Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
The Courts Government Entertainment Games News Politics

CA Games Bill Stopped 24

Posted by Zonk from the my-fragging-is-free-speech dept.
Gamasutra reports that a Judge has stopped the implementation of the CA Violent Game Bill in its tracks. The Judge in the case cites numerous rulings finding that games and violence are not categorically linked. From the article: "As a direct result of the suit filed by the ESA and VSDA in October regarding the AB1179 law, Judge Whyte wrote that 'games are protected by the First Amendment and that plaintiffs are likely to prevail in their argument that the Act violates the First Amendment.' This is the third initially successful ESA court challenge in recent weeks, following similar events in Illinois earlier in December and another preliminary blocking in Michigan in early November."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

CA Games Bill Stopped More

CA Games Bill Stopped

Comments Filter:

  • Excellent (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Limburgher ( 523006 ) on Thursday December 22, 2005 @07:05PM (#14322947) Homepage Journal
    Score one for the "I like violent viedo games but won't let my kids play them until they're actually old and mature enough" crowd. While I think a lot of the games out these days are crap, I still think any sort of ban is ridiculous. Good parenting is more than sufficient. Use a rating system, fine, but a ban is stupid.

    • Re:Excellent (Score:3, Informative)

      by zaliph ( 939896 )
      Rating systems are voluntarily enforced.

      http://www.mpaa.org/movieratings/about/index.htm [mpaa.org]

      http://www.riaa.com/issues/parents/advisory.asp [riaa.com]

      The major problem with the legislation is that its not necessary. For this to work, all you need to do is convince the retailers to embrace it. For example, any five-year old can legally buy a porno, but any retailer will refuse them, legally.

    • agreed. The only suitable rating system would be requirement of a photo ID proving age over 17, and that is only if they get their way, otherwise I enjoy the way it is. I know before I turned 17, EB games usually would ask my parents if it was appropriate for me to get it.
    • I'm glad to see this got shot down immediately. Kid's access to violence, and what they learn from it, is entirely up to good parenting. Leave the government to worry about things we pay the government to worry about, like counter terrorism, instead of trying to step on our freedom all the time.
  • Anytime the USDA gets involved with gaming content, there is clearly a lot of beef behind the scenes.

    --what??? V...S...D'oh!

  • Splendiferous (Score:3, Insightful)

    by OneWingedgAmer ( 940129 ) on Thursday December 22, 2005 @07:43PM (#14323234)
    Although the ruling doesn't surprise me, I'm glad that the bill never became law. It isn't the government's job to legislate morality. I believe that it is a parent's right to decide what is appropriate for their kids. There is a sufficent rating board in place that can inform any literate parent of the content of the games they purchase for their children; thus, I see no reason for a legal ban, and I see no reason for "concerned parents" to complain.
  • This is one of the few times I've seen US judges support a side based on the constitution. Recently I've notice that we have a bunch of situations where people are claiming it violates the 1st amendment or some other part of the constitution and usually you here nothing after that. It just sort of goes silent and later you learn that whatever was objectional somehow got through.

    See this sort of thing restores a little faith in the court system to recognize this document that is vital to the security of the

  • The value of multiple backups... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Starker_Kull ( 896770 ) on Friday December 23, 2005 @12:43AM (#14324688)
    ...not just two branches of government - three! May not be efficent, but it sure seems a lot safer....
    • I think we'd be a lot safer if we had an off-site backups as well. We had all three backups go up in smoke at the same time when a god damn plane hit the building.

      -
      • Very nicely put - I'm glad SOMEONE caught the seriousness as well as the humor of my remark - but 9-11 was a pretty shocking experience for a country that has been pretty peaceful (well, internally) essentially since the Vietnam War.

        But as to off-site backups, Democracy and a Constitutional form of government is/are a worldwide concept that is thriving in many places, certainly more places than throughout most of history... So in a sense, the off-site backup program has been very successful; it's just that

Slashdot Top Deals

"Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain." -- Karl, as he stepped behind the computer to reboot it, during a FAT

Close