to not hesitate pulling the trigger to end another human beings life. (humans tend to default towards not killing each other unless they are sociopaths which the Corps does not want). To overcome this issue, recently the Corps has been experimenting with 3D shootemups in an attempt at desensitization and teaching squad maneuvering and strategy skills, but primarily desensitization.
So, do video games desensitize kids to violence?
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, that is encouraging and good to know. However, it is one thing to say that "yes, I played video games (I most certainly did) and there is nothing wrong with me! I don't kill people". But it is quite another thing to perform population studies and test the hypothesis that video games do not desensitize people to violence. Isolated individuals speaking up does not a scientific study make.
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:2)
I smell a new slashdot poll!!!!!!
OK, so a slashdot poll is far from scientific, but this topic has come up in the past and if you take what people post as their true feelings, (i know, i know) then I would say that I have seen very few people say they have become desensitized.
Escargot (Score:3, Funny)
Of course you do! You just wasted a prefectly delicious entrée!
Hmmm...snail
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:2)
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:2, Funny)
Me too.
First-person-shooters are for wimps.
Let's hear it for turn-based strategy games! Body counts in the billions!
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:4, Interesting)
Only if the kid is unable to determine the difference between fiction/fantasy and reality and is able to remove the "violence" from the context. No matter how you wrap it, video games are distinctly artificial, and like tv, you know that what is happening isn't "real."
Regardless of the number of times I've seen a car crash on tv, in the movies, on nascar, or how "fun" it is to trash cars in video games, getting involved in the real thing (for me) definately triggered a different reaction than "awesome."
The military (to varrying extents) brainwashes recruits. THAT is how they get them to not hesitate pulling the trigger. The methods they use to perform this brainwashing have varied over time, but merely playing a video game will not be enough to accomplish the goal.
no, no, no (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parents who police and control their child's every movement probably cause as much psychological damage as the violent games/shows. Realistically, parents cannot monitor every audiovisual input their child receives -- it is the duty of those *creating* that input to make it reasonably wholesome for the sake of children.
Violent games/TV shows are about trends -- not every person will attack someone, but does the average person become more violent? If so, there is a negative influence. Think about brainwashing and propaganda -- still think TV/movies/games don't have any effect? None at all?
A particularly poignant example is this: in high school, I saw a video that showed a live execution. It was during the Vietnam War; an officer held a gun to the head of an enemy solider (Viet Cong I think), pulled the trigger, and the victim fell. He slumped over, blood spurted out of his head like a fountain, and slowly subsided.
That really effected me. I think we can agree that is a moving video. But why is that so different from a video game depicting the same thing. "Because it's real!" you say. The fact that *you* know it is real and not a hollywood set makes that difference. The same exact audiovisual input, coupled with the fact that "it's real" makes it scary.
Now think about kids. They have a hard time understanding what is real and what isn't, hell, we give them stories about the Easter Bunny and Santa. And so we expect them to understand that the deaths on the news are entirely different than the deaths on a video game, even though with increasing graphics, etc. they may look strikingly similar.
I'm not against banning the games; humans have come a long way from the Roman Colleseum and spectators making a sport of death. Death is a sad, inevitable fact of life, which cannot be fully appreciated by young children. Training them to kill at that age, or to view repeated killings, will surely have some effect. Minimizing this before they are old enough to understand (like restricting porn from them when they are young) is a Good Thing.
So yeah, I want to play some counterstrike/quake like the next guy, but maybe the little chilluns should kill monsters (aka Doom 3) instead of living, breathing humans.
That's my two cents. =)
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:2)
But in the natural and man-made world, death surrounds us and always will. Should a wolf bear responsibility for taking down prey where children might see it? Is the cat that got splattered all over highway 50 responsible for the kids that see it's carcas?
Respect for death and the cycle of life is just as important as respect for life itself. It's the responsibility of the parents and all adults around children to help them understand
Re:Video games don't breed violence... (Score:2)
original judge (Score:4, Funny)
Judge Stephen Limbaugh first cousin to, none-other than everyone's favorite Rush Limbaugh....
Mike
Re:original judge (Score:2)
Oh, wait...
Re:original judge (Score:2)
But Pro-Corporal from the look of it.
Re:original judge (Score:5, Informative)
However, the person referred to by the OP who rejected that request is Judge Stephen N. Limbaugh, Sr.- his uncle [rosecity.net].
Of course! (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Of course! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Of course! (Score:3, Funny)
Washington state, too? (Score:3, Interesting)
The Fat Idiot's Brother (Score:2, Funny)
Re:The Fat Idiot's Brother (Score:2)
Re:The Fat Idiot's Brother (Score:4, Insightful)
A stronger indication of "idiocy," per se, might be in using purely invective arguments against philosophical or political opponents. This, by the way, is what you have just done.
It didn't work, anyways (Score:2, Informative)
Re:It didn't work, anyways (Score:2)
Definition == Slippery Slope (Score:3, Insightful)
Hardly. (Score:2)
I think it is pretty obvious to any reasonable person what constitutes a "violent game". Then there is the guy picketing Toys-R-Us. Then there is the guy worried about him.
yay, I can kill nazi's now (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:yay, I can kill nazi's now (Score:2)
Pre-emptive strike (Score:5, Informative)
Before Yet Another Moron gets on here and starts ranting about how it works for the movies, why not for the games, won't someone PLEASE think of the children:
The MPAA ratings are voluntary and are not enforced under penalty of law. There is nothing about them at all that is legally binding. The only pressure theater operators face to enforce them is economic, not criminal. This is arguably what makes them constitutional, where this law is not. IANAL etc.
Re:Pre-emptive strike (Score:5, Funny)
Oh, come ON, I don't deserve this. What have I ever done to you?
Re:Pre-emptive strike (Score:2)
Didn't you??
You are my hero.
Duh (Score:2)
This was going to happen. It happened because, it's a video game.
It's about time it happened to.
You may have noticed I didn't explain in much detail this time. That's because if you don't already know and understand my point, you'll never get it and I'm not going to preach to the choir.
DUHSteven Limbaugh (Score:2)
Re:Steven Limbaugh (Score:2)
Another article (Score:2, Informative)
If a parent doesn't know what games their kid has (Score:5, Funny)
I didn't get to play Operation (the Wacky Doctor Game) or Clue until I was 18. I can see why, now that I am older and wiser.
I could at any moment tried to extract the funny bone from a schoolmate, or hit my sister with a candlestick in the study.
Thank goodness for calming coloring books and play-dough. Well, time for lockdown, night...
Any non-violent games out there? (Score:2, Insightful)
Is a game considered non-violent as long as the characters are represented in a cartoonish, non-human, guise...and cute child-like music is playing in the background? Or is there some other arbitrary designation? Who defines the line?
Re:Any non-violent games out there? (Score:2)
!st Amendment seems beside the point (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:!st Amendment seems beside the point (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, it is because the NC-17 (and the movie ratting system as a whole) is a voluntery policy adapted by the MPAA and NATO (National Association of Theater Owners.) It is not a law and the government is in no way involved in it's enforcment and in fact producers and theaters are free to i
I don't get it (Score:3, Insightful)
Please, somebody explain this to me. If it's ok for one, why is it not ok for the other?
Re:I don't get it (Score:2)
Re:I don't get it (Score:2)
Re:I don't get it (Score:3, Insightful)
Personally, I am against the barring of purchasing either, only the parent should decide.
But then there is economics.
If violent video games made for violent people (Score:4, Funny)
Wow. (Score:2)
Ryan Fenton
Awful... (Score:2, Funny)
Theres that FF theme again! (Score:3, Funny)
bumbumbumbum baaabaaa BUM BUM BUMmmm!
Anyone have a link to the actual opinion?? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Anyone have a link to the actual opinion?? (Score:3, Funny)
He's a Limbaugh, what did you expect?
About time (Score:4, Interesting)
"Our review of the record convinces us that these "violent" video games contain stories, imagery, "age-old themes of literature," and messages, "even an 'ideology,' just as books and movies do." ... Indeed, we find it telling that
the County seeks to restrict access to these video games precisely because their
content purportedly affects the thought or behavior of those who play them."
I am a minor... (Score:4, Interesting)
On the other hand, I played a Ferrari racing game in an arcade yesterday, and 10 minutes later I was in my car peeling out at red lights and red-lining in every gear.
I guess that means that I "suffer a deleterious effect on [my] psychological health" when I play racing games. Those evil devices should be illegal!
Or maybe it means that I'm a bad driver. That game didn't hypnotize me and make me drive like an asshole. I was fully aware of what I was doing, and chose to do it anyway. Sure, the game triggered that behavior, but something else could have triggered it just as easily. Being passed by a 350Z on the highway does the same thing. Vroom vroom.
I'm willing to bet a good sum of money that that's how violent video games work too. They don't make people violent, they make violent people active. The question is, would their violence be triggered by something else if not by a video game?
Re:I am a minor... (Score:3, Funny)
yup, you're 17 allright.
There's a reason why car insurance cost more for 17 year olds...
Don't worry, if you survive you first crash, you'll learn to slow down and be more carefull...I did.
Reign in your righteous indignation for a minute.. (Score:4, Insightful)
Aiming violent games at kids (even in an indirect way) may be profitable but it's a guaranteed way to ensure that video games (the medium as a whole- as casual observers do not make distinctions between good and bad) continue to be viewed as cynically exploitative and not worthy of the same standard of intellectual appraisal as other media. This perception is more of a handicap to the medium's evolution than any number of vague retail laws.
This could actually be a good thing. (Score:3)
Re:This could actually be a good thing. (Score:5, Insightful)
And why not? I don't care about your opinion; can you cite any scientific studies that prove actual harm? Why is it that a day before his 18th birthday, a young adult shouldn't be allowed to participate in fantasy violence, but the next day it is perfectly ok to ship the same young adult to Iraq on a mission to actually kill real people? Isn't that a bit hypocritical?
Mothers Against Videogame Addiction and Violence (Score:2, Informative)
If my behaviour in video games.... (Score:5, Funny)
*SMACK* Did I tell you to feed the hungry? Now go fetch the ball I threw at the creche.
It's the parents! Damn you lousy parents! (Score:5, Insightful)
Just because we're "minors" doesn't mean we can't be held accountable for our own behavior. You don't have to find someone else to blame. It's hard to determine exactly when a child has transitioned from ignorant to insane, but it's definitely earlier than 18. It may be that a 15-year-old kid kills his teacher because he's violent and his parents/teachers/video games/movies didn't teach him how to deal with anger properly, but he's still the violent one. If you don't think a 15-year-old realizes what the result of killing is, then perhaps it's been too long since you last spoke with one.
One problem lies in our whole system of treating "minors" completely differently. If a 15-year-old kills his family, it's blamed on his parents and his hobbies, it makes news headlines around the world, and inspires weeks and months and years of angry discussion about what causes violence in youths. If an 18-year-old kills his family, everyone just says, "he's one sick bastard" and he goes to prison. The minor is rewarded with fame and attention, the rest are rewarded with hatred.
Re:It's the parents! Damn you lousy parents! (Score:5, Insightful)
The parents are, arguably, the primary source of psycho-social imprinting for the child. Typically, children learn their behavior, morals, values, and identity from their parents. The more involved the parents are in the child's life life the stronger that influence. The less involved the parents are in their children's life, the less the influence; and the stronger the influence that outside sources (neighbors, peers, television, etc...)have on the child's identity.
That is why in most cases the minor is sentenced and the parents aren't convicted as accomplice to the crime. The fact that the 15 year old may or may not understand/realize the effect of murder (although that could be the case in rare circumstances) is not relevant. It is accepted that a fifteen year old understands the concept of "dead". What is relevant is the degree to which video games, television, movies, music, etc... desensitize the youth to the effects of killing, and thereby contribute to the condition (mental) which causes the youth to kill. There is compelling evidence [apa.org] to correlate violent video games and aggressive behavior, though not conclusive.
I am not familiar with that case, although most social scientists would examinate a killer's background for study. I would blame the media for sensationalizing a criminal act, not necessarily the social scientist.
You wanna see violence? (Score:4, Interesting)
I'll have my first demo at:
http://delvedesigns.com/websites/clancrazy/inde
Only has attack moves in it.
Re:Excellent (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Excellent (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Excellent (Score:2, Insightful)
True. And in the same sense, if the kid is out with $50 to spend on these types of things instead of doing homework, participating in sports, or spending time with their parents, then it's not just the shopkeeper, but also the parents that need to be looked at.
If parents don't want this stuff getting into their kids' hands, maybe t
Re:Excellent (Score:2)
Re:Excellent (Score:3, Insightful)
So you're saying that kids shouldn't be allowed any free time at all?!? Parents and teachers must keep them swamped with homework, sports activities, and time with parents that they can't have any life of their own? I agree that the above-mentioned acti
Re:Vice City (Score:3, Interesting)
Just because they shouldn't play them doesn't mean there should be a law against the sale of these games to minors.
Here in Canada, it is perfectly legal to show full frontal nudity, explicit language, and graphic violence after 9:00 pm. Hell, some of the movie channels that come with regular cable (not PPV) even show nudity before this... Thinks back to a recent airing of Blade Runner
At the young age of 15, I sat down in the middle of the day with my Dad and some of his buddies and watched the Outer Lim
Re:Vice City (Score:5, Insightful)
The pictures in the box aren't real jimmy!
Re:Vice City (Score:2)
Re:Vice City (Score:2)
Troll
They mention that they are against legislation to ban explicit material to minors only, and how a game that involves completing criminal acts including murder is probably bad for children (at least), and they are marked as TROLL. You must be kidding me? I can only hope it was a minor with mod points...otherwise I hope they're hit by a bus.
and (Score:4, Insightful)
How many times did gargamel try to boil the smurfs in a pot of hot water? How many times was daffy roasted in an oven? I remember nobody ever died in the A-Team despite all the violence.
By today's standards I should've assumed that violence doesn't hurt anybody, yet I seemed to have turned out ok. I think we aren't giving kids enough credit, we seem to think they are too stupid to figure anything out...
Re:WRONG!! (Score:2)
Re:Forcing retail clerks to make judgement calls? (Score:2)
Do the words "You're not paid to think" ring a bell?
They can't have a law like that give funny ideas to their register-drones...