Calif. Petitions Supreme Court On Violent Video Game Bill 204
eldavojohn writes "You know the drill, violent video game bill struck down because: "We hold that the Act, as presumptively invalid content-based restriction on speech, is subject to strict scrutiny and not the 'variable obscenity' standard from Ginsberg v. New York. Applying strict scrutiny, we hold that the Act violates rights protected by the First Amendment." Well, that didn't satisfy a PhD child psychologist turned Democratic California State Senator named Leland Yee who states in his press release that "California's violent video game law properly seeks to protect children from the harmful effects of excessively violent, interactive video games. I am hopeful that the Supreme Court — which has never heard a case dealing with violent video games — will accept our appeal and assist parents in keeping these harmful video games out of the hands of children. I believe the high court will uphold this law as Constitutional. In fact in Roper v. Simmons, the court agreed we need to treat children differently in the eyes of the law due to brain development." His appeal (in PDF) is here and you can find some industry reactions to the Supreme Court hearing at GamePolitics. Unfortunately Yee seems to be a bit more competent than old Jack Thompson, who is pushing a bill in Louisiana today."
WTF? (Score:5, Interesting)
Where is California going to find the money? (Score:5, Interesting)
Wouldn't it be better to actually spend the money on the children in California, rather than pay lawyers to take this clearly unconstitutional law to the supreme court? What with California's budget woes; you would think they would want to save the money so they don't have to cut as much from education and health care for poor children.
I remember this guy (Score:5, Interesting)
This is the same Leland Yee who has three times been pulled over on suspicion of cruising for prostitutes in San Fran (while holding public office), but never been charged? The same Leland Yee who was arrested for shoplifting in Hawaii, but had all charges dropped without prejudice?
Is it just me, or are those with the biggest axe to grind usually the ones with the most delicious skeletons in the closet?
Re:long of saying.. (Score:3, Interesting)
Why not just pass a law against kids being idiots? Solve a lot more problems that way, and has about the same chances of doing anything as these censorship measures do.
Re:I remember this guy (Score:3, Interesting)
Speaking of axes to grind, until you can produce evidence, the answer to all your questions may as well be "no." Seriously, how is this modded Informative or Insightful? There's not a single link to evidence for these claims. In a quick Google search, I found nothing about Yee being picked up for being a john - though lots to suggest he has fought against prostitution for years - and the only thing about shoplifting was this article [sfgate.com] referencing a 1992 incident that appears to have been a big, dumb mistake.
Mods, honestly, why did you mod this up? Do you know something I don't?
Re:Where is California going to find the money? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:I hate that I have to say this cliche comment (Score:5, Interesting)
And not to be pendantic, but it is rather obvious that even the outright banning of guns would not stop people or children from murdering others, and it is my personal convition that it wouldn't even make much of a statistical dent.
unlikely (Score:3, Interesting)
A capital punishment decision that was only 5-4 is going to be extended so far as to justify prior restraint on free expression. In fact - yes, this is a legal argument but it just barely passes the laugh test.
Re:I remember this guy (Score:1, Interesting)
There's not a single link to evidence for these claims.
Really? Try reading the article you linked to. It mentions the suspicion of prostitution stops. You found it, then didn't bother reading it.
referencing a 1992 incident that appears to have been a big, dumb mistake.
Where in the article does it say it was a big dumb mistake? In act, he refuses to explain it. When questioned he instead starts calling his opponent an ass. Here are the facts. He was charged with shoplifting in Hawaii. While awaiting a hearing he left without properly notifying authorities (fled jurisdiction to avoid prosecution) and never returned to face the music. Not sure about Hawaii, but where I'm from, it's quite possible to do jail time for shop lifting, even if only a few months, so I don't want to hear that it's not being a big deal. He's a government official. He should be held to a higher standard, and he obviously has failed to met that standard by this incident alone.