California in 2005 made such a law:
California’s law imposes fines of up to $1,000 on retailers that sell violent video games to anyone under 18. To qualify, a game must, as a whole, lack serious literary artistic, political or scientific value for minors.
It was ruled as against the First Amendment, but the Supreme Court reviewed it this year again.
The New York Times wrote an editorial hoping that "the law is unconstitutional" based on the notion video games are a form of free expression. The editorial ends with:
California lawmakers may have been right when they decided that video games in which players kill and maim are not the most socially beneficial form of expression. The Constitution, however, does not require speech to be ideal for it to be protected.
Before I comment I have to give a disclaimer that I am not a game and know very little about them...
ReplyDeleteThere are a few ways to handle something like this. Just like with videos and CDs there are ratings and parental advisories on them that restrict the sale (or are supposed to anyway) to minors. Video games should be they same way. The negative influences of the video games should not be blamed on the retailer or the creator but the the blame should lie with the irresponsible parent who allows the kid the spend countless hours killing virtual people. Free speech should be protected by the federal government but the ultimate decision is with the consumer.
By Alan Bodily
I tend to agree with California on this issue. Parents need to screen things such as violent video games from their children. As a parent I believe that parents have the right to protect their children from some things. We can't hide them from everything but we should have the option to screen them from some things. I believe in freedom of speech and I feel it is very important, but I fail to see how freedom of speech meet is being encrouched upon when an adult is reguired to purchase a video game.
ReplyDeleteDanielle Glenn
I personally find the Video Game law to be an unnecessary measure. The video game industry is already self regulating with the use of the ESRB ratings system. According to this system most video game retailers already restricted sale of violent video games to minors. If a potentinal purchaser is under the suggest age range for the game the child must be with an adult to purchase the game.
ReplyDeleteOn top of that I feel restricting the sale of these games violates the game companies rights laid out by the first amendment. Movies are allowed to continue producing violent content so long as they are rated according to the industry standards, and lets face it Arnold wouldn't be in the place he is today if not for violent movies. So where, you may ask, is the law restricting violent movie sale?
I fear that as a nation we are constructing new laws every day that are essentially taking away our freedoms. At which point is it not the government that should try raising kids and it should be turned back to the parents. When should we start holding parent accountable for being bad parents? Having to make a law like this at all says a lot about the degrading values in the home.
ReplyDeleteI've played video games since I was seven years old. I enjoy them and find that is a decent way to spend my extra time when I have some. Some of my favorite games do have extreme violence in them. I didn't begin to play these games till I was older and was considered an adult. I feel very little effect from the violence in these games. Thinking back on the games I played when I was a kid; they had more influence on me then the games do now. I believe that people and kids alike should be able to play these kinds of games if thats what they choose. I do believe that they have negative effects on the players but it's not the governments responsibility to police that. I believe that the responsibility falls upon the parents of these children. Thats were the judgement should take place.
ReplyDeletei feel that playing violent video games has nothing to do with the behavior of minors. i think it is up to the resposibility of the parent to monitor how much time their children is playing these games and to what age is appropriate for the minor. you dont want your kid to have a violent game dont buy it. but a person like myself who enjoys video games for a while until recently it had no effect on me as a human being today i just enjoyed playing them.
ReplyDeletekeith mcgowen
I agree with the New York Times editorial.
ReplyDeleteVideo games aren't usually beneficial to the development of children, but neither are most of the movies, TV shows, commercials, and magazines they're exposed to. If we limit the content of video games, there's no reason to allow the other types of the media that can be possibly harmful to continue to be shown to kids. If a parent decides a certain video game isn't appropriate for his or her child, that's fine. If the government decides a certain video game is not appropriate for children, that's a violation of free speech.
I don't think that people should care too much about this law. If a person is under 18 they are still considered a child and not an adult. If a parent wants their child to be exposed to these video games than they can buy the game for their child. If they don't want them to be exposed to this game than wouldn't the parent not allow the game in their home anyway if the child was able to buy the game if the law was not enforced? Whatever the law is it is still up to the parents.
ReplyDeleteI agree partially with California on this issue. I feel that violent video games do have a strong influence on youth in society. I do not have kids but I do have a younger brother who plays several different violent video games. He spends many hours playing these games and he enjoys it. Now I don't feel that he is being influenced to be violent by them, but many violent acts from kids have been traced back to playing violent video games. I think a lot of it has to do with the parents controlling how much time is spent on these games and it is their responsibility to make them aware of the difference between real life and playing a game. So no I don't feel that this law should be passed because it is up to the parents to teach their children and to be responsible for what they allow their kids to do.
ReplyDelete- Jordan Cornelison
Why does everything need to be regulated by the government? It's really not their business. They should place their concerns elsewhere. Parents need to step up and decide what is acceptable for their kids to watch...
ReplyDelete--Zeph Davis
I do believe that the California lawmakers are correct in placing some kind of law on the age of when children can buy violent video games, but I think at the age of 18 is a little extreme. It is much like the government placing laws where you cannot see a rated R movie until they're 17. On the other hand even if these laws are set in place, the children will easily gain access to these violent video games through their friends whose parents will willingly buy the games for their children. I also believe that these violent video games are an outlet for children to let their rage out on fictional people rather than real people, such as their classmates. I think they should lower the age of which the kids can buy these games because kids will be exposed to this violence in even PG-13 movies and are old enough to understand that the game is just a fantasy life and should understand that they cannot do these things in real life.
ReplyDelete-Brittany Paddock
I personally think of video games as a waste of time. I have played video games and have gotten bored with them very quickly. I do have a brother who is addicted to video games and has paid the price for it, he has lost jobs and friends because of it. He had to make up his mind on whether or not reality was worth more than video games.
ReplyDeleteI personally don't agree with the Law that California made. Yes some video games are violent and should not be played with by younger children, but that should be looked at by the parents and not the Government. Parents should be the ones who decide whether or not the child should play the games at all.
-Danielle Davis
I think this is not unconstitutional law.Children imitate to do violent action by watching video and some children made serious accident, like rubber, murder, and so on.We need a law for protecting children from violent video game. The most important thing is adult must teach children that video game world is not real world.Children easily misunderstand real and fictional world. So, I htink the prevention act is neccesary among children.
ReplyDeleteby Fumiya Hashizume
I haven't heard of California trying to declare the rating system on movies unconstitutional (maybe they are and I am merely unaware of the fact) I would think if anything, they would be trying to get those taken away since Hollywood Movies bring in a lot of revenue for the state.
ReplyDeleteJust like movies, TV, music, websites, alcohol and tobacco...yes, video games should have limitations as to who can buy them. Yes, a fine should be applied to those who violate and sell to someone of inappropriate age. The kids will still get to partake in all of those things, but only if the parent decides that it is something they want their child doing. It also give kids one more thing to look forward to when they turn 18....I can hear them now..."WooHoo! I turn 18 tomorrow..let's go to the basement and smoke cigarettes while playing that new violent video game...or watch porn...or both! WooHoo!"
I am trying to pose arguments for both sides but ultimately - I think I am just really bias on this topic. I chose California on this one. There are some really disturbing video games out there. Has anybody ever seen the advertisement of the video game with the jester who terrorizes what looks like the town from the Hunchback of Notre Dam. And he just slaughters people.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0PWwBAk-WM&feature=fvw
i think people who actively chose to play games like this one are really disturbed. It makes me sick to my stomach. I think that if minors can't watch particular movies because the content is too 'mature', they shouldn't be able to purchase 'mature' video games like this one and others. I am sure these video games will still filter down to minors through older friends or even parents like R-rated movies. But. I think the laws aren't such a bad idea.
Amanda Hansen
I dont think that this law would really do much. Parents usually have control of what is in their home. So even if this law was put in effect then parents could still buy the game and the kids will play. I dont think that what kids play really have that much of an effect on them. Its called self control
ReplyDeleteI am not a gamer and I do not have kids, but I believe that violent games impair children with respect to their knowledge of what is wrong or right. As a kid, I played very few video games and the ones I played were such as "Mario Kart" and that sort. I think the need of violent killing games to keep a child's interest is ridiculous. I think it only gives kids bad ideas and leads to events such as high school shootings, college shootings, and murders/homicides in general. The Supreme Court has every right to overrule California's law and deem it unconstitutional and messing with freedom of speech. I just believe that personally those kind of games just shouldn't be made...
ReplyDeleteBrenna Oliver
I have mixed feelings about the law, I agree with it, but I can see how people would argue the first ammendment. In my house we dont let our kids watch those kinds of video games or play them, so it wouldnt bother me, but it is important to protect first ammendment rights as well, it should be up to the parents, in my opinion.
ReplyDeleteWhile I agree that media and can have a huge influence on childrean and adults, I think it all comes down to what you are taught when you're not playing these games. If you're tought that they are not real, just games and not real life, then it will have less of an influence than if you are not.
ReplyDeleteAs far as the First Ammendment rights, I think following the ratings system that are already placed on these games would solve the problem...Just don't sell them to kids if the rating is too high. That simple.
Colin Carr