Connecticut AG backs Game Restriction Laws

[V-Man339]

Rape, nude zombies, and torture? Connecticut AG backs game law

Soon, the Supreme Court will rule on whether it is constitutional to ban the sale of certain video games to children under the age of 18. California's law has only a slim chance of being upheld; in the past nine years, 12 similar laws have been struck down as unconstitutional, with the states then being forced to pay the ESA's court costs. Even with such a strong precedent of games being considered protected speech—just like film and the written word—Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is jumping on the anti-gaming bandwagon with a press release supporting the law.

Reading Blumenthal's press release, it's hard to believe the charges he levels against video games. "The law prohibits children under 18 from buying the most violent games, including those where players decapitate people with shovels, beat police to death while they beg for mercy, and slaughter nude female zombies," the press release states. It gets better.

He points out that all violent games wouldn't be controlled by law, just "a subgenre of games that encourages players to commit graphic acts of homicide, rape, and sadism." Which subgenre is that? Can anyone involved in writing this press release name a single game where rape is encouraged? Can any of you?

Blumenthal also seems sadly ignorant of the state of video games and retail. "In the face of continued industry inaction—enabling unattended children to buy such games—states must preserve their critical right to protect children," he stated.

The problem with Blumenthal's argument is that the industry has not been in a state of inaction, as the ESRB has long assigned ratings to games, giving an accurate idea of the content included in them, and has made serious efforts when it comes to community and parental outreach to make sure the ratings are both understood and used. Chains such as GameStop and even Walmart actively check the ID of customers buying M-rated games.

In 2008 the Federal Trade Commission sent children into stores to try to purchase M-rated games, and the results were heartening: GameStop/EB Games turned away 94 percent of underage shoppers, while Walmart and Best Buy followed closely with an 80 percent turn-away rate.

 

[CptStern]

"beat police to death while they beg for mercy"

what game is this? instant sale if it's on steam

 

[Krynn72]

A law that makes it illegal to sell M rated games to kids under 18? OH THE HUMANITY! WHAT A FOOL THIS MAN IS!

 

[T-6000]

"beat police to death while they beg for mercy"

what game is this? instant sale if it's on steam

You can shoot and beat cops in some games like the Grand Theft Auto series (if you're crazy enough), but they seriously do not beg for mercy. At least in no game that I am aware of.

 

[CptStern]

I have every gta game made. they dont ever cry for mercy ..despite multiple bullet holes in their various appendages

 

[No Limit]

I think this type of thing should be up to the store to decide, not for the state to decide. And I resent the suggestion that I am crazy for beating the shit out of cops in GTA.

 

[V-Man339]

I think this type of thing should be up to the store to decide, not for the state to decide. And I resent the suggestion that I am crazy for beating the shit out of cops in GTA.

They already voluntarily don't sell games to kids, so there is really no point in making this law. It's just that stupid.

 

[No Limit]

Yup

5char

 

[Druckles]

They already voluntarily don't sell games to kids, so there is really no point in making this law. It's just that stupid.

So there's no problem in imposing the law.

 

[Krynn72]

But what if they decide they DO want to sell M rated games to under-aged kids? WHAT ABOUT THEIR FREEDOM?!

 

[No Limit]

But what if they decide they DO want to sell M rated games to under-aged kids? WHAT ABOUT THEIR FREEDOM?!

I don't get your argument. Are you saying we should have a law that prevents retailers from selling M rated games to kids? Not a very radical position, I just don't know what you are arguing.

 

[Druckles]

I think he was being sarcastic...

 

[V-Man339]

They already don't sell M for mature (17+) games to people under the age without permission, voluntarily. This would not only force them to do so, this would force them to move an entire year up along with the fact that it doesn't fix the problem of parents unwittingly buying these games for their kids anyway.
The real problem, as the proposal shows in and of itself, is misinformation and lack of public knowledge on how much games have progressed in areas other than "stomping cops to death."

 

[Mogi67]

lolz, cry moar high schoolers

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

But what if they decide they DO want to sell M rated games to under-aged kids? WHAT ABOUT THEIR FREEDOM?!

Then they should be able to. ESRB is not some deity- it's a group of people who decided in THEIR opinion the game should be M. You make it sound like they're selling them cigarettes or something that can actually cause physical harm to them.

It's the parents responsibility to tell their kids not to play M games or watch R movies. There is no law about buying R rated movies- its voluntary by theatres and rental places. If their reasoning is "the kids will hide it from them" then they have bigger problems than the kid seeing the game that they need to address :upstare:.

 

[V-Man339]

Then they should be able to. ESRB is not some deity- it's a group of people who decided in THEIR opinion the game should be M. You make it sound like they're selling them cigarettes or something that can actually cause physical harm to them.

It's the parents responsibility to tell their kids not to play M games or watch R movies. There is no law about buying R rated movies- its voluntary by theatres and rental places. If their reasoning is "the kids will hide it from them" then they have bigger problems than the kid seeing the game that they need to address :upstare:.

I continue to be amazed by how badly some peoples' sarcasm detectors function.

 

[RakuraiTenjin]

I continue to be amazed by how badly some peoples' sarcasm detectors function.

If you read what I wrote, I was arguing his sarcasm. I understand that he doesn't have a problem with this bill. I think that they should be able to sell to whoever they want and he's mocking that position.

 

[Yuri]

It's funny, the one thing we always agree on in this forum is our collective hatred for stupid scapegoat laws that target video games

 

[Stigmata]

Laws should only come into play when society fails to police itself. In this case, retailers are doing a pretty damn good job of not selling M-rated games to minors, so no law is necessary.

 

[Druckles]

It's funny, the one thing we always agree on in this forum is our collective hatred for stupid scapegoat laws that target video games

I don't see what the huge issue is, though. Because everyone's policing themselves, a law wouldn't make a difference.

What's the point in getting riled over the 'scapegoat law' when there are clearly 'scapegoat morals' already in place?

 

[V-Man339]

I don't see what the huge issue is, though. Because everyone's policing themselves, a law wouldn't make a difference.

What's the point in getting riled over the 'scapegoat law' when there are clearly 'scapegoat morals' already in place?

It would increase the age restriction by a year, and on issues like this it is a tad of a slippery slope.

 

[Krynn72]

I should probably point out that I don't necessarily think this is a good thing, but neither do I think its a bad thing. All I know is that my gut says 'maybe.' My posts were just a response to the reaction of the article, where they're making this out to be some kind of idiotic, hurf durf ignorant on a level that is "hard to believe" plan, when its not really that stupid. Its essentially just making the ESRB an official, enforceable rating system.

 

[Druckles]

Which it is over here. Not the ESRB, obviously, but a similar system.