Dissecting U.S. Violent Game Bills 419
Many reactions to last week's violent games bill. Primotech writes "I first heard of California's AB1179 late Friday night. Like most others, who simply shrugged the bill off as inconsequential, my first thought was strikingly indifferent. Beyond the perfunctory glance, however, it becomes evident that this bill brings into focus and, more importantly, actually probes some of the more serious issues facing the industry. Above all else, examining and dissecting the proposal reveals some truly frightening facts." Relatedly, Shodan writes "Hal Halpin, the President of IEMA, today issued a statement in response to California Assembly Bill 1179, which is on the floor to address the issue of violent videogames." Other states are taking their lead from Illinois and California. KymBuchanan writes "I'm sad to say my state is on the bandwagon, and the charge is being lead by Democrats. From the article: 'Michigan Governor Jennifer M. Granholm has announced that she will sign legislation later this week that will make the sale or rental of mature or adult-rated video games to children illegal ... The fine for anyone caught selling a "violent title" ( apparently defined by the bill as real or simulated graphic depictions of physical injuries or physical violence against parties who realistically appear to be human beings) to minors will initially be $5,000, and can go as high as $40,000 ...'"
Free Market versus Black Market: Nanny State (Score:5, Insightful)
My firm belief is that this is the responsibility of the parents, not the State. Parents now have even less involvement in parenting due to these laws. Kids will still get the games.
The margin on video games is thin (5-10%). Adding the cost of policing adds another burden to the retailers, making them less competitive with the e-commerce sites. retail is a huge portion of a local economy, it is a shame to see more regulations on business owners.
Of course, in the long run the State wins: More tax money for enforcement positions and the red tape jobs they add. Added income from fines and penalties.
In the end, the consumers suffer, parents distance themselves more from their responsibility, and the State profits. Not a worthy solution in my opinion.
Why is it ALWAYS about poltics? (Score:3, Insightful)
Er, why is it always about politics with some people? It's not like stupid ideas only come from one political party.... And don't anyone say that it's "always" or "mostly" one party, because it's not.
Stupid ideas are pretty universal.
Anyone that's been out in the real world (particularly the business world we all love to complain about), should know that.
Piracy (Score:5, Insightful)
One man's realistic... (Score:4, Insightful)
Good thing everyone has the same opinion of what's "realistic" in a video game, or this bill would be absurdly vauge.
Re:Free Market versus Black Market: Nanny State (Score:5, Insightful)
This is about taking the parents' ability to blame the video game manufacturers and putting the blame squarly on themselves for NOT BEING PARENTS! The sooner video game companies stop getting sued because stupid parents won't actually be parents and police what their children do, the sooner video game companies can spend less money defending shit like that and start making more games for less money.
It doesn't cost the retailers more, all they have to do is look at the back of the freakin box! And if some 12 year old is trying to buy GTA, well, don't let them! If mom buys it for them, then its mom's fault, not the retailer or the game maker. Mom can't try to cash in on the game company because her child shot someone.
Reguardless of whether or not the kids end up with the games anyway, it will now be the responsibility of the parents, and they won't be able to get out of it anymore. It IS a good thing.
Re:Free Market versus Black Market: Nanny State (Score:5, Insightful)
The article makes a great point. The RIAA gets to oversee music. The MPAA gets to oversee movies. The ESRB is impotent and the goverment must oversee games.
But next it will be music.
Then movies.
Then TV.
And the slope slickens (like that word? I think I invented it). This bugs me for many reasons, but two major one. First, the government shouldn't be in the business of censoring anything some little group doesn't like (once it's law, how long do you think it will be before any violence of any kind against any minority is instant grounds for a banning?). And second, of all the things we see (cursing and sex on network TV, violence, sexualizing of children, anti-religious sentiments, etc.) why is it VIDEO GAMES that we are working on? If the average kid plays 1 hour of video games a day (probably too high), and watches 3 hours of TV (probably too low, much of it "sexy" primetime), and sees 2 big movies a year (violent, "sexy"), and more houses have TVs than video games (for obvious reasons), which medium will have the most effect on kids psyches?
Right. The video games.
PS: Let's just ignore the fact that at the rate we're going video games are about the only place kids can see real conflict (especially in sports) since we wouldn't want to keep score in games or every let anything harm poor Billy or it might hurt his self esteem (until he is 18-21 unless he is a minority, at which point he is in the "real world" and his self-esteem be damned even though he was never taught any coping skills).
Sorry that got a little rant-y.
Okay as long as they apply it to Movies/Tv/Etc. (Score:3, Insightful)
If you realistically portray damaging another human in a movie or television show - you get a $5,000 fine per minor that sees it.
Oh--- what , you mean we've been doing this already for the last 70 years? And before that we did it in plays?
What IS the world coming to?
Re:Stupid Democrats!!! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:A Double Standard? (Score:3, Insightful)
If they did that, it would be CENSORSHIP and they would be thrown out of office. Instead what they are doing is saving innocent kids from their terrible parents^H^H^H evil industry types who are trying to get kids to play sex games and learn how to commit mass murder.
You are against mass murder, aren't you?
If this gets passed, they will say in a year or two that it made a small "dent" but people found ways around the law or turned to other sources of violence (music, TV, movies). So that is when they will add on to the bill (which will be given a cute acronym like K.I.D.D.I.E. or named after a dog that was hit by a car by someone who had played GTA, thus "Spot's Law"). They will make the law more draconian and add new media types.
This will continue until people come to their senses, or the Californian government gets total censorship control over the media. The pendulum swings, it's up to the voters where it stops.
"so what?" (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Some questions (Score:4, Insightful)
Are we going to keep taking away the freedoms of 90% of society to protect the 10% of society from doing themselves in?
And more basically- if I want to bloody risk killing myself doing something risky shouldn't I be allowed to do so?
Violence in Media (Score:5, Insightful)
The issue of violence in video games is fairly devisive as the main portion of law makers are not amongst the demo-graphic of game players. Thus it's far easier to run an anti-video game campaign when your voter base and politcal makeup is on average over 25 years old.
Comicly, somehow everyone has missed the boat in regards to the fact the crime and violence in the US has been on a steady decline since the 70's. How can you argue these games and other mediums (gangster rap, death metal, movies, etc...) are causing increases in violence when the stats clearly show we are becoming less violent as a culture?
Maybe these mediums are serving as an outlet for violent behavior which would otherwise be exerted in the very real world with very real consequences.
Another point it seems many people willfully miss under the guise of free speech and/or desire for games with illicit content, is that there may well be a serious moral, ethical, and social problem associated with content that glorifies and/or encourages anti-social behavior.
This is quite a paradox, crime is on the wane, so its hard to say if these games are causing a problem or helping it. However as an adult who does play GTA and every FPS i could get my hands on, i can definitly say this isnt the type of stuff ill want my children playing. And while many would argue(and i do agree somewhat) that this falls into the realm of parental control and proper parenting, i say that our society has made such parenting increasingly difficult to do.
The average white collar family has TWO working parents who spend 50-60+ hours a week at work and commute another 10+ hours. Blue collar families face similar if not worse conditions leaving less and less time for adequate parental supervision. Maybe the solution is a reduced work week, but i dont think ANY of us believe that will happen in the near future (not to mention the effect on our economy), so in the interim i cant help but support better controls for parents.
Those controls are inadequete and nearly laughably easy to circumvent right now, as such the only moderation available without industry support is through strenuous law. Which puts us directly in the path of free speech.
How do i, as an adult gamer maintain my right to view whatever content i want, and leave the industry free to PRODUCE that content, without endangering the wellfare of my child in todays society? A society where even as a top-tier earner it is difficult for me to keep my child in a safe environment of my choosing.
This is a very serious problem which everyone seems to be avoiding by pointing at each other.
sadly enough it may be DRM is the only dependable solution. Now THATS a scray thought.
Re:Modern Parasites (Score:3, Insightful)
Independent game devs? (Score:5, Insightful)
Your a small independent game shop that decides to forego using a major publishing house to distribute your titles, but rather decide to distribute/sell your video games from your own website. In many ways this could be a smart move since it avoids that whole you putting the majority of effort into making the video game and somebody else pocketing almost all of the profits thing. In any case, after setting up the website and posting a few games online, lets say that one or more 15 year olds gets a hold of his/her parents credit card and buys a couple of games the could be considered 'violent' under this law (e.g. almost any FPS). The kids buy the game even though there is a clear warning on the web site that it should not be purchases by anybody under 18, which of course is a pretty useless deterrent to a 15 year old. Then later, lets say the kids parents find out and decide to go after your company using this law.
Now, for a few sales that brought in $20 to $30, your company has to pay out $5,000 $40,000?!? That's probably going to be a significant chunk of the development budget for your next game. Heck, if you're a one man shop, that might be all of your development budget.
So, it seems like this will pretty much force independent developers to distribute with major publishing houses who can afford to shoulder the liability. Or, even better for the publishing housing, shift that liability over towards the brick and mortar shops that most people buy their video games at.
Re:Free Market versus Black Market: Nanny State (Score:3, Insightful)
Just when you think it is only the republicans attempting to legislate morality you have democrats trying to usurp them. Sad really. Plus you are correct again, the private "blackmarket" sale of games will only sky rocket.
And hello to a fellow anarchocapitalist Mises fan!
Re:Fine by me (Score:2, Insightful)
This is taking away control from parents. In come communities, it is illegal to pubicly punish your kid (read: whip, just a little smack, not beat)
In some communities, if the (public) school recommends your kid is to be put on Ritalin, you have to abide for the best interest of the child. Who the f*k made the school the doctor? The same people pushing this law.
Re:Free Market versus Black Market: Nanny State (Score:2, Insightful)
Society is going to hell, simply because we are constantly encouraged to pass the buck
Example
Little billy shoots up his school -- most people say it's because other kids made fun of poor billy. His parents, who obviously don't give a damn, never noticed that their son was becoming aggressive. It wasn't the video games, directly -- it was the fact that he was using the characters in the games as replacements for his tormentors. Eventually, because he never got any help (and it should have been pretty obvious) he goes and shoots the people at his school
His parents blame the games -- when they should be blaming themselves and those who picked on billy. Kids don't become murderers overnight (usually) -- there are warning signs.
Any responsible adult should put a stop to the things that cause violence -- anything that may sadden or piss a person off.
Re:A Double Standard? (Score:5, Insightful)
If they video game industry had paid better attention to what was going on around them, they could've policed themselves, and the government wouldn't have gotten involved.
Sure there are some bad parents out there who need to pay more attention to their children. But there are also plenty of good parents who do take an interest in what their children are exposed to, but who realize that they can't lord over their children 24/7. Watching a young teenager like a hawk all the time isn't good for the parents or the teen. But neither is throwing all caution to the wind and letting a child do whatever the hell he wants.
The saying goes, it takes a village to raise a child. Most of us don't live in a village anymore, it's impossible to know even a sizable percentage of the people/situations that your children are going to be exposed to. So society creates some laws to make that a little easier to deal with. Most parents don't want the Playstation, the TV, or the internet to raise their kids. They don't want the government to do it either. But they certainly wouldn't mind a little help now and then, and restricting the sale of content deemed mature seems like a pretty reasonable way to help.
Restricting the sale of video games to kids is not the huge travesty of basic human rights that some people want to make it out to be.
But the Public doesn't hear the Slashdot audience (Score:2, Insightful)
Furthermore, the average person has little to no idea about what the video game industry is actually like, and will get all their information from the politicians and the mass media.
Laws WILL be passed to further restrict what can and will be consumed by everyone because there is no large groundswell of slashdot visitors to offset the current loud groups of politicians/mothers/etc.
If we don't want these types of laws to be passed, the only viable answer is to make our voices heard by writing to newspapers, calling into radio stations, writing to the politicians, and so on.
Protesting in online forums, voting in online polls, and so on will do nothing significant because the vast majority of people are not connected, or are so ill-equipped to know about places such as slashdot, or whatever your favourite site is.
Don't just sit at home posting, and agreeing with everyone else online. Get out and make a difference by getting into the media channels which the average person consumes.
Fight the fight on their own territory, because they certainly aren't coming into ours.
Resale? (Score:3, Insightful)
I sure wouldn't want to be hit with a $5,000 fine for pawning my old game off online for $4.99 plus shipping!
Post modern??? (Score:4, Insightful)
"I don't like meddlers and the worst meddler of all, is a meddling man of god." - Shane.
wtf ? (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sad to say my state is on the bandwagon, and the charge is being lead by Democrats. From the article: 'Michigan Governor Jennifer M. Granholm has announced that she will sign legislation later this week that will make the sale or rental of mature or adult-rated video games to children illegal ... The fine for anyone caught selling a "violent title" ( apparently defined by the bill as real or simulated graphic depictions of physical injuries or physical violence against parties who realistically appear to be human beings) to minors will initially be $5,000, and can go as high as $40,000 ...'"
So...basically, your for selling adult rated material to children or I am missing something? Let me guess, your under 18 and your pissed you won't be able to buy the next version of topless titi BMX racing without your mommy's consent.Re:Why is it ALWAYS about poltics? (Score:3, Insightful)
Er, why is it always about politics with some people? It's not like stupid ideas only come from one political party.... And don't anyone say that it's "always" or "mostly" one party, because it's not.
When people hear about stupid censorship like this, there is a tendency to attribute it to the party they don't like, in order to feel better about their own views. Really though, this type of legislation is just as likely to come from conservatives (religious right, "family values") or from liberals (nanny state advocates, "for the childrern").
Re:Free Market versus Black Market: Nanny State (Score:3, Insightful)
- Get modchip for whatever system you are using
- Given the shift of consoles more towards computers this may eventually be just a software hack
- Install modchip
- Download copy of game from your preferred P2P network
- Burn and play restricted game
- ???
- Profit!!!
Though I doubt that even this much trouble will be expended in most cases. Usually little Timmy will just ask his parents for a copy of "Whore Fucking and Killing 12", and they will ignore both the title and boxart while buying it.The other problem I have with laws like this is, it's basically telling parents it's OK to abandon their responsibility. Why should the parent bother when the government will watch over the kids for them? Maybe Aldous Huxley was right, A Brave New World is comming, and parents are going to not only let the government take their kids, the parents are going to drive them down to the collection center.
Now, where's my Soma, dammit!
Re:Nanny State (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Free Market versus Black Market: Nanny State (Score:5, Insightful)
What's wrong with anti-religious sentiments? Religion is a pretty silly thing--really, who still believes in stuff like a guy named Atlas holding up the world? Although many religious people know laugh at this notion, all modern religions are filled with similarly stupid and ridiculous stuff, so I see no reason not to make fun of them. Besides that, religion is to blame for a lot of the misery and suffering in the world, so again, I ask, what's wrong with anti-religious sentiments?
And what's wrong with sex on TV? Sex is something that people do, just like eating, crapping, and farting. Are you going to complain next that TV shows people eating, and this is gross? How about if we only have TV shows about happy robots, so we don't ever have to think about any of those nasty biological things that people have to put up with?
Comment removed (Score:3, Insightful)
Hot Coffee sucks, I go for ICED LATTE! (huh?) (Score:3, Insightful)
My point had nothing to do with underage rights. It isn't the government's job to make decisions about how you raise your kids. They should be devoting their efforts to important things, draining New Orleans, or getting properly organized so they can actually do some good the next time there is a major disaster, not waste time and taxmoney deciding if the latest 'quake' clone qualifies for a mature or adult sticker in walmart.
Re:Hold up there, Captain America (Score:2, Insightful)
Why is it not fine with video games? Retailers have been instructed to adhear to ESRB rules for a long time. Most retailers I have been to do have policies set in place enforce this. Games don't reach the unbelievably graphic horror that hellraiser does. The interactivity in video games does not give the user the ability to torture and mame people that way that is depicted in many movies. If anything the video game in many cases is much cleaner and less violent then the movie industry. But video games are getting attacked, for enforcing moral responsibility the exact same way movies have.
For those people who think this law only makes sense and people should stop complaining about it. Honestly this law does not restrict too much. It only makes a suggestion into a law.(with some legal loopholes) What is scary is the fact that it is taking a step toward what we fear. We don't want the government taking steps to enforce morals on the citizens because it doesn't turn out well. It "could" lead to another prohibition all over again, if people don't get there thoughts heard. You shouldn't have to wait for the government to go too far before you can say that they are heading in the wrong direction.
Re:Why is it ALWAYS about poltics? (Score:3, Insightful)
Legislating victimless crimes pisses me off. So does this idea that the state has the *right* to push its rules on us simply because it sees long-term benefits from doing so, through some convoluted and terribly unproven chain of plausible events. Gay marriage, violent games, the use of encryption as part of hacking
And then they have the audacity to tell us that rebellions, revolutions, wars of independence, etc. are unfair. That those of us who just want to be left alone *must* remain shackled to those who wish to oppress us. Sheesh. It's not like we want our freedoms so we can go around killing people.
Re:Nanny State (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Free Market versus Black Market: Nanny State (Score:3, Insightful)
Second, just because some people claim that Christian mythology is "true" doesn't mean it is. 2000 years ago, if I went around claiming that beliefs in Neptune and Jupiter (the gods, not the planets) were silly, well-respected people would have told me exactly the same thing you just did. Well, how many people now believe these things? None, because they're silly. A couple thousand years from now (hopefully less), people will be saying the same thing about today's mythologies.
For a modern-day example, just look at Hinduism. Most westerners, who also think Ra, Zeus, Odin, and Jupiter are all silly beliefs, would find the Hindu gods similarly silly. I mean come on: a guy who had his head chopped off and replaced it with an elephant head? Sounds like something just as ridiculous as the Greek myths, maybe more so. Yet a billion people in India actually believe this stuff, despite the fact that they have an advanced education system (much more so than the US), advanced technology, etc. Just because we as a species has figured out some advanced technology and learned a fair amount about the universe around us apparently doesn't make us immune to silly beliefs just like what people back in the Stone Age believed.
Re:cost to retailer (Score:3, Insightful)
Infact, less then 30% of all games released a year (I believe it is 24% but not certain) are M rated, compared to more than 50% of all movies (belive that is 54%) are R, the equivlent to the M rated games in the movies.
Actually, I personally know of more complaints with the MPAA ratings then the ESRB ratings, I work at a Local Video store, and I discourage parents from renting out games to minors that are out of their age range, but I can't enforce it, I can't tell you how many parents allow their kids to rent M Rated games only to go and not let them watch PG-13. I had a friggin' seven year old talking to a friend about how cool Manhunt was, I told his mother that he was trying to rent a very mature game, only to be shrugged off. I then proceded to tell the mother that I personally was discusted with the game and that it is like watching a Faces of Death video, only then did she seem to get my point. Thinking it was over, I walked away, only to be confronted by my boss 10 minutes later on why that customer was upset with me, she thought I had called her parenting into question. My boss then said that she would have given me a warning had she not heard about 2/3 of the five minute conversation.
So if you belive that a store is just likely to stop selling Mature games you are insane, but to say that Mature games are the biggest profit margin, let me ask you what sold more Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, or Madden 2006. Burnout 3 or Punisher. I will tell you that Madden wins hands down, as does Burnout 3. My store manager even told me once "If it has EA as the Publisher I get at least 2 copies if not more, we usually end up making 10 times what we pay on all of their titles." (That was after I reccomended he get some more copies of games that I knew that dorks like me would be into, like Rez, Kotor 2, or even some games that I knew would rent well in my area Juiced, Flat out, MX vs ATV Unleashed.)
Which is worse... (Score:3, Insightful)
For a horror movie, you are right, Hellraiser is a very graphic movie. However, for a kid, I am not sure if it is the worst movie you could show them.
Hellraiser relies on fantasy, to show demons which rend the flesh from those who relish in violence, using chains and hooks - among other things. Some would find it a sensual movie (series) depicting ultimate pain as ultimate pleasure. These things tend to go beyond child-level understanding. That, coupled with the imagery on the box, and the knowledge of what it is about, might at least cause a bit of hesitation on the part of the retailer and/or parent, about whether to sell it or let the child watch it.
But is it really that horrible of a movie? Let's take another movie for instance: Silence of the Lambs. Here is a movie that is almost pure psychologically thrilling, with very little (compared to Hellraiser, at least) in the way of blood or gore. More about the naivete and development of the main character of Clarice Starling, as she battles "evil" in the form of "Buffalo Bill", who is killing young women in a seemingly random fashion, for unknown ends. A man who knocks out and kidnaps his victims, then puts them in a deep hole in the basement of a house, while he goes about his business of killing them in a slow, methodical fashion. In the background, helping both himself and Clarice, is the repulsive and enigmatic former-psychiatrist Hannibal Lector, contained in a special cage, given his crimes of utmost depravity - for which he can give very reasoned, logical explanations as to the whys of, which are, it seems, rather convincing...
Does it help that while Hellraiser is based on pure fantasy, Silence of the Lambs draws from the real life terror that the dude in the house three doors down may be a serial killer? That people just as depraved and indifferent to life as both Hannibal Lector and Buffalo Bill walk around among us, have killed among us, have tortured among us, have made couches and lamps with the skin of their victims - in both the past, and likely the present - and that this is real, and has gone on likely as long as mankind has existed?
Which is more frightening? Hellraiser and its fantasy world, or Silence of the Lambs and its based-on-reality world?
The unfortunate fact is that people will continue to hound on the former and ignore the latter - whether it comes to children or adults watching it. People, for some reason, seem oblivious, and likely frightened, of the fact that the ordinary can easily hide the extraordinary and depraved. That the clown hired to tend to a child's party is actually a serial killer hiding the bodies under his house (J. W. Gacy). That a woman can go on a "rampage" and kill her family and friends for seemingly no reason at all (Lizzy Borden). That a person could stalk and kill prostitutes without provacation (Jack the Ripper). That a respected "Doctor" could so easily lure and kill his victims in a "house" constructed to lull and confuse his victims before he killed them (Dr. H. H. Holmes).
They have numbed themselves to the fact that humans are, at base, animals, and that some of us lack both reason and empathy, and are able to commit these crimes without remorse - and day in, day out - these people exist among us, work among us (and in some cases, over us), live next door to us. That, in my opinion, should be way more frightening than any fantasy depiction of violence...