Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Games Government Entertainment Politics

Germany Wants EU to Ban Violent Games 122

FredDC writes "Germany is seeking support among other European countries to ban violent videogames during its EU Presidency, according to Infoworld. In an initiative led by Franco Frattini, the European Justice commissioner, Germany is pushing for restrictions on the sale of games with violent content of any kind, from Half-Life to Star Trek . In the eyes of the EU, gaming and real-world violence is 'linked', and steps should be taken to prevent the purchase of these games by younger people. From the article: 'The German government said it will conduct a study of all the different national rules concerning video games, with a view to setting Union-wide norms. Its initiative makes the prospect of a ban much more likely. Video game violence became a hot political issue in Germany at the end of last year when 18-year-old Sebastian Bosse shot up a high school in Emsdetten, Germany, injuring 37 before fatally turning the gun on himself. Police said Bosse spent most of his waking hours playing Counter-Strike.'" This, just days after two Final Fantasy VII fans were arrested in connection with a series of killings.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Germany Wants EU to Ban Violent Games

Comments Filter:
  • Leave us alone (Score:0, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 17, 2007 @06:25PM (#17654214)
    Fuck off, fuck off, fuck off, fuck off.

    Christ, first WWII and now this. Why does Germany hate the rest of Europe so?
  • Wrong again... (Score:2, Informative)

    by F-3582 ( 996772 ) on Wednesday January 17, 2007 @06:26PM (#17654234)
    They just aim to create EU-wide unified criteria for judging violence in games. Nothing more. It has nothing to do with banning games!
  • Re:Wrong again... (Score:5, Informative)

    by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF ( 813746 ) on Wednesday January 17, 2007 @06:32PM (#17654364)

    They just aim to create EU-wide unified criteria for judging violence in games. Nothing more. It has nothing to do with banning games!

    Slashdot summaries are often misleading interpretations of articles. That is not the case here. From TFA, "The Commission wants to see a combination of outright bans on the most violent games, together with minimum age rules on other titles." If you're asserting the summary is wrong because you read the article, your comment would be fine as the reference is already there. As it is you're making an assertion that contradicts the article. For that you need to provide a real reference if you want anyone to believe you.

  • by LWATCDR ( 28044 ) on Wednesday January 17, 2007 @06:34PM (#17654418) Homepage Journal
    From the article.
    "The Commission also wants to harmonize national rules in the 27 countries in the Union. "Protection of children cannot have borders," Frattini said. The Commission wants to see a combination of outright bans on the most violent games, together with minimum age rules on other titles."

    How does an outright ban have nothing to do with baning games?

  • by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday January 17, 2007 @07:05PM (#17655118)
    The Infoworld article is misleading and wrong (american journalism at work).
    What has been reported in German-language news (see heise: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/83790 [heise.de])
    is simply that steps are being taken to create a central list of banned games in member states.
    This in itself has NO effect on the actual bans or lack thereof.
    The second thing is that the EU justice comissionary wants to (rough quote) "harmonise member state laws" on the matter (or as he refers to it, protection of children). It seems more likely that he means the list can be used by other countries, not that the EU will ban things directly.
  • Correlations... (Score:3, Informative)

    by MaWeiTao ( 908546 ) on Wednesday January 17, 2007 @07:33PM (#17655558)
    This, just days after two Final Fantasy VII fans were arrested in connection with a series of killings.


    Most people are a fan of something. Is the media going to start associating other crimes with the personal interests of those perpetrators? In some cases it may provide some insight but in most cases it does not. I can think of a few things out there more closely related to crime than this and those aren't investigated.

    But I guess this hits closer to home for many people and when was the last time the news media hasn't sensationalized a story to make a few extra dollars?

    There's something very frustrating about government officials getting fixated on non-issues when there are far more serious problems to contend with.
  • by turing_m ( 1030530 ) on Wednesday January 17, 2007 @11:36PM (#17658376)
    "As the country that was host to probably the greatest villain in the twentieth century there is going to be a lot of pressure to condemn things that could ever be even remotely like the horrible things that happened there during WWII."

    The pressure has less to do with hosting the supposed "greatest villain in the twentieth century" and more to do with the fact that Germany was invaded and has since been occupied by foreign troops until the present day. And contrary to what is shown on the "History" Channel about the postwar events - with commentary about the Marshall Plan, Hershey bars and grainy footage of airplanes dropping off bales of cargo - the reality was much more harsh. Over 4 million Germans were used as slave labour by the Allies after the war. This went on for a period longer than the war's duration!

    Meanwhile in Germany after the war in 1945 and 1946, international aid organizations were prevented from sending relief to German civilians. In 1945, the average German civilian received a starvation diet of 1200 calories - in the US and UK occupation zones. In 1946, the average German civilian received 1500 calories, still well below what is considered to be healthy.

    Their press and government were also under strict Allied control.

    THAT is where the pressure to self-flagellate comes from. Germans knew that if they didn't kowtow to their occupiers, their lives would be forfeit. These attitudes got passed down to the next generation.

    Stalin was at least as bad as Hitler ever was. The difference between Russian and German attitudes about their past leaders is that one was occupied by enemies of the prior regime, the other wasn't.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morgenthau_Plan [wikipedia.org]
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eisenhower_and_German _POWs#American_food_policy_in_Germany_shortly_afte r_the_war [wikipedia.org]

I've noticed several design suggestions in your code.

Working...