Judge strikes down violent-game law

[samcurry]

A federal judge on Thursday struck down a Washington state law designed to restrict the sale of violent video games to minors, saying that such restrictions violate free-speech rights, court documents show.

http://zdnet.com.com/2100-1103-5272512.html

Finally a lawmaker that knows reality from games.......

Doug Lowenstein, president of the Entertainment Software Association, which backed the plaintiffs, called the judgment "a pretty sweeping victory."

"Judge Lasnik made it (clear) that games are expressive and are protected under law," Lowenstein said.

 

[Professur]

free speech for kids, eh? Remember the good old days when the parents did stuff like controlling what kids watched on TV, and did in the back yard, and said, and stuff. Man were they ever lame.

 

[Gato_Solo]

free speech for kids, eh? Remember the good old days when the parents did stuff like controlling what kids watched on TV, and did in the back yard, and said, and stuff. Man were they ever lame.

I still don't understand why parents, in general, today have so many problems with what their child watches, or plays, on TV. Don't they have enough backbone to do things like toss out games they don't approve of, or change the channel their child is watching? Working is not an excuse, either. Don't they want to be a part of their children's lives anymore? What a world we are becoming, when we try to get the government to do what we, as parents, should be doing...

 

[PowerballWinner]

But what the legislators could do is pass a law saying that people who sell violent video games to minors won't be allowed to have police protection letting shoplifters, burglars, and robbers to legally burglarize, shoplift, and rob from such stores.

 

[Gonz]

Everybody is entitled to equal protection under the law.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

But what the legislators could do is pass a law saying that people who sell violent video games to minors won't be allowed to have police protection letting shoplifters, burglars, and robbers to legally burglarize, shoplift, and rob from such stores.

HaHa Ha HaHa Ha Snort. Yeah, and what if they pased law that: people who make games with aliens have to protect the world if aliens really attack? Or a law that kids that play learning games can't go to public school. (because they are tainted). Maybe another law that people who steal software must post thier their banking infomation online and keep their doors unlocked when their not home.

What planet are you from? I hope you came with a manual, because I really don't understand how you come to that conclusion.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Everybody is entitled to equal protection under the law.

. . . "some animals are more equal then others", and the Democrats are those animals

 

[Gato_Solo]

But what the legislators could do is pass a law saying that people who sell violent video games to minors won't be allowed to have police protection letting shoplifters, burglars, and robbers to legally burglarize, shoplift, and rob from such stores.

Why do people continue to think that it's the governments job to protect their children? It's not. It's the parents job. Re-read my post, please.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Where ever did you come out with that crazy idea’r Gato? My kids, my responsibility? BAH!

It’s not my job, why do I pay taxes? I send them to public school and the state should be teaching my children about the ‘real-world’. What is right and wrong, what are acceptable beliefs and behaviors?

If my 13 daughter comes home pregnant it’s not my fault, I wasn’t there, what could I do? The state should have taught her better than that!

[/sarcasm]

Who are these people that think that you legislate child development?

[flamebait]

To my daughters:

I point out these guys with tattoos coming up their neck and all the way down to their wrist. I will tell them:
<snip>


Damn-it I feel a new thread coming on . . .

 

[Digital]

Why do people continue to think that it's the governments job to protect their children? It's not. It's the parents job. Re-read my post, please.

[RANT]
To those of you who are wise enough not to act like this, congratulate yourself, and look down your nose at the rest of Society:

We live in an age of immaturity. Where the lawyer rules, and anyone who accepts responsibility for their own actions is a sucker. Now a days, parents (not all, but most) use TV, Music, and other forms of entertainment as their babysitters. They take no real approach to raising their kids lives, and expect the schools and the boob tube to do it all.
A great example of this would be the Littleton Colorado incident. After the entire problem was resolved, people started pointing he finger at everything BUT the real problem: The Parents
The Parents where never around to speak with the kids when they where growing up, and this is a very common problem in the US today. During the whole slaughter field one of the fathers FINALLY wises up and calls the cops to tell them that he *THINKS* his kid is going to kill people in the school. (Hmm…Little late for a Family intervention, eh paps?) If the parents actually took a larger role in their life, the kids probably would not of done such a thing.
Unfortunately, things seem to be getting worse...Now not only are parents not taking a positive role in their kids life, I see them taking a NEGATIVE role in their lives. That's right. (As if kids aren't messed up enough as is.) A lot of this is attributed to child birth before the age of 25, (Again, not everyone under that age is a bad parent, but a good 90% are.) the time when people are still a bit too immature and selfish to be looking after children. This is also at a time when the life of a person is also the most unstable. Most are either students trying to make something of them selves, or still trying to build a resume in order to land a more stable job. Where in that do you see a healthy environment for children?[/RANT]
EDITED: Just for you, Gonz

 

[Gonz]

I like what you said & agree with it but please...stay in school & take remedial spelling. My god man, it's atrocious.

 

[catocom]

http://www.iespell.com/

 

[Digital]

I like what you said & agree with it but please...stay in school & take remedial spelling. My god man, it's atrocious.

Spelling has never been my strong suit, nor has accurate typing. So, you can immagine the problems I get into. Maybe, just for you, I should post a warning about my atrocious spelling. OrIcanjuststopputtingspacesinbetweeneverythingandreallypissyouoff. or type everything out with complete disregard to punctuation grammar and all the necessary things a good sentence needs how does that sound
02 1<0ulD D0 73H WH0l3 7H1N6 1N l337 5|*34|<.

Which do you prefer?

 

[PowerballWinner]

So parents are supposed to monitor their kids 24 hours a day huh? Sorry but many parents are working. I myself plan on designing and selling a violent computer game and I am not going to advertise it to anyone under the age of 25. I'll make it clear in English that copies of my game are not to be resold to people under 25. It's meant for people who want a simulation of what it would be like to lead a bunch of star systems. I'll even have a special program in it designed to stop the game after a certain period of playing time. What about game companies, who make violent games, that condone people who go to their message boards & say their violent people. Wouldn't you say that the game companies have a responsibility to make it clear to those people that their attitudes must change and if not, then why not?

 

[ResearchMonkey]

Which do you prefer?

Come back once you finish the puberty stage?

 

[ResearchMonkey]

So parents are supposed to monitor their kids 24 hours a day huh? Sorry but many parents are working. I myself plan on selling a violent computer game and I am not going to advertise it to anyone under the age of 25. It's meant for people who want a simulation of what it would be like to lead a bunch of star systems. What about game companies, who make violent games, that condone people who go to their message boards & say their violent people. Wouldn't you say that the game companies have a responsibility to make it clear to those people that their attitudes must change and if not, then why not?

"Plan on" (you must be a liberal) Gee, I thought . . . after Aug 1st you're going to put yourself out of business with a boycott

Yes 27/7 they are your kids, you are responsible from minute-one til 18 y/o.

No excuses.

 

[Digital]

So parents are supposed to monitor their kids 24 hours a day huh? Sorry but many parents are working. I myself plan on selling a violent computer game and I am not going to advertise it to anyone under the age of 25. It's meant for people who want a simulation of what it would be like to lead a bunch of star systems. What about game companies, who make violent games, that condone people who go to their message boards & say their violent people. Wouldn't you say that the game companies have a responsibility to make it clear to those people that their attitudes must change and if not, then why not?

No, but they should have an ACTIVE role in the kid's life! If something is going on, they should see what's wrong. You can tell when a kid has a bad day at school. It isn't hard.

As far as the video game crap you're talking about: I'm going to guess you're trying to say that people who make violent video games influence kids to do bad things? Is that right? Is this the tripe you're trying to regurgitate?
Ok, let me just say this: "Any pile Stunted of growth unaware that entertainment is just that and nothing more, deserves to doom themselves to some dank dark cell, somewhere, for having been so STUPID!! Movies, Books, TV, Music -- They're just entertainment, not guidebooks for damning yourself!" -- JCV
I do agree with the idea of only selling violent videogames to people over the age of 18. ONLY because Christian Coalition and the Over-Protective Mothers Society (Not really a group.) has a field day when it is sold to anyone under the age of 18. (Now, do not construe my bashing towards over-protective mothers as hypocrisy. There is a difference between active and over-protective.) If a kid wants to do something bad, he's going to do it. If he sees it on a game, or a movie, or on the Radio, he's going to use it as an escape goat. The object in question is not to blame, because again, it goes back to the parents. If they don't want the kid playing it, then they should take it away, AND if the kids are swooning over such ideas (like Head Explodey) then it's the job of the parents to make sure the kids know this is bad, and it's only funny when it's not real.

 

[Digital]

"Plan on" (you must be a liberal) Gee, I thought . . . after Aug 1st you're going to put yourself out of business with a boycott

Yes 27/7 they are your kids, you are responsible from minute-one til 18 y/o.

No excuses.

I'm liberal. This is a difference between stupid blame misplacement, and intelligence, not 'conservative vs. liberal' ideals. And if you want to get technical, it's the religious types that are fighting the whole 'anti-violent-media' war. And they're the conservative types.

 

[Gonz]

I'm going to guess you're trying to say that people who make violent video games influence kids to do bad things?

I love games like Far Cry & Battelfield 1942. I was listening to damning heavy metal when most of this boards participants weren't even gleams in their daddy's eyes. I think all the above & more belong in the court of the parents. My kid has no reasonable expectation to listen to Kid Rock or Ice T. He isn't allowed to play the games I own. His speech is monitored for the 7 words (plus a few more). He wants to see Alien vs Predator. He can. When he's older. Not at 11.

All that to explain I've stood on both sides of the issue. Now to the meat of the matter.

Yes, violent video games, more particularly-violent images of any type, do have a negative impact on society. One of the most pertinent stories to illustrate this is the changes in miltary training. During WW1, they used circular targets on rifle ranges. After seeing the trouble the men had in battle shooting other humans, they began using (and used exclusively until post WW2) human silouhettes. It was shown that psychologically it was easier to kill another human if you trained on "humans" than when training on a typical target. Fast forward to the 21st century and much of the training is done with computer generated 3-D holistic images. There is less trauma, psychologically, than in the past.

Now look at our TV. It's beamed into virtually every single home in the US. In the days of yesteryear the good guys wore white hats, saved the woman & were embarassed to get credit for heroic behavior. Today the anti-hero is a junkie former victim of abuse with delusions of granduer & a questionable sexual appetite. Look how different we've become. The nation was aghast when the Lindbergh baby was taken. Jonbenet drew gawkers & speculators.

 

[ResearchMonkey]

I'm liberal. This is a difference between stupid blame misplacement, and intelligence, not 'conservative vs. liberal' ideals. And if you want to get technical, it's the religious types that are fighting the whole 'anti-violent-media' war. And they're the conservative types.

Yeah, your values are clearly showing.

Your Opinion = technicalities is quite enlightening.

This is very much a conservative vs. liberal issue, again

I know for a fact that video games and movies smear the line between fantasy and reality. Especially when someone does not have the proper teachings of right and wrong as a part of whom they are.

I don’t play certain games because the “fantasy” it’s based on is not healthy to immerse ones self into that role. I don’t let my kids play anything I disapprove of.

I differ from Gonz in that I do let my kids play some killing games like Ghost-Recon. I think they should know how to kill a specific identifiable enemy if the need arises. I also let them shoot real guns at targets and small critters sometimes. Discriminate killing is a skill, indiscriminate killing is mindless.

They have never seen the movie “Natural Born Killers” and they won’t in my home. They have seen “Saving Private Ryan”, “The Patriot” they understand the history and underlying plot of it all.

I control 100% of what my kids are taught to an age*. They then slowly get weaned and depend solely on who they have become (my doing). If I am not able to be in control during the day, I pay someone that I deem responsible and that will not go against my wishes.




Whos wife was it that originally got the labels put on music and games?