These new bills are always entertaining. California already had one violent video game bill fail to pass based on free speech. Now Leland Yee has resubmitted it with unspecified changes in an attempt to garner support. Anyway it has been changed, it's hypocritical and a joke.
Beyond the fact that it has been stated a million times that retail establishments should NOT be parents and should never be forced to monitor purchases of an 8-year old, why is this bill only geared towards games? What goes through a politician's mind that makes him ignore all the Hollywood action films with body counts equal to that of a game? What about the games based on R-rated movies? Should those movies not go under the same legislation?
Yee claims that "...Such games must also be determined to lack serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value to minors." Right, because the "Rambo" movie trilogy offers so much to a young kid. He lumps games together with alcohol and cigarettes, which is a travesty caused by someone who simply doesnt have a clue what they're talking about, or maybe it's just a guy looking to get his face on TV.
This is such an asinine issue, one that should never enter into a political battle. If they want to make a change, force parents to take an intelligence test before having a baby. Make sure in the text that they can tell the difference between an "E" and "M." Thats all thats required to figure out the ratings system. Obviously a lot of them would fail or this would all be a null issue.
Article comments
1 - Nick Jones
Great, a West Coast Joe Lieberman.
Matt, you are indeed correct about parents who don't supervise their child's purchase (or examine their own) for appropriateness. There's a reason for that "M" rating: it's a warning to parents as to the content of the game. The game developers are doing their part to inform the public, but the public is not holding up their end, prefering to whine about how terrible these games are, after the fact.
This is the same type of scare tactic that Dr. Frederick Wertham used in the Fifties to get comic books banned or restricted by a comics code, saying that comics "caused" juvenile deliquincy. Not only do Yee and Lieberman want face time with the media, they want to curtail the very existence of material meant for adults - one more thing in a long line that includes Fanny Hill, Ulysses, Lady Chatterly's Lover, Naked Lunch, Screw magazine, as well as things that are merely suggestive (in reality or only in their minds), such as Louie, Louie and Wake Up Little Suzy.
Ah, if only the Mayflower had sunk...
2 - Gigi34
I agree wholeheartedly! As a mother of an 11 year old boy, from the beginning of his Playstation stage til now, I, (and notice I said "I"), pay attention to the ratings on games and keep up with new games when they hit the market. He is NOT allowed to rent or buy anything above his rating and he's never taken to a store and just dropped off to purchase anything he wants. What kind of mother would I be if I allowed him to act as an adult when he's not?? The problem lies soley with the parents of a lot of kids who do not want or realize that parenting is A NEVER ENDING JOB, not a burden, to pass onto anything or anyone!!
3 - Alan
Wht r u saying?