Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
The Courts Government News Entertainment Games

Politicians Wising up on Game Legislation? 66

Blackjack writes "Ars Technica looks at recent failures to pass laws regulating the sales of violent video games. They ask whether politicians are finally wising up to First Amendment issues and the costs associated with lawsuits resulting from the laws. Recent attempts to pass video game legislation in Mississippi, Utah, and Indiana have either failed or been put on indefinite hold. 'Now, state lawmakers are more cognizant of the constitutionality issues at stake. The judicial landscape is littered with the charred husks of laws passed by Illinois, Washington, Michigan, California, Louisiana, and others. All of them tried in some way or another to regulate the sale of violent video games to children, and all of them were struck down on First Amendment grounds.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Politicians Wising up on Game Legislation?

Comments Filter:
  • by Zephyros ( 966835 ) on Friday February 23, 2007 @02:12PM (#18125180)
    Beer is a product. I won't argue that good beer can indeed be considered an art form, but not in the same way that media (books, music, movies, games) are. Beer expresses hops, malts, etc. Media can express ideas, and that's what the first amendment protects.
  • by paeanblack ( 191171 ) on Friday February 23, 2007 @02:16PM (#18125236)
    I consider my home brewed beer to be an artistic expression of brewing abilities. Does this mean I can sell it to minors and be covered under the first amendment?

    Minors can't buy any beer from any brewer. If only your beer was specifically regulated due to its artistic content, you might have a point.
  • Re:I am relieved (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Jerf ( 17166 ) on Friday February 23, 2007 @02:34PM (#18125518) Journal

    Maybe politicians are figuring out that you need evidence to prove their points.
    What politicians need, if they want to pass a feel-good law like this, is a law that passes First Amendment muster. It can be based on a theory of Evil Fairies penetrating the minds of unsuspecting young teens and corrupting their precious bodily fluids, and it'll hold up, as long as it passes First Amendment muster, and all other relevant criteria. No amount of scientific studies demonstrating the evils of video games will help with that, because we have no criteria about laws being scientifically sound. (For better or worse, probably mostly better, but that's a separate argument.)

    You are confusing your desires with reality.
  • by Fallen Kell ( 165468 ) on Friday February 23, 2007 @02:43PM (#18125666)
    ...you beer. The primary use of beer is to consume as in, drink, the product. It is not an idea or thought that is passed through a written, or visual media. Thus, your "free speech" rights do not apply to this product.
  • Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday February 23, 2007 @02:54PM (#18125874)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • by RobTFirefly ( 844560 ) on Friday February 23, 2007 @03:13PM (#18126162) Homepage Journal

    It doesn't solve the problem when adults buy it and turn around and give it to a kid
    But it can sent that one last necessary jolt to the addled brain of Clueless Joe Sixpack, who is about to buy "Manhunt" for his eight-year-old because one time in his youth he played "Pac-Man" and that's what all video games are, right?

    It seems stupid to anyone on /., but this is an accurate representation of the sort of braindead masses that overregulation or censorship would actually serve. If we can cause the necessary brain-attacks in these people by having the cashier gently suggest that the M-rated game a parent is about to buy their kid isn't happy friendly "Super Mario" stuff, in the accepted manner of other comparable age-restricted purchases like R-rated movie tickets, then the ultimate responsibility is once again reverted to the parent where it belongs, and said parent is hopefully forced to become educated enough to properly make the decision on what to buy their kids.
  • Re:I am relieved (Score:3, Insightful)

    by king-manic ( 409855 ) on Friday February 23, 2007 @03:35PM (#18126488)
    The argument that video games make kids into little killing machines, that's a different kind of claim altogether. There is no such study, doing one would be completely unethical.

    Child soldier all over africa could be used. A control group that gets just a regular upbringing, a test group that gets brain washing, physical abuse and violent video games, a test group that just get violent video games, and maybe a group that just gets the brain washing and abuse. I'm sure if mercenary corps get big enough they'd try it.

    psychology is a very slim science. Large scale studies might have strong science behind them but far too often you have sample sizes of 1 and psychologists drawing conclusions from that. Those "case studies" are what make the rest of science think very lightly of psychology. I think this psychiatrists study seems better. psychiatrist tends to be closer to real science. But I'd like a few more studies before I'd change my mind about the effects of violence on people.
  • by ChaosWeevil ( 1004221 ) on Friday February 23, 2007 @04:45PM (#18127404)
    "The right to swing my fist ends where the other man's nose begins." --Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

Before Xerox, five carbons were the maximum extension of anybody's ego.

Working...