California continues effort to limit violent game sales

[Matthew Smith]

The state of California has been trying for years to level consequences against businesses that sell violent video games to minors. The current law (California AB 1179) was established in 2005 and criminalizes the sale or rental of games to minors under the penalty of a $1,000 fine.

The Media Coalition and Electronic Media Association immediately requested an injunction, which was granted. The case made its way through various courts until it finally arrived on the steps of the Ninth Circuit Court in 2008, who ruled the law unconstitutional.

Now the battle is headed to the United States Supreme Court. The state has filed its brief and, as before, argues that the legislation provides a service to parents who want to regulate what their children play. The brief also argues that first amendment protection does not extend to offensively violent material.

The court process is a slow one, so it will be some time until the case is heard and a verdict is reached. As a side note, gamers in California might be interested to know that the state has so far reimbursed the plaintiffs $282,794 in attorney's fees.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/39630-california-continues-effort-to-limit-violent-game-sales.html

 

[aj_the_kidd]

If California can't get rid of porn good luck with violent games.

 

[matrix86]

People should just monitor their kid's activity. If they keep going out and getting violent games, then oh well. You should keep a better watch on them. This is coming from a parent...not some teen trying to defend video games. Watch your kids and quit complaining. Yes, it's impossible to constantly watch them...yes, they'll go behind your back...THEY'RE KIDS! It's what they do. No matter what you do, they'll always find a way to get around the things you say.

 

[Wendig0]

Good call aj_the_kidd.

"The brief also argues that first amendment protection does not extend to offensively violent material." - They will have a hard time defining what is offensive to people, as it is a relative term, and what may offend some people may not come close to offending others. If the supreme court does its job, the state of California will once again take it up the pooper.

 

[treetops]

Just a distraction from there current bad economy.

 

[Richy2k9]

hello ...

humm, remind me of that South Park episode (weapons vs naked kid - who wins!?) LOL ...

I agree Businesses shouldn't sell inappropriate games to kids, but parents should also keep an eye on them, but where there are alternative routes (piracy & copied games from friends + PC or console in kids room), it's a difficult job.

I think it will be better if we control things before the government do take control of what we can or not do.

cheers!

 

[tengeta]

Typical California attitude, if theres a societal problem pass a law then sit back and say its all good again. Modern consoles have the means to stop a M rated game from being played altogether, so even if it is rented to a minor it shouldn't be a problem. This is YET AGAIN the problem of parents who don't want to put any time into actually raising their children.

 

[Guest]

If you dont want your children playing violent video games, try monitoring your kids.

Major Parenting Fail

They will be in your house or a friends house, its not like they nip to the shop to buy a $60 game then go buy a $500 tv, $200 dollar console and go hire a hotel room to play the game in. Try watching your kids you lazy lazy bastards.

 

[windmill007]

Who cares playing violent video games doesn't effect kids. Their upbringing has more to do with how people act. Playing video games in moderation along with physical activities are good for kids. I agree Grand Theft Auto is about as bad as they should let games get but one option I would like is to turn off obscene language. I could see where hearing the f-bomb over and over isn't good for anyone. Why they feel they need excessive obscene language in music, games, and movies is beyond me. The occasional word ok...I have a uncle that swears every other sentence and it gets old very quick.

 

[9Nails]

How many children can drive to the game store and make their own income for which they purchase games? It's the parent's responsibility to raise the child. The state should just keep the roads paved, kids educated and the girls looking hot.

This is a stupid effort and a waste of tax payers dollars.

 

[Eddie_42]

Oh so many naive opinions in this. Its not about parenting, its not about paying attention to your child. Its about creating a law that prevents the sale of a video game that "shows images of humans being maimed, killed or sexually assaulted" to a minor.

go read the original documents "http://www.docstoc.com/docs/484895/Video-Software-Dealers-Association-et-al-v-Schwarzenegger-et-al---58/"

Lil' Johnny cant go to the store and purchase a bottle of Jack Daniels, or the lastest version of Girls_Gone_Wild. Why should he be able to walk down the street to wal-mart/target/game-stop/best buy and purchase a game that has been deemed inappropriate for children.

This is not a new concept for our society. There are plenty of regulations designed to keep children safe. Tobacco, Liquor, Pr0n, even a Driver's License.

This law does not prevent any company from making any video game. It is not an infringement on free speech. It is a regulation to prevent a store from selling overly violent video games to minors.

I am a gamer. I know how it feels with all these laws being tossed around. But I also think that this law is good. And the bad wrap its getting is simply a knee jerk reaction by the gaming community.

Lawyer: " we are gonna make a law that happens to involve video games"
Gamer: "OMG WTF HELLZ TO THE NO!!"

 

[Eddie_42]

The above link is the Lawsuit filed.

here is the assembly bill (The actual law): http://www.mediacoalition.org/mediaimages/ab_1179[1].pdf

Its only 3 pages, read it.

 

[PanicX]

Thanks for the link to the legal text Eddie. After reading it, I've got major issues with this law. Section 1 of the Bill claims facts that have never been substantiated.

(a) Exposing minors to depictions of violence in video games, including sexual and heinous violence, makes those minors more likely to experience feelings of aggression, to experience a reduction of activity in the frontal lobes of the brain, and to exhibit violent antisocial or aggressive behavior.
(b) Even minors who do not commit acts of violence psychological suffer harm from prolonged exposure to violent video games.
(c) The state has a compelling interest in preventing violent, aggressive, and antisocial behavior, and in preventing psychological or neurological harm to minors who play violent video games.

Every article about adverse effects of gaming, that I've seen, have never been able to support these claims. The closest I've seen any article claim is that sociopathic children will gravitate to violent games, but does not verify any claims of damage caused by gaming.

Creating laws the based on false premise should be a criminal act.

 

[Eddie_42]

I see your argument, but I counter with this:

Is there proof that watching an adult movie causes a person to become a sex addict or a rapist? There are still restrictions on that.

Does drinking at 12 cause a person to become an alcoholic? There are laws against that.

I do not have the experience to comment on the psychological side of this. I must admit I haven't read/seen anything to the pro or con in quite some time.

I will agree that this law may need an amendment along the lines of "it is the State's belief that..." or removing this section. But I still stand that the law in essence is still a good thing. And that the Courts and lawyers arguing over 'free speech' and 'first amendment' are completely off base and not what this law is about.

 

[Burty117]

Just wondering and since Eddie_42 seems to know a lot about this, how come little Johny can walk into a game shop and buy a violent game? here in the UK usually they ask for a proof of identity (even my mum got stopped once!) so that you cannot buy a particular game without being old enough.

Is that rule different where you come from?

 

[aj_the_kidd]

windmill007 said:
Who cares playing violent video games doesn't effect kids. Their upbringing has more to do with how people act. Playing video games in moderation along with physical activities are good for kids. I agree Grand Theft Auto is about as bad as they should let games get but one option I would like is to turn off obscene language. I could see where hearing the f-bomb over and over isn't good for anyone. Why they feel they need excessive obscene language in music, games, and movies is beyond me. The occasional word ok...I have a uncle that swears every other sentence and it gets old very quick.

Ah so true, playing video games doesn't make people violent and if it does, clearly those people have bigger problems. If anything it desensitizes you.

 

[PanicX]

I see your argument, but I counter with this:

Is there proof that watching an adult movie causes a person to become a sex addict or a rapist? There are still restrictions on that.

Does drinking at 12 cause a person to become an alcoholic? There are laws against that.

There is no correlation with watching pornography and sex addiction or rape. The restrictions censoring pornography stem from an era (early 1900's) which was very sexually repressed. The same era that didn't allow women to vote and enacted segregation on non whites. There's many countries with much less censorship and no ill effects on their childrens minds.

Drinking at any age can lead to alcoholism. There's no laws against being alcoholic. Alcoholism is a dangerous disease that can lead to death, and while it's possible that in small amounts there's possible benefits to drinking alcohol, I haven't ready any studies that promote child drinking.

I also think its absurd that legally at 18 you can enlist in the army and risk your life, but can't drink alcohol until 21.

 

[Eddie_42]

burty117 said:
Just wondering and since Eddie_42 seems to know a lot about this, how come little Johny can walk into a game shop and buy a violent game? here in the UK usually they ask for a proof of identity (even my mum got stopped once!) so that you cannot buy a particular game without being old enough.

Is that rule different where you come from?

Very much different. We have a rating system, but it is viewed as a Guideline for the purchaser. There is nothing to legally enforce it. An individual store could enact a policy to enforce it, but that would likely drive sales away to the big chains that dont (best buy, game stop, walmart etc)

 

[Eddie_42]

PanicX said:

There is no correlation with watching pornography and sex addiction or rape. The restrictions censoring pornography stem from an era (early 1900's) which was very sexually repressed. The same era that didn't allow women to vote and enacted segregation on non whites. There's many countries with much less censorship and no ill effects on their childrens minds.

But there is still a law against it, and its in the interest of protecting children.

Drinking at any age can lead to alcoholism. There's no laws against being alcoholic. Alcoholism is a dangerous disease that can lead to death, and while it's possible that in small amounts there's possible benefits to drinking alcohol, I haven't ready any studies that promote child drinking.

again, there are still laws prohibiting the SALE of liquor to a minor. mom and dad can buy it and give it to the child in the privacy of there own home. No one is stopping that. Same should go for these video games.

I also think its absurd that legally at 18 you can enlist in the army and risk your life, but can't drink alcohol until 21.

I agree, but thats a whole different can of worms.

 

[Eddie_42]

aj_the_kidd said:
If anything it desensitizes you.

thats the problem

 

[PanicX]

But there is still a law against it, and its in the interest of protecting children.

Yes there is a law about this, but I disagree that its in the interest of protecting children. What is it protecting children from exactly? These laws are nothing more than knee jerk reaction to american squeamishness.

again, there are still laws prohibiting the SALE of liquor to a minor. mom and dad can buy it and give it to the child in the privacy of there own home. No one is stopping that. Same should go for these video games.
.

Mom and Dad can definitely NOT give alcohol to a minor. In this country thats child abuse/endangerment. It's the same as going into a liquor store to buy alcohol for a minor. You get caught, you're going to jail. It just happens that its vastly more difficult to get caught at home, as it should be.

 

[Burty117]

eddie_42 said:

burty117 said:
Just wondering and since Eddie_42 seems to know a lot about this, how come little Johny can walk into a game shop and buy a violent game? here in the UK usually they ask for a proof of identity (even my mum got stopped once!) so that you cannot buy a particular game without being old enough.

Is that rule different where you come from?

Very much different. We have a rating system, but it is viewed as a Guideline for the purchaser. There is nothing to legally enforce it. An individual store could enact a policy to enforce it, but that would likely drive sales away to the big chains that dont (best buy, game stop, walmart etc)

Thanks, was just wondering, I didn't realise it was a guidline system, then I guess this law maybe of some use. Although over here is the UK there was been plenty of storys of parents that buy there 12 year old kid GTA anyway, Just because they cry and moan saying that its a "really good game mummy".

 

[Guest]

Hell yes, getting rid of some of the whiny, annoying little kids that plague our online video games? I'm in.

 

[Guest]

eddie_42 just shut up look at the retardeness of most laws designed to "protect children". at the age of 18 a kid can go to war, vote for public officials, be tried as an adult, (and given the death penalty), and yet cannot drink alcohol. it doesn't make sense. if the dang liberals would take the wooden block out of their butts, then none of this would be a problem. it is about parenting because if the kids were watched by their parents and other responsible adults then crime and everything would go down. you say that it's to protect childern. i say BS. you said to prevent stores from selling overly violent games to minors. do you really think if a 40 year old man goes to walmart and buys an M rated game with his son do you really think its for him. but if i bought a pack of cigarettes for someone else it would be illegal. so i ask you look at the hippocracy of most laws designed to "protect children"

 

[RD3SRED]

Now, thats a good move.http://rd3.ca/index.php