Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

June 27, 2011 -

California State Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) issued a statement expressing his disappointment that the Supreme Court of the United States struck down California’s violent videogame law (Brown v. EMA), upholding a previous ruling from the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals that the law was unconstitutional.

Yee points out in his statement that while the decision was 7-2, only five agreed with the lower court's decision, two dissented completely, and two other Justices left the door open for a law that had a narrower focus on videogames. Justices Roberts and Alito said that a law could be more narrowly tailored and Justices Breyer and Thomas believed that California’s law was perfectly acceptable.

“Unfortunately, the majority of the Supreme Court once again put the interests of corporate America before the interests of our children,” said Yee, the author of the bill signed into law in 2005. “As a result of their decision, Wal-Mart and the video game industry will continue to make billions of dollars at the expense of our kids’ mental health and the safety of our community. It is simply wrong that the video game industry can be allowed to put their profit margins over the rights of parents and the well-being of children.”

Yee raised Justice Stephen Breyer who wrote the dissenting opinion.

"Justice Breyer, in his dissenting opinion, clearly understood the need to protect our children from the harmful effects of excessively violent video games and to give parents a tool in raising healthy kids," said Yee.

"While we did not win today, I am certain that this eight year legislative and legal battle has raised the consciousness of this issue for many parents and grandparents, and has forced the video game industry to do a better job at appropriately rating these games," said Yee.

He closed by saying that "every" national medical association agreed with the law he wrote:

"Every major national medical association – including the American Psychological Association, American Psychiatric Association, and the American Academy of Pediatrics – has concluded that exposure to violent video games causes an increase in aggressive behavior, physiological desensitization to violence, and decrease pro-social behavior," said Yee. "Thus, society has a direct, rational and compelling reason in marginally restricting a minor’s access to violent video games."

Of course, society also needs to use the tools already available to them, because they work. Ratings systems like the ESRB, smart phone apps that allow you to use the aforementioned ratings system right in the store while shopping, and parental controls on various consoles to keep kids from playing games that aren't meant for their consumption. We can't let the government raise our kids for us, after all, even when they want to.

Source: Lelland Yee Website

Posted in

Comments

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

"Unfortunately, the majority of the Supreme Court once again put the interests of corporate America before the interests of our children ... As a result of their decision, Wal-Mart and the video game industry will continue to make billions of dollars at the expense of our kids’ mental health and the safety of our community"

Unfortunately, a politician once again used outright lies and well-worn rhetoric to try and win over the public to support his agenda.

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

""Justice Breyer, in his dissenting opinion, clearly understood the need to protect our children from the harmful effects of excessively violent video games and to give parents a tool in raising healthy kids," said Yee."

I've always found it insulting how I'm considered "unhealthy" because I enjoy playing violent video games.

Yee doesn't give a shit for the "parents" or the "children", only his own pathetic agenda. If he cared for the parents then he wouldn't be trying to dictate the way a paren

-- Randi Tastix

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

If they had ruled in his favor he would have had nothing but praise for them, but since some of them dared go against him,, they "put corporate america before our children's well being." Sorry Yee, but you'll have ot actually be a parent, if you actually are one or don't have a nanny to do it for you

 

Plus parents already have that too, It's called the Entertainment Software Ratings Board.

And of course he says every medical association agrees with him, he expects people to take his word.

Won't be surprised if he wastes more money on another attempt agaisnt a group he likely never tired of picking on since high school

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

Again, he mad.

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

yee is an idiot. 

 

 

let him sink into obscurity now, we're done with him.........

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

Amazing that we haven't heard from Jack yet.

---You are likely to be eaten by a Grue.

---You are likely to be eaten by a Grue.

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

You're amazed?  We haven't heard from him in about a year and a half.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

He issued an empty threat against Valve earlier this year.   

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

Do you have a link? I don't remember that. 

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

True, but as far as I know it was just that one letter.  Other than that, I've seen small quotes from him here and there but really, the man's been out of the public eye (the portion he was in, anyway) for a long time.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

True, but this is normally the kind of thing he sends out a mass email about.

---You are likely to be eaten by a Grue.

---You are likely to be eaten by a Grue.

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

Yeah, two years ago.

As I said, Thompson's been very, very quite since trying to sue Facebook.  Sure, he pops up now and then with a small quote or something but I'd actually be surprised if he did put out a press release.

That said, I'd certainly welcome it.  I bet it would be really entertaining.

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

7-2, 5-4 either way Yee, you got slapped down. Get over it.

 

Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

Trick is that 7-2 is much more bullet proof, even with 2 of the 7 "leaving the door open". Only a few lawmakers would try something similar for the next 10 years, and most if not all attemps will be shut down by their peers.

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

Thing is, Scalia and Kennedy in particular won't be around forever. Once Kennedy in particular retires, it's a crapshoot which way the Court will shift in the future. Fortunately, Breyer isn't getting younger either.

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

I'm more worried about Thomas actually... in his disenting statement he didn't even bother to address most of the arguements the game industry presented. He addressed pretty much only one issue; free speech as it regards to minors. He basically would have let the law passed without a second thought. I mean Breyer may be wrong but atleast he addressed all the issues and presented reason (though wrong as they are)... in comparison Thomas seems utterly closed minded an irrational since he did not seem to care about the specifics of the case. I assume this might be why Yee mentioned Breyer but not Thomas

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

Legal analysts are speculating that given good health, Scalia and Kennedy will both be around for at least another ten years.  Stevens retired at 91 and since then he's been even more active. 

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

Yee has them RIGHT WHERE HE WANTS THEM! 

Re: Leland Yee Issues Statement on SCOTUS Ruling

I love that his response to losing is basically the same one Jack Thompsons had when he was disbarred. "Just you wait until I make my comeback!"

 

 

http://www.popularculturegaming.com

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Will we ever get Half-Life 3?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
NeenekoI only got a short way into HL-1, but enjoyed HL-2. Probably because I do not like PC FPS games and HL-2 I got on console.10/02/2014 - 12:28pm
Andrew EisenI have a confession to make: I didn't really care for Half-Life.10/02/2014 - 12:27pm
Papa MidnightI don't think I've used the forums since the Wordpress days.10/02/2014 - 12:13pm
NeenekoI keep forgetting we even have forums.10/02/2014 - 11:48am
ZippyDSMleeA shame we can't have good convos in the forums, seems to me its time to nuke and restart fresh on them.10/02/2014 - 11:45am
Papa MidnightOh, no problem! Just wanted to let you know that it's what we're discussing. By all means, join in!10/02/2014 - 11:36am
E. Zachary KnightNeeneko, No problem. In juicy conversations, key points of discussion get pushed off quickly.10/02/2014 - 11:36am
NeenekoA rather scary censorship. I have known too many people and small companies destroyed by such pressure, so this unnerves me at a pretty personal level.10/02/2014 - 11:36am
NeenekoMy bad, I always have trouble working out what is going on in shoutbox10/02/2014 - 11:34am
Papa MidnightTo a point stated earlier, it very much is a form of indirect censorship. Rather than engage in rhetoric and debate, one side has instead chosen to cut-off opposing viewpoints at the knees and silence them via destroying their means of income.10/02/2014 - 11:28am
Papa MidnightNeeneko: the topic of Intel's dropping of Gamasutra is indeed part of this very ongoing conversation.10/02/2014 - 11:26am
NeenekoThis can't be good... http://games.slashdot.org/story/14/10/02/1558213/intel-drops-gamasutra-sponsorship-over-controversial-editorials10/02/2014 - 11:25am
Andrew EisenAnd there's also the consideration that the fact that a former IGN editor was one of the people who worked on the game's localization may be unknown (although in this specific case, probably not. Drakes been very visible at events IGN covers).10/02/2014 - 11:24am
Papa MidnightAlso, let's face it: people seem to believe that a conflict of interest can yield only positive coverage. Who is to say that Audrey Drake did not leave on bad terms with IGN (with several bridges burned in their wake)? That could yield negative coverage.10/02/2014 - 11:23am
Papa MidnightThat's a fair question, and it's where things get difficult. While Jose Otero may not have any cause to show favor, Jose's editor may, as may the senior editor (and anyone else involved in the process before it reaches publication).10/02/2014 - 11:21am
Andrew EisenWould such disclosure still be required if Fantasy Life were reviewed by Jose Otero, who wasn't hired by IGN until sometime after Drake left?10/02/2014 - 11:19am
Papa MidnightIn that case, a disclosure might be in order. The problem, of course, is applying it on a case-by-case basis; As EZK said, what's the cut-off?10/02/2014 - 11:19am
E. Zachary KnightAndrew, a disclosure would probably be in order as she likely still has a strong relationship with IGN staff. My follow up question would be "What is the statute of limitations on such a requirement?"10/02/2014 - 11:09am
E. Zachary KnightSleaker, my hyperbole was intended to illustrate the difference and similarity between direct censorship and indirect censorship.10/02/2014 - 11:07am
Andrew EisenOpen Question: Former IGN Nintendo editor Audrey Drake now works in the Nintendo Treehouse. Do you think it's important for IGN to disclose this fact in the review of Fantasy Life, a game she worked on? Should IGN recuse itself from reviewing the game?10/02/2014 - 11:07am
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician