Glad that these types of bill's are seeing the same fate around the country. But what I liked the best was this line at the end of the article.

Quote: "At the end of the day, it’s up to parents to oversee and guide their child’s activity in the home. "

Yet it's amazing how few parents (at least from my experience) are willing to even attempt that. There are many that don't even know what the rating system is for. Or care that their child wants some M rated game. They simply seem to let them have it because it'll keep them quiet.

Sorry, got a bit off track there.

opps, should have concluded: "but it would at least help if the media and the politicians, at a minimum, had to read up on the facts before spouting their views that such things as the anti-videogame laws are intended to "protect the kids". Yes, this report wasn't as bad as most, but coming out with a slap for those supporting the law when (or before) they did so would be nice, or politicians brave enough to reveal that the law doesn't achieve that and is unconstitutional."

"It’s easy to see why the bill was so popular — who isn’t for “protecting kids”?"

This is the first mainstream article I have seen which seems to have cottoned on to the fact that "for the children!" is the easiest thing a politician can put forward to get easy support and voter interest. It's a shame that so many motions and policies that are put forward as "for the children" end up being stupid and useless like this, and the only reason they are made in the first place is for that easy soccer mom vote.

"But while many video games are indeed loathsome,"
Loathsome is a pretty harsh word. Inapporopriate for children might have been a better phrase in my opinion, but his next point makes up for it.

"we worry about what products would be next on the banned list."
If violent video games got banned, it's a small jump to movies, literature, music, etc.

"At the end of the day, it’s up to parents to oversee and guide their child’s activity in the home. "
Just what we have been saying all along. There are many works of literature, theatre and cinema that are regarded as classics and enjoyed by adults everywhere but are not appropriate for children. Where are the politicians going after these? It IS a parents responsibility to monitor their child's consumption of media, but unfortunately it's a lot easier for a politician to blame the video games industry than it is to tell parents what they should be doing.

God I hate politicians. I'm so weary of them pissing away our tax money that could be used in a multitude of constructive ways simply on maintaining their own power.

God Bless America.

Also, we should fight the banned booklist while we're at it.

That's why I always have a copy of Mein Kampf, Huck Finn, and Uncle Tom's Cavern on hand.

"It’s easy to see why the bill was so popular — who isn’t for “protecting kids”? But while many video games are indeed loathsome, we worry about what products would be next on the banned list. At the end of the day, it’s up to parents to oversee and guide their child’s activity in the home."

Other then the whole Loathsome thing, (well in certian cases superman 64) I have been saying this for years, even back in the MK days and I was only 8 when that was going on

Also I think that the banned book list is the stupidest thing in the world. Some of the books that they want banned are the best books in classic literature. Huck Finn does more to fight racism than promote it, but they ban it because it depicts racism. Go figure.

@EZK

the argument that a book portraying racism poorly helps end racism isn't old. in fact, it's the same argument they made about All in the Family concerning Archie Bunker's blind prejudices and outspokenness regarding them.

studies done show two things:
1) people who were open-minded already watched the show and saw it as a satire on why one shouldn't be racist.
2) people who were closed-minded bigots used it as further "proof" that they were right.

so in the end, it didn't change anyone's general predisposition.

gg legislators, but in the end, you're just n00bs, as we've told u a billion times

@Anonymous

Sarkozy'll un-ban it soon enough. He's primarily in the Fascist Camp.

LOL

It sounded like a good idea alright, but most bad ideas do when don't think them through.

@ the honoured Anonymous

For me it was PWOT.com, some of the articles there are just wack. *shivers at the memory*

SO DOES TO FRANCE!!

@ our honored /b/rother,

How old were you at the time? I can say that experience shaped a lot of my beliefs in humanity.

Another shock moments were the two (teenagers, around 14, I was 12 or so) guys banging each other in the restrooms when I was a bit late and needed a leak. They were in a stall but the door was open. I took my leak anyway.

And it is high time that the other medias around the place start getting that damn first ammendment expressed.

And really, those laws would be around 10 millions extra police on the far side of completely unenforcable.

*shrugs* Too old to have any real affect I guess *17-18, is 21 now*

I'm not sure if any one moment messed me up come think about, if anything it's my... unique personality. But that's no surprised given my autism.

@ Everyone who's taken part in my 'ban' discussion

I feel that nothing should be banned. Ever.

Banning anything makes it too easy to ban something else, and before you know it we're all goose-stepping to the same beat.

@ Austin Lewis

Perhaps. The problem is there are things out there which genuinely are dangerous, and should not be in the hands of anyone, let alone children. *thinks of the more harmful narcotics as an example* The problem is finding out how to restrict the access to them; and how to separate the stuff that is dangerous from the stuff that looks dangerous because it's not something you're used to but isn't.

"Radicals are only dangerous when you try to suppress them. The trick is to find ways to use them." ~Leto II, God Emperor of Dune

AND Stoned xD xD

@Internet Hate Machine

I can't speak for him for sure, but I think AL was talking about forms of speech and expression, not things like drugs or guns.

When you're dealing with something like a book and it's banned, it's not being done so because the paper is made of some weird substance that could easily sever someone's finger if they weren't careful or anything, it's because someone in power doesn't like the ideas expressed in the book.

See, I like this guy, he doesnt like games, calls some loathsome, but is willing to defend them for free speech.

The mark of a man who believes in freedom.


I think it was neitzche, or attributed to neizche (sp?) who said "I despise everything you have to say but I will give my life defending your right to say it"

It's still going to give them support where they want it, so most likely they don't care...

@ Austin Lewis

'Uncle Tom’s Cavern' :) now that is a book i'll have to read!
I certainly agree with the sentiment that literature (thought) cannot and should not be banned. The only caviot to that would be to technical materials. While Mein Kampf should be allowed, I could see a reasonable restriction on books giving instructions to make explosives or other weapons.