Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Games Government Entertainment Politics

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 ...'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Dissecting U.S. Violent Game Bills

Comments Filter:
  • Modern Parasites (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @05:57PM (#13551419)
    I plucked this quote out of someone's sig, but it seems appropriate:
     
    "The problem with 'post-modern' society is there are too many people with nothing meaningful to do, building 'careers' around controlling the lives of others and generally making social nuisances of themselves. They justify their meddling by discovering social 'problems' and getting the media to magnify them out of all proportion."

    -Graham Strachan
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @06:03PM (#13551476)
    Violence in America is much greater than violence in Japan and Europe simply because the degree of competition in America is much greater than the degree of competition in the other 2 places.

    Violence is a degenerate form of competition. Imagine that degrees of competition are rated from 0 to 10. 10 indicates degenerate, extreme competition: violence via rape, murder, etc. 10 means "I want 'it' now. Society be damned." Then, we plot the number of Americans exhibiting each of the 11 degrees of violence: 0 to 10. We have a Gaussian curve.

    Do the same graph for Japan and Europe.

    In American society, the sublimal message in the culture is "Compete to win. Free enterprise. Yeah!". This message shifts the Gaussian curve to the right.

    In Japan and Europe, the societies are more paternalistic. Europe is effectively a socialist economy with cradle-to-grave entitlements. Japan is also socialist, but its socialism is not mandated by the state. Rather, Japanese culture is socialist. Firing and laying off employees is very difficult in Japan, and Japanese banks are notorious for funding bankrupt companies just to provide a wage or salary to their employees.

    Which society is better? You make the call.

  • A Double Standard? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by SirChive ( 229195 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @06:03PM (#13551478)
    Do any of these bills propose equal penalties for people who show violent movies or tv shows to kids? How about violent comic books or novels?

    No? Didn't think so. Harsh penalties are reserved for computer games because anything with the word "computer" in it scares and confuses the authorities.
  • realistic humans? (Score:3, Interesting)

    by phriedom ( 561200 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @06:03PM (#13551483)
    "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'

    So if a rational person judges that NPC "people" in the game are not realistic human beings? I mean, nobody actually thinks a real person is being injured when I run over a San Andreas pedestrian right? So that isn't realistic to me. But if they are alien zombies or Combine soldiers, will it still be okay? I guess all of next years games will feature aliens, 'cuz aliens don't vote.
  • Some questions (Score:5, Interesting)

    by fuzzy12345 ( 745891 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @06:09PM (#13551543)
    No matter what the measure -- gun control, banning/regulating violent videogames/movies/TV/comic books, punitive sentencing laws etcetera -- there's always someone arguing passionately against it.

    I firmly believe that there are some people whose morality and upbringing inoculates them against committing violent acts, some who would do it regardless, and some who are borderline cases, for whom the constant diet of violence on TV and in video games (and, who knows, in their real life surroundings) is just the push they need.

    Do people who are against video game regulation consider the level of violence in the US acceptable? If not, what do they see as the causes of America's very high (relative to other "first world" or developed nations) rates of violence, and what do they propose to do about it?

  • by dada21 ( 163177 ) * <adam.dada@gmail.com> on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @06:40PM (#13551839) Homepage Journal
    I first read your post and sort of agreed.

    Then I realized my parent post already dismissed your opinions, at least in my opinion.

    First, this law won't make parents more responsible. Will Little Johnny ask mom to buy the game, or ask Big Brother Billy or Older Friend Paul?

    I do t ink this bill adds overhead to businesses that can't absorb the cost. Retailers now need to police games better out of Hot Coffee fears. They need to take register time to check IDs and slow down traffic. They need to police their own employees to make sure they're obeying the legal directives.

    Want to bet the law isn't clearly worded? Hiring a business law lawyer is $300/hour, bet its more in California.

    I can forsee many more added costs the more I ponder.
  • by Gaccm ( 80209 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:09PM (#13552085)
    I agree with your view of Europe, but Japan could be viewed as being more competitive than U.S. In Japan, there are far more suicides than any other first world nation (more than double U.S.). And about 1/4 of these suicides are from "joblesses and bankruptcies." [usatoday.com] You're right in that they don't have much of a "i want it now, society be damned" view, but their view of suicide being acceptable* in the face of economic failure is troubling.

    *I'm not saying the society is pro-suicide, but the people in that society are more likely to think (and act on) the idea than in U.S.
  • by Meagermanx ( 768421 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:12PM (#13552120)
    Nothing's wrong withabsurd levels of violence. Mild sexuality, on the other hand, is completely over the edge. Take GTA:SA. Killing hookers? Who cares. They're immoral wastes of oxygen anyway.
    Exposing little Billy to sexual situations, assuming he has expensive modding hardware and really great technical skills? That's a little out there, don't you think?
    Anyway, I think making Best Buy employees responsible for our nation's youth is a great plan. Parents already dump their kids on the demo machines all afternoon, leaving their supervision up the the clerks and shelf stockers, so this isn't that big of a leap.
  • Re:Post modern??? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Rude Turnip ( 49495 ) <valuation.gmail@com> on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:12PM (#13552121)
    Shaman/monk = life revolves around studying religious experiences and sharing them.

    Priest = Religious beaurocrat = makes up stupid rules that miss the point about religion.

    A slight difference, but one I felt like pointing out.
  • by myowntrueself ( 607117 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:24PM (#13552216)
    "So most games will turn their enemies into robots."

    Interesting, like the 'Samurai Jack' cartoon series where the only thing that ever gets cut up are robots. Pretty sad really. Akira Kurosawa would not be amused.

  • by i_ate_god ( 899684 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @07:56PM (#13552478)
    Lets fight against age restrictions of all kinds.

    R rated movies will be a thing of the past. Porn movies won't have to be hidden in video stores anymore. Alchohol should be sold to 14 year olds for their "my parents are gone" house parties. And one could argue that driving is a form of expression, so driver licenses should be awarded to everyone! Oh, and, age restrictions on bars should be removed as well. Yes, let darwinism take its effect on humanity. So what if a few kids get raped, killed, beaten, or damaged in some sort of way? After all, if they had good parents, none of it would've happened right?

    You are never, ever going to have a society full of perfect parents. It just will not happen, and this is why the government has to step in. This is not going to affect game companies in the least, and no one should worry about Rockstar making a bland and boring GTA as a result.

    It hasn't harmed the movie industry has it? Give it up...
  • RTFA people! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by PhoenixOne ( 674466 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @08:41PM (#13552858)
    I don't care that much if somebody under the age of 18 can't buy GTA without their parent's help. This is the part that scares me:

    "If the bill were to pass, games put on sale in California would need to be rated and labeled by the state government, not the Entertainment Software Rating Board (ESRB)."

    Not only do I doubt the ability of the government to judge what is good and bad for our kids, but this is unfair. Movies and music are not rated by the government; why do they think games need to be? And, when Idaho and Alaska pass their own bills, do I have to submit for a rating from them too?

  • by thc69 ( 98798 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @08:59PM (#13553014) Homepage Journal
    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?
    For more on this concept, read "Camelot 30K" by Robert L Forward. It's about the discovery of an alien race, less technologically advanced than us. They aren't at all bothered by being seen crapping, but mouths and eating are a major taboo.
  • by tmortn ( 630092 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @09:27PM (#13553186) Homepage
    Ummmm how do you know the parent DIDN'T pay attention to the content and decided there was nothing wrong with their kids playing a game? Just because you do not agree with their judgement does not make theirs wrong.

    Cowboys and Indians... theres a game. Kids pretending to kill each other. Not pixels on the screen. Yet most would just poo poo it as quaint and old fashioned. Violent games for kids are nothing new. Tell me would you really rather have your kids out playing a pick up game of tackle football than sitting in the den firing game rocket launchers at game police helicopters? I can assure you which one is more likely to end up with someone getting hurt. And before you say they won't be doing that... take your pick of whatever boys are going to get up to when you shoo them out from in front of the TV. Perhaps Mario will return to the fore but I doubt it.

    Ya know, just about every Child in this world is the result of a man fucking a woman and they ALL came out of some woman's Pussy in a gory bloody violent event with screaming cussing and most likely drugs... hell she may even have been sliced open (Ever seen a fresh cesarian scar?) to bring them free. Sure I could pick differnt language to describe that which was less offensive or harsh... but it would mean the same thing. What is this fear of sex and violence? And what is this fear of kids that play video games are so driven to violence? Hell my theory would be that the more they play the LESS likely they are to be violent and more likely they are to be socially maladjusted geeks that grow up to post a lot on /. I don't know many geeks that get into bar brawls or beat their wives (hell they wish they had one to worship)... but I run into thousands of them online fraggin my ass off gleefully as I do my best to frag em back.

    A lot of the kids I knew that were violent growing up were the ones that DIND'T have video games. And to risk sounding like an elitest snob most of them were of the lower socioeconomic strata, but certainly not all. I knew violent little snots all across the social order with families from all walks of life. But it was more common for poor kids, I suspect because being outwardly violent is something valuable for them to have. Kids were violent little snots before video games ever came around. What a shocker they are violent little snots after video games have come about. And its not the games that make them that way. The violence in games is kinda like sex. IT IS WHAT SELLS. Take em away completely and they will still be violent cruel little snots.

    And if you don't belive me you to are in denial about your child hood. Now take off those rose tinted glasses and recall how kids treat each other behind closed doors. And no I am not talking about you and your buddies that banded together on your own. I am talking about ALL kids you grew up with in general. How your group treated others and how others treated you. How the social peer pressure in schools created monstrous environemnts that most people can't recall in detail if they try.. and most don't care to. There just are not many people that would care to go back through child hood.... WHY ? Cause kids and being a kid sucks. They are ignorant, mean, cruel little bastards and only through years of patient training do they become good socialble little liars that keep a pleasant face on everything like society preffers.

    And yes I agree not ALL kids are such. But most of them are and it has fuck all to do with video games and an awful lot to do with a few million years of evolution to survive in a harsh violent environment. Violence in and of itself is not a bad thing. Many Many good things in this world were accomplished through violence. The cliche example of the over throw of Hitler obviously comes to mind. Does that condone all violence? Certainly not. But I don't see much allowance here for the fact that Violence is a part of our society. I see a mentality of sweep it under the rug... Hide it. At least for the kids... let them keep their illus
  • Comment removed (Score:2, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Tuesday September 13, 2005 @10:43PM (#13553608)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
  • Re:Piracy (Score:3, Interesting)

    by mOdQuArK! ( 87332 ) on Wednesday September 14, 2005 @12:11AM (#13554078)
    Heh - I always thought that combining a balanced-budget amendment with an amendment requiring that the government provide free legal services to _everyone_ (the cost of which would have to be taken into account when writing laws) would probably result in the simplest, easy-to-understand legal system in history, since the government wouldn't be able to afford to keep existing otherwise.

    Of course, I also think that criminals should be allowed to vote, since that provides a valuable form of negative feedback against legislators who try and disenfranchise classes of the population by criminalizing them.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday September 14, 2005 @04:49AM (#13555218)
    My 12 and 9 year old sons compete in GTA:SA. So far I haven't noticed that it affected their real-world behaviour. Killing innocent, nonhostile (although often apparently nonhuman, but "sentient") computer game characters for computer game money (or score points) is something they alreday had seen and did before in other, "benign" games. Those "straw dogs" of computer fantasy worlds are regenerated again and again... like in child games of sides in war, "cops and thiefs", "cowboys and indians"... , no character stays dead forever. I've never heard lawmakers complain or try to forbid bunch of kids to chase each other around playground with plastic toyguns. OTOH, we are not living in "the hood", not living in California, USA, nor America at all, so GTA is as fictional to them as any D&D world, so I can't say that it can do no harm to kids elsewhere. But even so, (computer- , but also any) game is ment to be safe simulation of alternative reality, it is made to satisfy people's curiosity, let them imagine what it would like to be someone else (with short time-of-life expectation), even a criminal. I believe that it is better to satisfy their urge to harm someone in simulation rather than in real world.

    I see bigger problem in noninteractive violence (action movies), where violence is preached, rather then just offered, as it is in games. I mean, you have choice even in GTA to pick your fights only when nescesary and make some sense out of it (i.e. attack only other gangs' members, but no civilians or cops), or you can launch a killing spree. In the movies (and news), you don't. Even when charachters are pictured initialy nonviolent, they "convert to normal" by the end of the story, clearly sending strong message of unavoidability and supreme rightness of violence. The proponents of this are hiding behind good triumphs over evil reason. It somehow makes any nasty thing done in good->evil direction OK, sending yet another message: "If you can make up an excuse for feeling somehow righteous, nothing you do can be wrong, no matter how terrible it is".

    Kudos to Quentin Tarantino, he bravely cut into heart of it in his "Pulp Fiction" and even revealed that particular aspect explicitly. Too bad almost none noticed that unique meta-message, everybody was too excited with action and music (in other words, props).

    Unfortunatly, good and evil are too relative in any individual's mind, paradoxicaly leading to more violent crimes on "wolf" and public support for dangerous and avanturistic international and BigBrother domestic politics on the "sheep" side. I can see even here on /. the devastating mind distorting effect it (or some other source of same indoctrination) has on some people. The same message (violence is good) is comunicated to all of the world, friends and foes alike, making world as a whole more dangerous for everybody.

    Therefore I am not going to censor my kids' games or films, make a big deal out of it, provoke their curiosity and give bad thing an oreol of desirability, but I am always there for them to "ruin the fun" and make authors' intentions clearly explained (look stupid and boring, as they are).

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Working...