Red Cross Debates If Virtual Killing Violates International Humanitarian Law

Ron2K writes in with a story about a Red Cross committee that is debating if people playing war video games should be subject to the same humanitarian laws as people in a real war. Seriously. "With 62 billion kills in Call of Duty: Black Ops alone, a committee of the Red Cross is debating whether the International Humanitarian Law is applicable to online gamers, and if they are violating it. From the committee's site: 'While the Movement works vigorously to promote international humanitarian law worldwide, there is also an audience of approximately 600 million gamers who may be virtually violating International Humanitarian Law. Exactly how video games influence individuals is a hotly debated topic, but for the first time, Movement partners discussed our role and responsibility to take action against violations of this law in video games.' While it's questionable if gamers themselves can be prosecuted for not obeying the Geneva convention, the Red Cross committee's actions seem to be aimed more at game developers — as first person shooters become more realistic, do game developers have an obligation to include humanitarian elements?"

Next thing you know...

[Genda]

In a related scandal, Electronic Arts is being investigated for the use of virtual steroids in its pro sports game line.

Lives saved

[cheebie]

Does this mean I can get a couple of virtual Nobel Peace Prizes for the trillions of e-lives I saved playing Mass Effect?

Re:what a load of

[worip]

Don't forget the books. Stephen King is a mass murdered and must be stopped.

Re:Retarded.

[Chrisq]

1. piss off 30% of the world population

You can manage that just by being American. If you're white and male you probably pissed off a lot of the remaining 70% too.

Re:what a load of

[Chrisq]

Its a bunch of pixels changing color,

That's racist. They should be happy with whatever color they are, and be respected for it.

Re:Somewhat reasonable

[Chatsubo]

Welcome, to EVE online.

Re:Retarded.

[schroedingers_hat]

But you didn't piss off the remaining 1% so everything is golden.

Re:Somewhere, a lawyer is crying.

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe this would be a great selling point for the game? Buy this game, violate international standards of the conduct of war, and make Jack Thompson cry. (Assuming he is capable of such emotions.) Who knows, maybe this is coming up via some vast gaming-wing conspiracy to get the game in the news.

Re:Retarded.

[commlinx]

Anyone remember when they tried to get people to call fish "sea kittens", so that we wouldn't eat them?

Not really, but I might try "hey kitty kitty" as an alternative to a fishing rod and bait in the future.

Thanks for the idea.

Daily Mail should call out to ban this evil game.

[rainmouse]

Ban this game: Its a sick, violent and racist game that cannot be played without a high body count. The whites versus the blacks in this war against race, but the people who make the game decided that whites are superior and must start with an advantage. There is a strong caste social system in the game and players are encouraged to happily send the poor people out to die so that the more wealthy characters are more likely to survive. The sick bastards who play this game never feel remorse with the violence. I tell you, speaking as a mother, this game is making our children into sociopaths. We must ban chess now!

Re:Daily Mail should call out to ban this evil gam

[Troyusrex]

Don't forget the gender bias! The queen is obviously many times more capable than the very limited king but sacrificing her means nothing if the king survives.

Re:Retarded.

[Culture20]

Anyone remember when [peta] tried to get people to call fish "sea kittens", so that we wouldn't eat them?

Yeah, kitten consumption went up 300%

Re:Retarded.

[Anonymous Coward]

But you didn't piss off the remaining 1% so everything is golden.

If you pissed off anything and it's golden, then you're probably dehydrated.

This message was paid for and supported by the Red Cross.