Slashdot Log In
NY Governor to Target Violent Video Games
Posted by
ScuttleMonkey
on Wed Apr 18, 2007 11:43 AM
from the answer-to-all-the-worlds-evil-obviously dept.
from the answer-to-all-the-worlds-evil-obviously dept.
NoMoreGuns writes to tell us that Governor Eliot Spitzer is planning to target violent movies and video games in a new bill. "Spitzer said he wants to restrict access to these videos and games by children, similar to motion picture regulations which prohibit youths under 17 from being admitted to R-rated movies without a parent or adult guardian. Under Spitzer's proposal, retailers who sell violent or degrading videos or video games to children contrary to the rating would be sanctioned."
Related Stories
[+]
Games: Manhunt 2 Ban Fallout, Game Rated AO By ESRB 384 comments
In the wake of yesterday's announcement of a UK ban on Manhunt 2 , Rockstar has registered its disappointment at the BBFC's decision. The company simply stated that they 'respect those who have different opinions about the horror genre and videogames as a whole, but we hope they will also consider the opinions of the adult gamers for whom this product is intended.' Meanwhile, here in the US, the ESRB has given the game the dreaded AO rating, for adults only. If you're unfamiliar with this seldom-seen designation, it's essentially the 'kiss of death' for a title at retail; a number of popular videogame outlets refuse to carry titles with that rating. MTV's Stephen Totilo has a lengthy and considered discussion of these proceedings. "For 'Manhunt 2,' signs pointed to the title being both less and more extreme than the first. Gone from press previews were mentions of snuff films and Directors. Instead, a more traditionally violent video game premise: one man's struggle to stay alive in an insane asylum gone mad."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Election time already? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Election time already? (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Election time already? (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Bad headline! (Score:5, Insightful)
I expect that sort of misleading headline from the mainstream press, but Slashdot should really have fixed it.
Re:Bad headline! (Score:5, Insightful)
Movies do not have this regulation. All media or none.
Parent
Re: (Score:2)
What? So I, hypothetically assuming I was 12 for example, could go out and buy Blood-Murder-Death-Sex 3 from my local Blockbuster? I could go ask the nice mister at the counter to take my allowance for Death-Death-Death-And-Blood 7 and he'd do it?
There are already restrictions on buying R rated movies, at least where I live, and the same goes for video games (Already). This is really a non-issue if he means M rated by violent.
Re:Bad headline! (Score:4, Informative)
Parent
Re:Bad headline! (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
I can't be the only one thinking... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Bad headline! (Score:5, Insightful)
It's a matter of local and state laws, not federal laws. There are no federal laws banning the sale of any movies to minors, AFAIK. However, most states have laws regarding the sale of pornography or movies with strong sexual content. Surprisingly, most states do NOT have laws concerning violence.
So what we as a society are saying is that it's okay for kids to see people shooting, stabbing, kick boxing, or whatever else to each other in a violent rage, but HEAVEN FORBID if any minors see NAKED PEOPLE or, worse, two people engaged in a perfectly normal act that is part of our biological survival process as a species. Hmmm, I wonder which would inhibit the development of a child more...?
Parent
Re:Bad headline! (Score:5, Interesting)
Incorrect. The body of law may seem to imply that, but certainly I as a parent don't. And I'm sure most of my fellow parents feel the same way.
Parents should be responsible for their children, not the government.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
A fair amount of them represent the collective will of the small percentage of the people who speak the loudest and most often...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Bad headline! (Score:4, Funny)
I survived seeing lots of bare breasts in German TV ads when I went to Iceland (they show some German channels). I came back unscathed but I did buy a lot of German shampoo for some reason.
Parent
Re:Bad headline! (Score:4, Insightful)
On a side note, does anyone else recall that in the 80s a 14 year old kid had no problems renting R rated movies? I would do it all the time. Only one place I rented at actually required parental permission for kids to rent R rated movies. If mom and dad said it was okay, they would rent them to you.
But then again myself and all my age related peers ARE all psychopathic serial rapists and murderers now due to this very fact.... Damn you Jack Thompson you were right!
Parent
Re:Bad headline! (Score:5, Informative)
Laws prohibiting the sale of indecent materials to minors do exist, but they exist independent of the ratings system, and already fully apply to video games.
Parent
Wouldn't fly here. (Score:3, Insightful)
I think we were talking about the U.S. here. On the whole, Canadians seem to accept a much higher degree of government interference than I think would be acceptable in the U.S. (This may or may not be due to a greater degree of trust in their government, but I'd argue anyone who trusts any government is a fool
Wouldn't say "vast majority." (Score:4, Interesting)
You're right about it being voluntary, but I think you're wrong in saying "the vast majority do not." I can't think of any major theater chain in the U.S. that doesn't enforce the MPAA ratings on movies. If you can find one that doesn't, it's just because the employees are looking the other way, not because of any official policy. I mean, the theater owners have representatives in the MPAA -- they sit on the appeals boards for rating movies. (Go see "This Film Is Not Yet Rated" if you want to know names; it's basically a who's-who of theater ownership.)
Movie rental and sales may be a little more lax, because they're more focused on making a buck. However, the big chains all at least pay lip service to the MPAA ratings, and any difference between policy-as-written and policy-as-enforced (like being lax about the "R" rating, because it would hurt sales too much) is just going to get blamed on the employees.
Parent
The Book Test! (Score:3, Interesting)
Here's a simple test. Would you have this regulation apply to books? Are there some books -- and I'm talking about the kind with just words in them, now, no pictures -- that are not only inappropriate for anyone under the age of 17, but that should be illegal to sell to those under 17?
Here's me, the pimple-faced kid with the cracking voice from The Simpsons, and I'm behind the counter at a bookstore. Lisa walks up with a copy of Tropic of Cancer and
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
You must be new here.
Re:Bad headline! (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:Bad headline! (Score:4, Insightful)
No, he is targeting game stores.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Why crush the head when the throat is such an easy choke point, right Homer?
I don't see the problem with this law (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Kids should not get their hands on these games, but that's the responsibility of the parents. They have the tools.
Correction... (Score:2, Insightful)
Correction... it should read "My Kids should not get their hands on these games, but that's the responsibility of the parents. They have the tools."
When you state that universally "kids" should not get their hands on the games, you validate the idea of creating a law. After all, if it is an absolute truth that "kids" should not get their hands on the games, then the only time the law wo
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I don't see the problem with this law (Score:5, Insightful)
If the law just targets video games, then that is unfair. Other than pornography, there are no laws about content being sold to minors.
Video games, like movies, are voluntarily rated. There is no law to enforce the movie ratings, as far as I am aware, and so there shouldn't be one for video games.
Another poster here said, "All media, or none." And I agree.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Don't tell them now, but comic books no longer carry those stupid "Comics Code Authority" labels advertising their safe-for-children content. Now they have ratings, just like everything else.
Gasp, shock, horror.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
While we're at it... (Score:5, Interesting)
Lets ban children from watching, listening to, or reading the news. There are all kinds of accounts of anti-social behaviors contained in the news. Shouldn't we be "protecting the children" from that too?
Besides, are social problems like school related shootings really being encouraged by video games, or is it possible that massive news coverage plays a larger role? I mean, I take what I see on TV to be a lot more "real" and "possible" than anything I see on a video game.
Here we go again. (Score:5, Informative)
Apparently there was a quote from the group responsible for the bill saying that they would try again. Millions of dollars wasted in 'thinking of the children', when most stores do that anyway.
Let me see if I've got this... (Score:3, Insightful)
The only thing I can see about this bill that might concern people is the definition of violent. If, by that, the bill means M rated then who cares. M rated is supposed to be sold to 17 year olds or older, so now it'll be enforced by law, that's nice. Now then, if by violent the bill intends for all games with violence, with no care to the rating, to be sold to 17 or older then we have a problem, especially since every game has violence except the most absolutely boring arcade games.
That's all I'm concerned about, how is a violent video game defined? I'd presume by the movie part as well that it means M rated but hey, it's politics, they could very well mean to ban all games in one fell swoop.
Re:Let me see if I've got this... (Score:4, Informative)
So, you don't think it could just be a store policy that prompted them to ask for your driver's license? Not all store policies are based on laws, you know. You really should be a bit more sure before you use a phrase like, "I know for a fact..."
Parent
Re:Let me see if I've got this... (Score:5, Interesting)
I know for a fact this is not true. For a writeup of this, see:
http://arstechnica.com/news.ars/post/20070223-891
Video game restrictions, unless if it has something to do with pornography, are voluntary, just like movie restrictions are. Now, mind you, you have to look hard to find someone willing to violate these restrictions, which is why many people mistake this for a law.
Parent
I'm all for it (Score:2, Interesting)
I know a ten year old who was playing GTA San Andreas and thought that the dildo he found in the police station was a purple balloon. He's running around beating people up with it when I walk in and ask him where he found that weapon. Well, I'm still laughing. His mu
"Society" doesn't know best (Score:4, Insightful)
That's why I say fuck the "community." The only person raised by a village was a feral, tribalist, not a civilized human being.
Re: (Score:2)
Parents are too caught up wi
gamestop (Score:3, Insightful)
There are NO regulations on movies in the USA (Score:4, Insightful)
Either way he is an ass.
There are no laws in the USA regulating the sale of any entertainment medium. There are regulations on things like porn, but those are a genre and they are notoriously vague in that at least once a year a comic book store gets busted for selling comic books with drawings of boobs.
If videogames were to be singled out there would have to be a mountain of evidence that shows that they are dangerous to children. No such mountain exists. Therefore, it is just singling out videogames because it is an easy way to look like you are "looking out for families."
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
I know it's too much to expect those here on
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Tycho Brahe said it best (Score:2)
But frankly, I'd be perfectly happy to have things be a bit more European around here, with less tolerance for violence in the media and also less prudish reserve
Wouldn't it be novel... (Score:2, Insightful)
Eliot Spitzer not an ass (Score:4, Informative)
Like many slashdotters, I have an extremely low view of politcians but Spitzer is a good man.
When he was in New York District Attorney's office, he single-handedly ended the Gambino crime family. When he became New York's Attorney General, he showed a great zeal in going after biggest Wall Street firms like Goldman Scahs, JP Morgan that were inflating stock prices and giving biased investment advice to customers. He did it inspite of a great deal of pressure. Then, he went after music companies practising "payola" schemes to get their songs played on radio. He didnt even spare huge insurance companies like AIG and chip manufacturers practicing price-fixing and other fraud.
Even in the current case, he is NOT against violent video games. He is just against the SALE of mature-rated video games to minors. This is no different than preventing minors from purchasing tickets to R-rated movies
It's about time! (Score:3, Funny)
Attn: Developers - New Game Idea (Score:4, Interesting)
In this game, you should get points for:
humiliating and ostracizing people who are different from you,
evading taxes by exploiting questionable tax breaks,
using barely legal accounting practices,
manipulating other people's emotions for political objectives,
taking campaign contributions that create conflicts of interest,
and suing people under immoral circumstances for profit.
Personally, I'd rather kids pretend to shoot people.
Re:Fine, sanction the retailers... (Score:4, Interesting)
Make it illegal for retailers to provide the game to kids. That way, when the kid gets it from his inept, irresponsible, moronic parents, and actually *does* do something he saw in the game (probability dictates some retarded insane person is going to do it eventually, and you *know* what the media is going to focus on instead of them being retarded and/or insane), then the game companies and the publishers and the retailers can all say "look, the game says Adults Only, but that kids' parents got it for him, so they are obviously to blame." It will all be on mommy and daddy's shoulders then, and they won't have a leg to stand on.
That wont' stop the media from blaming video games entirely, of course, but it still weakens their argument.
Parent
Re:Fine, sanction the retailers... (Score:5, Interesting)
As the saying goes, "you can't legislate stupidity." Parents are increasingly irresponsible and clueless when it comes to what their children say and do. We're having trouble with my 10-year-old stepson because he feels we're being unfair because we won't let him have games rated T-for-Teen, or have his own cell phone. He rails at us because we won't simply let him go where he wants, when he wants, and we won't continuously feed his bad habits. He constantly tells us how "other kids' parents don't do this," to which my standard reply is "I don't care what other parents do." And I don't, because I see how other parents let their children push them around, guilt them into buying them things, browbeat them when they don't get what they want. And these people cave in!
But again, that's what they decide to do. Parents will do stupid things and while you can make those things illegal, you can't make people not do them. Parents have to decide for themselves that buying these games for their children are a bad idea.
Parent