Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Government The Courts Entertainment Games News

California Continues To Push For Violent Game Legislation 167

Posted by Soulskill
from the if-at-first-you-don't-succeed,-you're-probably-california dept.
Back in February, the US Court of Appeals shot down a California law that banned the sale or rental of violent video games to minors. Shortly thereafter, State Senator Leland Yee petitioned the US Supreme Court to review the case. Now, along with California's Psychiatric and Psychological Associations, Yee has filed an amicus curiae brief with Court that elaborates on the reasoning behind the law. Within the brief (PDF) are some interesting quotes: "Parents can read a book, watch a movie or listen to a CD to discern if it is appropriate for their child. These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery. ... Notably, extended play has been observed to depress activity in the frontal cortex of the brain which controls executive thought and function, produces intentionality and the ability to plan sequences of action, and is the seat of self-reflection, discipline and self-control." The video game industry has filed its own amicus brief to dispute Yee's claims.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

California Continues To Push For Violent Game Legislation

Comments Filter:
  • Oh, that's super (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Opportunist (166417) on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:28AM (#28805617)

    California has no other problems right now...

    Oh right, I forgot the contemporary approach to politics. If you have real problems you don't solve them, you distract your people by making up problems where there are none.

    • by ultraexactzz (546422) on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:37AM (#28805673) Journal
      That's all right, apparently the US Supreme Court accepts IOUs.
      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by NickCool (802521)
        "California Continues To Push For Violent Game Legislation".... For a minute I envisioned legislators proposing duels or gladiatorial combat as a new form of government.
        • by mpe (36238)
          "California Continues To Push For Violent Game Legislation".... For a minute I envisioned legislators proposing duels or gladiatorial combat as a new form of government.

          It might make the public more interested in politics :)
    • Re:Oh, that's super (Score:5, Informative)

      by tverbeek (457094) on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:37AM (#28805677) Homepage

      It's one of the oldest political tactics in the book: bread and circuses. [wikipedia.org] (This is one of the circuses.)

    • by Drakkenmensch (1255800) on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:42AM (#28805703)

      Oh right, I forgot the contemporary approach to politics. If you have real problems you don't solve them, you distract your people by making up problems where there are none.

      Where's a state-wide brushfire when you need one?

    • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

      by dfenstrate (202098)

      Legislatures are the problem nowadays. Fact is, effectively governing a country doesn't actually require anything close to the time we allow those guys to meet. They meet anyway, and meddle with our lives and businesses to the detriment of us all.

      Best drive them home, and let them only meet every two years. Then perhaps every three years after a little while.

      Really, let's see how long it takes us to miss them.

      • I think with the current economy, two wars etc etc that it is actually a full time job to run a country.

        Just that nobody is doing it.

        Reminds me of several projects I worked on. Lots of managers drawing up useless docs and sitting in endless meetings. Some idiot demanding you put an ETA on bugs you haven't even seen yet. Lots of excitement about upcoming projects and new potential customers.

        And one poor smug sitting in the basement trying to do all the work.

        But hey, that ain't so bad. I served my time an

        • Running it, yes. Changing laws and inventing new ones to appear busy and working isn't the right way, though. It's flashy and it's something you can point to when it's time for the next election, you can say "look, here's what we did".

          When you just run the country, probably along the laws the former, maybe rival, legislation enacted, it's not your accomplishment. It's theirs. Actually you're doing your opponent a favor, because he can claim "look, we did that 4 years ago and boy, how it did pay off!". Even

      • The "problem" is that, essentially, all the necessary laws are in place (aside of those we'd direly need which we won't get, ever, because it would hurt those that spent the most to buy our legislation). So they're increasingly desperate to justify their existance. Imagine them sitting around four years and essentially doing nothing because, well, there's nothing to be done. No law needs changing. No new laws required.

        How could you justify demanding a reelection? Well, I'd probably vote them in again. They

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by bigbigbison (104532)
      To be fair this law has been working its way through the legal system for years. Since either 2004 or 5 if I recall correctly. It wouldn't make much sense to just quit because the money situation has changed.
      • At the very least it would make sense to postpone it until you got time for this kind of bickering, because that's what it will lead to. You will get a lot of discussion, you will have to meet with lobbying groups, you will have to deal with petitions and (mis)information from both sides, pro and con, and that's something you really have no time for now.

        You have to keep the state from going bankrupt, for crying out loud! Your company is going under and you're discussing whether the "watch your step" signs i

    • by mpe (36238)
      California has no other problems right now...
      Oh right, I forgot the contemporary approach to politics. If you have real problems you don't solve them, you distract your people by making up problems where there are none.


      Just as well California isn't a nation state. Otherwise they'd probably have started at least one war by now...
      • by painehope (580569)

        With what guns exactly?

        I'm from Texas. I can kill someone from California just by looking at them. Thanks for amusing me, though.

    • This is supposed to be a liberal state, but those Democrats in Sac (and in San Francisco, and San Jose) keep passing laws that remove choice from every aspect of our lives.

    • by AP31R0N (723649)

      It's the Law of One Problem at a Time. Governments and scientists can work on exactly one problem at a time. This is why we don't have a cure for cancer... too many people designing cars, looking at stars or looking for cures for viruses. If all of the scientists worked on JUST cancer, we'd have a cure. Likewise with governments, we can't deal with our economy AND health care. We should either fix the banks or fix health care and let the other problem just simmer until the first is resolved. We can't

  • by Joe The Dragon (967727) on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:30AM (#28805627)

    California does not have the cash for a case that will likely end being shot down by the 1st amendment.

    • by elrous0 (869638) *
      Personally, I just love the delightful irony of this bill being signed into law by Arnold Schwarzenegger. What's next, a law against the sexual exploitation of women--championed by Ron Jeremy?
      • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        Ron Jeremy is a vocal feminist supporter and feels that most current pornography is degrading and unacceptable.

    • Really, do you know what their big mistake is. They are using the wrong argument. They should have just said that game violence is obscene by their community standards. Because we all know that obscenity is the one thing that trumphs free speech in the US.

      And in case someone brings it up. Of course, violence on film isn't obscene. It is art according to the same local community standards.

  • by BadAnalogyGuy (945258) <BadAnalogyGuy@gmail.com> on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:30AM (#28805631)

    I hate those little fungus motherfuckers. They make my skin crawl.

    Every time I see one of those pieces of shit, I jump on it until it's fucking smashed and dead.

    I also hate fucking ducks with shells. Those fucking freaks of nature just piss me the hell off. I love to stomp on them and then grab the shells and just wipe mushrooms the fuck out with them.

    Goddamn pipes also freak me out.

  • by tverbeek (457094) on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:31AM (#28805639) Homepage

    After this they'll work on violent legislation dealing with other matters.

  • Heh... (Score:5, Insightful)

    by travdaddy (527149) <travoNO@SPAMlinuxmail.org> on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:41AM (#28805691)
    can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery

    If a kid is smarter than his parents, maybe he should be put in charge of restricting his parent's media content (maybe reality TV, Deal or No Deal, 20/20 are all off limits).
  • Who cares? (Score:4, Informative)

    by maxume (22995) on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:41AM (#28805699)

    Some huge majority of 12 year olds with $300 gaming systems are talking their parents into the $75 game anyway.

    The ones that aren't will play them at their friend's.

  • All bad? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    "Notably, extended play has been observed to depress activity in the frontal cortex of the brain which controls executive thought and function, produces intentionality and the ability to plan sequences of action, and is the seat of self-reflection, discipline and self-control."

    I find this interesting because I grew up playing a lot of computer games (probably too much), yet I was, and am still today, basically the poster boy for self-reflection, discipline and self-control. To a point where it has actually

    • Re:All bad? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Thiez (1281866) on Friday July 24, 2009 @09:22AM (#28806023)

      What does that even mean? 'Depressed activity in the frontal cortex of the brain'. Boohoo. What can we conclude from that? How long does this thing last, how does it affect a person?

      Maybe it simply means someone has become good at the game and no longer needs to think about every single action while playing, like many sports (we'll probably never know since it's hard to scan the brain of someone playing tennis or juggling...). Maybe it means your brain has magically become more efficient and requires less activity to deliver the same quality. Maybe it even means we get dumber, less capable of self-reflection and planning, but only while playing the game.

      The little fact about the brain is completely useless without more information. If 'they' had more information that would suggest these effects are permanent and damaging, they would have included this information, since it supports their point. Since they didn't, we can conclude that there is no reason to believe the changes in the brain are permanent or harmful in any way, but it sure sounds like something creepy and nasty to those who don't think it through.

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by geminidomino (614729) *

        What does that even mean? 'Depressed activity in the frontal cortex of the brain'. Boohoo. What can we conclude from that? How long does this thing last, how does it affect a person?

        Helpful /. Translation: "Staring at a video game screen for ten hours makes your brain 'tired'".

        No shit, sherlock. So does doing calculus for ten hours. OMG Ban teh Mathz Clazzez!

        Pretty sure doing anything "thinky" for many hours at a block is going to have a similar effect.

    • Re: (Score:2, Interesting)

      "Notably, extended play has been observed to depress activity in the frontal cortex of the brain which controls executive thought and function, produces intentionality and the ability to plan sequences of action, and is the seat of self-reflection, discipline and self-control."

      I find this interesting because I grew up playing a lot of computer games (probably too much), yet I was, and am still today, basically the poster boy for self-reflection, discipline and self-control. To a point where it has actually hampered me and I've had to work on diminishing those traits so I can live in a better and more carefree way.

      So if this statement is correct, perhaps computer games was a much needed way for me to take a break from myself, maybe other kids have the same need?

      I'd like to see how video games depress the frontal cortex but tv and movies don't. You pretty much have to actively be thinking and planning to play most video games, I'd expect them to improve these skills. Passive entertainment like tv and movies, not so much.

  • by A. B3ttik (1344591) on Friday July 24, 2009 @08:58AM (#28805811)
    Despite common belief, they DON'T do the same with movies.

    It's not a crime to let a kid into a three-year-old into R-Rated movie, or even to let him buy one. It's just against the rules of the movie union guys. It's actually covered under the First Amendment.

    So why should it be a crime to sell a kid a violent or sexual game?
    • by kellyb9 (954229)
      I'll admit, it's easier to get into an R rated movie as a minor then to rent an M rated game, but I've still been carded in the past. Your statement is simply untrue, or depends on the state from which you are posting.
      • by A. B3ttik (1344591) on Friday July 24, 2009 @10:24AM (#28806721)

        I'll admit, it's easier to get into an R rated movie as a minor then to rent an M rated game, but I've still been carded in the past. Your statement is simply untrue, or depends on the state from which you are posting.

        My statement is _not_ untrue. Re-read it.

        It is not a crime to let a three-year-old into an R-rated movie. Movie theaters restrict kids from their audience, yes, but they do it voluntarily in order to adhere to the system of rules set in place by the MPAA. A theater could theoretically let an unchaperoned group of kindergartners into any R-rated movie they wish right in front of a Cop and not be charged with a crime, since it's not against the law. They may lose their license by the MPAA but, again, let me reiterate: they won't be charged with a CRIME.

        That's why this is completely different from movie ratings. Movie ratings are an industry standard, and there is literally no legal weight behind them. [wikipedia.org] California's attempts to put legal weight behind Video Game ratings will end in failure, just as it did in Freedman v. Maryland. [wikipedia.org]

        • by ukyoCE (106879)

          Not mod points, just wanted to vote you up for getting to the real heart of the matter along with great links backing it up.

        • by Kesch (943326)

          I believe this legislation is also pointless, because all the retailers I know already self-regulate game ratings the same way movie theaters self-regulate as you pointed out.

          This is why these laws are bad. The legislature is unfairly burdening one form of media in contrast to all others.

          Not to mention first amendment rights and the fact that nanny-statery is complete bullshit and needs to be fought at every turn.

      • Not it isn't. In the USA there are NO laws regulating ratings on films. The film industry just like the videogame industry is self-regulating. If you get carded going to a movie it is because the movie theater is enforcing the ratings not the government.
      • No, his statement is entirely true. The movie theatre owner refuses you entry by his own decision to enforce the movie rating, mainly because his distributor will stop selling him movies to show if he doesn't. No law forcing him to deny you entry exists.

      • by Blakey Rat (99501)

        I'll admit, it's easier to get into an R rated movie as a minor then to rent an M rated game, but I've still been carded in the past. Your statement is simply untrue, or depends on the state from which you are posting.

        The MPAA ratings system is *VOLUNTARY*. There's no law compelling the theater to check your ID; they do that voluntarily.

        In fact, in the US, almost all media "censored" has been voluntary:
        * The Explicit Lyrics warning on CDs is RIAA policy, not law
        * The "Comics Code" (when it was in force) was

        • by Blakey Rat (99501)

          Sorry, I did some research and I was wrong. The TV ratings system in the US *is* voluntary-- the V-chip, however, is not.

          So, in short, there's no reason video games should have a mandated ratings system when NO OTHER MEDIA does, and there's no reason novels should have no ratings system at all when all other media has voluntary ones.

  • by OrangeMonkey11 (1553753) on Friday July 24, 2009 @09:00AM (#28805825)
    No one organization out there right now can provide definitive prove that playing âoeviolentâ video games train kids to be killers or desensitizes them from violence. Just because the military uses simulators to train soldiers for combat preparedness; does not mean that FPS game are the simulator training kids to be killers. If this was true every child who ever played FPS or âoeviolenceâ video games would be able to handle a gun like a pro and kill anything that moves without discrimination.
    • by db32 (862117) on Friday July 24, 2009 @10:07AM (#28806535) Journal
      No, you are wrong. With the new "Recoil & Jam" model mice you can train kids to be violent killers. You see...these new mice actually recoil with each shot and can occasionally jam and even will backfire and injure/kill the operator sometimes!

      The hilarious thing about all the people that cry foul about the military training stuff is that I have yet to meet one that has even had a clue about what they do, why they do it, or have even a remote understanding of human behavior. These "murder simulators" have precious little to do with the killing. You can't train people for live fire with a fucking mouse and a monitor. What you CAN train them for is tactics, squad movement, reaction times, perception skills, etc. There is no soldier in the field (and probably never will be) that has not gone through the live fire training or any of the other live combat training stuff. The issue is that it is WAY cheaper and WAY faster to train a lot of those skills through a simulator. The military has been using "violent video games" for LONG time training pilots how to fly without losing valuable jets or any training accidents. No one talks about the lives saved by using these simulators for the initial training.

      What I can't figure out is this whole definition of "violence". There aren't exactly a whole lot of games that could completely avoid the "violent" definition. This is just the D&D panic all over again. If the kids cannot separate reality from fantasy that has more to do with the kid and less to do with the video game. They love to point out "look at all the kids that were violent killers and played lots of FPS games". Well..I bet they also all drank soda too...should we go after Coke and Pepsi for making kids violent? The number of people that play those games and don't go psycho should pretty much show that it isn't the games doing it...but again...no on talks about how many people play them without going nuts. So...I blame Coke and Pepsi!
      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Culture20 (968837)

        I blame Coke and Pepsi!

        I blame American football, rugby, soccer, and any other contact sport. They have more real violence than coke or pepsi, and kids are being indoctrinated earlier and earlier.

        • by db32 (862117) on Friday July 24, 2009 @12:29PM (#28808535) Journal
          In all seriousness I think it is insane to blame anything other than human nature and poor parenting. Kids now are learning these "violent" contact sports at a much older age than what kids used to learn hunting skills. I would put obscene amounts of money that children that learn firearm and hunting safety stuff at a very early age are less likely to engage in violent gun behavior than the kids that are sheltered from the very same.

          These violent outbursts are not from "teaching violence". They are from teaching piss poor conflict resolution skills, or not teaching them at all. It is for thinking stupid shit like "bully free zone" signs will fix a fucking thing. It is from "no bullying contracts" being used to make kids agree to not be bullies. It is from the complete and total lack of adults actually getting involved and acting like adults and putting these little brats in their place. Instead they whine and bitch and moan and hire lawyers and blah blah blah. When all of the adults are acting like whiney children and not taking responsibility for anything how do you expect the children to learn any other behavior?

          Looking back, I am not convinced that a child was ever beaten in the principals office at my gradeschool. But *EVERYONE* sure as hell believed it. Now kids know they can act like little fucking terrors and no one will say a god damned thing to them, and if anyone DOES stop them, their little shithead parents come charging in with stupid lawsuits. The few places the administration DOES step in, it is usually with assinine draconian measures on kids that didn't deserve it and they wind up screwing it up for any administration that WOULD actively get involved in a sane fashion.
        • by Culture20 (968837)
          I should really end with a /joke more often. Sometimes mods are weird.
      • by mpe (36238)
        If the kids cannot separate reality from fantasy that has more to do with the kid and less to do with the video game.

        It isn't only "kids" who have this problem. It isn't unknown for actors to get "love" and "hate" mail because of characters they play.
      • No, you are wrong. With the new "Recoil & Jam" model mice you can train kids to be violent killers. You see...these new mice actually recoil with each shot and can occasionally jam and even will backfire and injure/kill the operator sometimes!

        They are not new. I've had one of these for ages.

    • by kinnell (607819)

      No one organization out there right now can provide definitive prove that playing âoeviolentâ video games train kids to be killers or desensitizes them from violence.

      I'm not sure that's true. The reason the military use shooting simulators is that a large majority of people are psychologically unable to pull the trigger when aiming at another human being, even after extensive shooting range experience. Shooting at images of people is intended to remove this instinct. This is also why targets are shaped as soldiers rather than just concentric circles (which would technically be better for marksmanship training). I'm pretty sure they have plenty of evidence that video

  • california's going broke.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday July 24, 2009 @09:17AM (#28805949)

    Notably, extended play has been observed to depress activity in the frontal cortex of the brain which controls executive thought and function, produces intentionality and the ability to plan sequences of action, and is the seat of self-reflection, discipline and self-control.

    Yeah, that's actually true and what this guy is conveniently leaving out is that it's not permanent. I was reading about this phenomenon on Dr. Daniel Amen's website years ago (and it's NOT just violent video games).

    Essentially, too much intense video gaming for too long makes your brain concentrate too much and you use up all the neurotransmitters that let you concentrate. The result is ADD-like symptoms. Cut back on the video games to reasonable levels and the neuotransmitter levels return to normal because they aren't being depleted.

    So the real message is: too much of anything is bad for you.

    But this Yee dude doesn't bother to say that part.

  • "These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery."
    Yeah. Right. Maybe if you count the full gameplay, or many many game additioned together. I would be hard pressed to find a GAME with 800 hours of gameplay for a single session until "mastery". You would have to add multiple gameplay. Unless somebody spot an er
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by addsalt (985163)

      Yes, but it isn't that sensational to say

      • Listen to a CD : 60 minutes (ave)
      • Watch a movie: 120 minutes (ave)
      • Read a book: 500 minutes (average novel at average reading speeds)
      • Play video game: 600 minutes

      In all reality, 5 minutes in any of these mediums will tell you what the rest of the content will be like.

    • Maybe people who play a LOT of WoW?
    • You are obviously not a Square/Enix fan.

      • Even the Square RPGs can be finished in under 200 hours easily, and for what it's worth they're not really violent. And as one of the previous posters suggested, the violence does not change throughout the course of the game.

    • by Kesch (943326)

      This senator is right! We need to act now and form some kind of a group, or maybe a board. This group will play video games to discover their content, and then it can suggest an appropriate age for the content. Maybe this board can even go further and provide handy key words for the sort of themes that are to be expected in the content.

      Someone has to go on this plan! Parents these don't have time to level all 12 Omega Materia to lvl 255 only to discover that the 115% completion ending is really a gay orgy/s

  • I'm old enough that this wouldn't prevent me from getting whatever game I wanted. Can someone explain what the difference between this and say the laws against selling porno to minors is? If anything it would force parents to be involved (because the parent would have to buy the game) and at least know what their kid has. Sure, kids would find some ways around it (everyone had a friend, who's friend had a playboy when you were 10), but having one barrier between Manhunt and my kid would make me feel a bit m
    • First pornography is a genre and not a medium. A pornographic videogame would be subjected to the same regulations that a pornographic film would be. Under this legislation a violent game would be subjected to different regulations than a violent film.

      In the USA no medium has their ratings enforced by the government. Film ratings are NOT enforced by the government. They are just like the videogame industry in that they are self-enforced. If you get carded going to an R-rated film it is because the th
      • I see your point, and I agree. Games and video (as well as books/magazines or any form of expression I suppose) should all at least be held to the same standard.

        I'm not sure I see how this falls under First Amendment protection? The material isn't being destroyed, and they aren't making it a crime for a minor to have the material, but merely a restriction at the time of purchase.
  • by Xelios (822510)
    Or parents could simply look at the ESRB sticker and know right away what kind of content is in the game. That's why those ratings are there after all.
  • Up to 800 hours of footage??? Other than an MMO, how many games do people play with up to 800 hours of play? Jesus! We're lucky if a game has 8 hours of game play nowadays. 800?? Are you joking!
    • by julesh (229690)

      Reckon I've played 800 hours of Elite. And of Civ I, II and III.

      Don't play many modern games but I'd assume they're similar in terms of replayability?

  • "extended play has been observed to depress activity in the frontal cortex of the brain which controls executive thought and function, produces intentionality and the ability to plan sequences of action, and is the seat of self-reflection, discipline and self-control."

    From this I can only conclude: Senator you must be one hell of a gamer...

  • by tgibbs (83782) on Friday July 24, 2009 @10:29AM (#28806801)

    The reason they are talking about things like brain activity (and no neuroscientist can tell you what patterns of brain activity are good or bad) is they are trying to distract everybody from the fact that as videogames have gotten more realistically violent, real world violence and crime have dropped, and dropped most sharply in the very same demographic of young males that are the biggest consumers of videogames. Of course, that doesn't prove that videogames prevent violence, but it does prove that any hypothetical anti-social effect of videogames must be so small as to be absolutely swamped by other social and economic factors that influence violence and crime.

    • by Kesch (943326)

      I think violence has gone down only because these masses of violent gamers are too busy trying to finish today's 800(sic) hour long video games. In fact, the legislatures do not realize that the only hope they have at this point is to KEEP UP THE SUPPLY OF VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES. If there aren't enough games to play, these violent youth will soon start to wander outside. Before we know it, there will be hordes of mindless acne-scarred teens roaming the streets in bloodthristy packs and employing their deadly k

      • by tgibbs (83782)

        I think violence has gone down only because these masses of violent gamers are too busy trying to finish today's 800(sic) hour long video games.

        While I recognize that you are being facetious, there could be something in what you say. I'm hesitant to infer causality from correlation--as I said, the fall in violent crime may reflect social and economic factors that have nothing to do with games. On the other hand, there may be something in the "idle hands" notion. This is, after all, the reasoning behind the

  • Backyard fences (Score:3, Insightful)

    by toriver (11308) on Friday July 24, 2009 @10:49AM (#28807043)

    I bet they will never push for a law against violent MOVIES, what with Hollywod present in the state. Games, however, are mostly made out-of-state, e.g. Austin TX has a lot of video game companies.

  • by SkyLeach (188871) on Friday July 24, 2009 @11:16AM (#28807425) Homepage

    I have real issue with the federal circuit courts having any say whatever in what California can or cannot ban for sale in their own state. The distribution of authority in the DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC of the United States has been shifting with ever increasing momentum to the federal level.

    I think california is full of insane pollitics, but isn't that their right as a state under the constitution? I don't like my local and regional policies being dictated by californian pollitics and in order to preserve the rights of my own state I am willing to let california have their rights.

    -SL

    • Was that complaining I heard? Well sir, why don't you go with those nice men for some re-Neducation! First you'll feel a slight pinch, then just a wee tickle, but soon everything will seem right as rain! You see, people all over the country - and even the world! - have different needs and problems. The only way to ensure every last one of them gets a fair shake is to collect all the wealth and power at the top, and then fairly and evenly distribute it amongst all the people. It just wouldn't be fair if your
  • I would like to help all the lawmakers out there who would like to pass a law that limits expression (e.g. the ability to sell video games to whoever the all I want). If any of you are reading Slashdot, please read the following helpful instructions.

    The rest of us have decided that free expression is important to us, so we explicitly included that right in our Constitution. That means you can't make a law that limits the expression of U.S. citizens. If you would like to make such a law, you need to ge
  • Parents can read a book, watch a movie or listen to a CD to discern if it is appropriate for their child. These violent video games, on the other hand, can contain up to 800 hours of footage with the most atrocious content often reserved for the highest levels and can be accessed only by advanced players after hours upon hours of progressive mastery

    A person has a certain amount of free time, and they can spend it on one 800-hour game or 400 2-hour movies. If you're a parent and want to check their entertainment in its entirety, you're going to be going through 800 hours of material either way.

If a subordinate asks you a pertinent question, look at him as if he had lost his senses. When he looks down, paraphrase the question back at him.

Working...