Indiana Senator Offended, Committee Passes Video Game Bill

I'd love to see a constitutional bill regulating the sale of mature games to minors. HOWEVER, that being said, no such thing can exist with our current system. We'd need to rate other forms of media as well, from books to television shows, DVDs, movies, etc... all from a governmental agency to ensure consistancy. Ratings would take forever, nothing would ever be released on time, prices would skyrocket... In short, it won't work.

phentermine...

news...

Let me put it this way Tonka, do you think that adding this law will, in any way, make those 'bad parents' any better? Do you think this will change one tiny thing for those kids who are abused or beaten?

It's like that 'Mums for Justice' group in the UK, who seem to think that Video Games lead to an increase in 'street gangs and thuggery' as well as being 'anti-social and addictive' and yet fail entirely to spot their own oxymoron.

@Tonka Truck

"don’t any of you think it might be a good idea to keep these kinds of games away from kids below a certain age?"
Yes, that is a good idea. However, it's not the government's job to raise children - that responsibility lies with the parents.

"Some of you sound like you’re actually against it because it goes against your rights or something."
Nail, head.

"The problem with the argument that 100% of the responsibility falls on the parents is that some people have really crappy parent(s)."
So why not do more to make parents better? I honestly believe every kid deserves responsible, mature parents - and frankly, a solid grounding from their upbringing would do more to protect them from the potential (and unproven) dangers of violent media than any knee-jerk reaction would.

"That doesn’t mean we should just let kids get a hold of something that isn’t suitable for someone there age and throw the parents in jail."
I don't think anybody here's ever advocated arresting parents. I don't think there should be any criminal penalties associated with this at all. Retailers need to be more stringent about not selling to kids, although legislation is a step too far with how little else has been tried. Parents need to be educated, and the industry needs to own up when it goes too far.

"The idea behind this is to protect the kids."
I bet wrapping them up in bubblewrap would protect kids from accidents, but I doubt you'd be able to pass a law fining anyone not doing that.

"Sometimes grownups do know what’s best. Even politicians!"
The key word there is "sometimes". And even while they may know what's best, that's no guarantee they'll always *do* what's best.

Go ahead, let them. That way they'll be sued and then taxes'll get raised and the money that was supposed to go somewhere important is now flushed down the drain.

Let the process repeat itself a few dozen times. Years go by. People are still being stupid about it and it keeps going on. Schools now close down because the government can't fund them with money because it's being wasted on unconstitutionalism.

Yay politics.

I think that people who don't understand the difference between Reality and Fantasy should be playing these games anyway.

I wonder which version they got of BMX...X-Box or GameCube. The PS2 was censored after all...I could've tried it back home because it was for rent at Roger's Video.

Anyway. I'm glad the Canadian Government isn't being dumb about this kind of stuff.

Tonka you are precisely what is wrong with this country. You are spewing out the same ignorant bull**** that has been disregarded in every court case. And who are you to define who has "crappy" parents? Protect the Children? Don't make me laugh, whether you like it or not, minors have first amendment protections as well. The goverment has absolutely no bussiness telling minors what isn't suitable for them. It amazes me that people who have taken an oath to protect the constitution have shown so much disregard for it.

One video game clip showed a character urinating on victims and setting them on fire while a narrator made racial comments. Another featured a character gunning down people in church, while another “rewarded” players who reach a certain level with video clips of real topless strippers. Many of the games included bloody beatings or shootings, as well as explicit language.

I honestly want to call that game out as that Jack Thompson game, cause i recall at one point being able to do just that.


Beyond all this nonsense, I'm guessing it's gonna pass and then hit the roadblock known as the industry and finally get shot down, like old times.
There hasn't been any hard evidence leading to anything, just a little brush on the shoulder on both sides.
If the politicians really want to pull something off, sign a deal with the ESRB for an ad (maybe even for a campaign run) and do a PSA.

"The idea behind this is to protect the kids."

Protect the kids from what though. I've said it before and i'll say it again, there is nothing that kids (at least older kids and teenagers) need to be protected from in these games as there is no evidence beyond some extremely weak, inconsistant, incredibly flawed and biased studies that these violent games are actually harmful to kids. Beyond any sort of proven harm, i believe the responsibility falls solely on the shoulders of the parents. Much in the same way it does for religious parents who don't want their kids reading Harry Potter books or atheist, jewish or muslim parents who don't want their children reading the Holy Bible.

@ Josh

"The fact is young children should NOT be playing these games. I’ve heard of children as young as five playing the GTA games and its just absurd."

Yes. I agree. But guess just who it is that buy these games. The kids? Hell no, ain't got the money.

Their parents, that's what. Parents who need something that will shut their kids up and leave mom and dad time to watch their favourite channels.
The fact that the game is overplastered with M - which ironically(not!) stands for Mature - means little to Mr. and Mrs. Don't-Give-A-Shit.

So, with every piece of legislature towards regulating videogames destroyed by this simple fact ALONE, it's time to move on to the whole violence thing.

1.
To date, there is no conclusive evidence of videogames being anything BUT good to a human's mental self.
APA study, anyone? You know, the study a certain lawyer kept bringing up until some time ago. Maybe he read it since then, 'cause it's content explicitly states that a healthy person is NOT affected in any way by ANY form of media. There is no actual murder-teaching, no professional weapons-training. Only a short-term mental stimuli which ultimate results in Nothing.

2.
There has been no shootings to date where there was found substantial evidence for there to have been a link between the shooter(s) and videogames.
In fact, in many of these incidents that were hailed by pro-legislation people and mass-media as "the result of videogames", the culprits had little to no access to videogames themselves.

3.
Even then, every time a bill is supported by politicians ranting about videogame Content, they ironically enough take EVERYTHING out of context.
Like for example the hooker-beating. I can't EVER recall a mission objective in any GTA game being that of patrolling the streets for hookers and beating them up. Machete-cutting and headmash-rumbling? Not even IN the game, not to mention not a rewarding or vital goal...
Also, do I have to mention the SCMRPG-Bully confusion that most political figures suffer from?



While it's true that kids shouldn't be playing a game like GTA - which despite popular belief do NOT turn your kids into zombified killermachines - there is ultimately only one force powerful enough to prevent it.

The Parents.

The Government Can not and Should not attempt to police this area. It is an area both out of reach and off-limits to the Government.

That is Final.

Josh it's not the state's job to keep violent games away from kids who can't handle them, that's the parent's job. I agree that 5 year olds shouldn't be playing GTA and kids probably shouldn't play things like that until thier pre-teen or teenage years(I was 11 when I played GTA3). However when I was in Kindergarten, I was a huge fan of the Mortal Kombat games and was an even bigger fan in first-third grade. I remember going to the Arcade to play MK4 when it was popular in the arcades back in 97-98. Hell I even played Doom when I was only 3. Granted those games weren't nearly as graphic as what we had now but those were the games that were accused of being a bad influence on me and my peers. We all grew up fine and so will all the other underage kids who are currently playing violent games. And comparing violent games to Smokes and Booze is not going to convince anyone. Those are restricted because are potentially harmful substances. And R-rated movies are restricted by law and it's very easy for a minor to get into an R-rated movie without an adult. It's funny how everyone thinks that R-rated movies are completely off-limits to kids when it's so easy to either sneak in or have an older customer buy your ticket.

@Mr. Blond

While i agree with what you're saying, i think Josh was specifically refering to younger children like those in their single digit ages and not teenagers or older children who most likely can handle the games just fine.
As for this bill, well there is just five words that comes to mind, unconstitutional waste of taxpayer's money. That is all.

To Josh and all the others:

What are all these value judgments about that kids shouldn't be playing M-rated games? That completely depends on the individual. You even admitted yourself that you played many a violent game as a kid. We all grew up with Mortal Kombat, Doom, Duke Nukem, Quake...(sure they weren't GTA, but still pretty graphic). Are you saying there is a possibility that the violence will be imitated, because we all pretty much agree that is not the case, and is what a good deal of our argument hinges on. To me, there is no such thing as a game that is not for kids, just certain kids who aren't ready to play certain games.

I always feel like these proceedings are much like going to vegas. The house always has the advantage.

Yes there are horribly games that go simply for shock value, but we also have Ben Stiller or Will Feral release at least one of those types of movies that redefine low brow humor and every year have a atleast 10 actions movies or Horror movies that redefine use of gore and ultra violence that are released on DVD which kids can get much easier then any videogame.

I also feel like showing Postal 2 is the very definition of sterotyping. Yes the Mature rating often deals with games that involve a high level of violence and or sexual/suggestive content. But Postal is all the way at one end of the spectrum. There is the other end where the violence fits for the type of story (Grand Theft Auto) or something like Eternal Darkness where there is violence, but there is also a moving storyline and experience in which it asks questions and also plays with your own expectations.

The only reason game slike Postal and GTA are scary is because of the amazing fact that they reflect who's playing. Postal not so much, but the level of carnage you cause is up to you. GTA is especially scary because while you are a criminal all the extra violence doens't need to be done. YOu don't have to kill random people, cops, or hookers when not on a misison. I also don't think there were any kill hookers mission in any GTA. But wow ain't it a kick that little Timmy likes to do that.

Pretty much I think the whole debate can be simplified with something I heard Adam Sesslar say in a podcast, "Culture isn't symptomatic of its Art, Art is symptomatic of its culture." If you are frightend by the fact that the ultra violent games can captivate the youth so much, you should be asking why to you have a culture that responds so much to that level of violence.

It didn't start with video games, It didn't start with TV, It didn't start with Moives, It didn't start with comic books. Hell at latest it started the with the writen word, but my bet lies on the fact that it started about the same time the first creatures we would call people started to scratch pictures in walls. Violence for so long in the human species has equaled survival. In the current structure of the world and American society we have so many people in charge of our lives and livelyhoods that its become part of the fabric of society that people joke that if they could get away with a single murder they'd kill their boss. We feel tiny, insignficant and threatened. We like to rout for the people who manage through some act manage to shuck the rules of society and take back control and eliminate everyone in their way. Why else woudl films liek the God Father and Scarface be so popular.

Everyone just likes it if its simple. Nobody wants to admit that perhaps the reason their kids have a culutre that likes violence ever so much is because you cheered when Jason's Mother first killed all those teenagers at Camp Crystal Lake, or that your grand kids happen to like GTA because you thought there was nothing wrong when you watched the Lone Ranger and had no trouble with him wasting all those Injins. Life's complicated, kids will see things they shouldn't see, read, or hear at their currnet age. Trying to lock it all up with laws aren't right because it pretty much makes parrents think that they don't have to do anything because government will handle the parrenting for them. You don't like the culutre of violence you need to put it in perspective for the child at each and every step, one child at a time through personal interaction. Ask the questions, try to get them to explain what they saw and what they took from it, and best of all set limits. DVD players, TV's, and Videogames have Parental controls. Even doing that much will limit what they can play and unless you've got a kid who's willing to try at minimum 9999 or you have an very simple password they won't be able to play that copy of GTA no matter how they got it.

Chapter 15. Violent and Sexually Explicit Video Games
...
Sec. 4. A video game retailer who sells, rents, or permits another person to sell or rent a video game that is prepackaged and rated:
(1) M by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board to an individual less than seventeen (17) years of age; or
(2) AO by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board to an individual less than eighteen (18) years of age;
commits a Class B infraction.
Sec. 5. A sales clerk who knowingly or intentionally sells or rents a video game that is prepackaged and rated:
(1) M; or
(2) AO;
by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board to an individual less than eighteen (18) years of age, knowing that the individual is less than eighteen (18) years of age, commits a Class B infraction.




So it's okay for a manager to sell M-games to 17-yr-olds, but not sales associates? Ooookay...

Josh:

Unless the law applies to *ALL* media, it's unconstitutional. Apply it across the board or not at all. Movies, books, games, no exceptions.

Another day, Another Unconstitutional stamp posted.

This is both ridiculous and pathetic.

Here we go again. I m a bit worried that this law will pass because it written like the prohibit of selling cigrettes and alcohol to people not of age. Of course when I was underage I was still able to drink and smoke. And if this law passes well I wouldnt be surprised that other states start writting similar bills. (Although if u want screw with the bill the ESRB just has to change their rating system no longer using M or AO)

Also i dont think there would be a problem if the church shoot out was in mosque to kill terrorist.

hmm didnt they make a game where they kill saddam hussin. And then I bet if a game make made a game to kill president Bush there would be a huge public out cry. Even if the game allowed u to play for both sides.

I been wondering if these politicians have been watching TV lately or have they been snorting coke of some prosititue then beating her to death and taking there money back.

and well next thing u know it will be like that family guy censorship episode where u have government officals following you around and then government officals following the government officals around and so on and so on.

DECLARE WAR ON INCOMPENTENCE

@Josh

While I agree that young children should not be playing games such as Grand theft Auto, I also think that it should not be up to the state to make parental decisions for them, especially in a context as blantantly unconstitutional is this one.

Another tranparent vote-grab from our free speech-hating congressmen.

"You become the character, for better or for worse, (including) kicking (a prostitute) out of a car and then beating her to death. If you think (children) are not playing these games because there’s an ‘M’ on the box, you’re badly mistaken."

I've seen a lot of anti-video game politicians use this question-begging argument, as if it's understood by all that an interactive violent activity is worse than a passive one simply because of the interactive nature. If anything, I'd argue the opposite, since at least in video games (as opposed to movies, music, or whatever other media the post-Tipper Gore political world wants to demonize), the interactive nature provides a release for whatever "sick" fantasies kids may have.

"I am absolutely, totally appalled - first by the content and second that you would bring that kind of filth into this Senate chamber. You ought to be ashamed of yourself."

I, too, am absolutely, totally appalled - first, by the blantant disregard for the First Amendment and second by the notion that these politicians would bring this kind of nanny state rhetoric into the Senate chamber. THEY ought to ashamed, and they ought to stop wasting taxpayer money and unlawful horeshit like this.

You guys are just nitpicking around the issue. And no I'm not trying to flame, please read on. The fact is young children should NOT be playing these games. I've heard of children as young as five playing the GTA games and its just absurd. Its true, some children mature quicker than others. I don't think it would be a stretch to say a child as young as 16 would be able to handle the blood and violence of most M rated games, in most cases no worse than an R-rated movie.

I say this myself having played many a violent video game at a younger age. The real problem is parents just need to pay attention to what the hell their kids are doing.


But still, if parents feel their kids are mentally stable enough to play these types of games they can still go to the store and pick them up themselves.
Now I'll be honest, if I were still under 18 this would piss me off to no end. What an inconvenience (and embarassment!) that I would need my mother to come with me to buy the games that I wanted. But now that I'm older I understand the way the world works, it makes sense. I can tell you I would not want my children playing games like this until they are mentally mature enough. And you can bet your arse I'd be a responsible enough parent to take the five minutes to sit down and talk to them about what they are playing; if not play it with them. Its not much different than needing to be 21 to drink or 18 to buy cigs and see r-rated movies.

In my opinion, this bill doesn't hurt anyone (yet..) but does have the potential too. As was mentioned earlier, the rating system is ran by a third party, possibly making this unconstitutional. Thats the real reason this should make you upset and the bill stopped. Otherwise, it has good potential to keep violent games away from immature children who cannot handle them. Although, I suspect the politican had alterior motives himself other than actually protecting children. Just trying to get some limelight for the next election.

And for the record, yes I work in the video gaming industry.

@ Wolf

If it was RE4, then I don't see why they should be complaining about it. In the game, you go around and kill parasitic terrorists whose plan is to destroy the United States. Unless these politicians hate their country, I think we can all assume they've never played, listened, or seen any of RE4's plot.

The thing with the gunning down of people in the church may be Hitman 2: Silent Assassin. That was one of the most epic church shootouts ever. The last "boss" (if you can call it a boss) dies after getting shot inside a confession booth.

@Jabrwock

Again, it's Postal 2 - at one point you need to go to Church to confess your sins, which you can murder freely in (Which I certainly did not do! Oh, these screenshots? Uh.. research. Yeah.) - but as soon as you get to confessional, it's raided by Al Queida style guys. Carnage ensues!

It's all in the name of fun. Honest!

@Jabrwock

Um...Oh! How about Resident Evil 4! Don't you kill a few in the church? (been a while since I played)

Isn't there a way to somehow discipline politicians for bad behavior?

Hopefully, Hal Halpin is working on a plan...knucklehead politicians need to pay one way or another.