Jack Thompson's Anti-Game Law

[Dragonfire]

what kids are allowed to play should be up to the parents, but I think actually enforcing the game ratings system isn't a bad idea. for example having to show ID to get a game rated "M" is a good thing. It's something society deems bad for children, so put restrictions on who can get it, just like cigarettes and alcohol(don't even get me started on the age for this)... its all they can constitutionally do. If some kid shoots up his school after playing one of these games... then yeah you can blame the parents, caus either they bought it for him/her or they weren't responsible enough to monitor what their kid was being exposed to. I understand that it is hard for alot of parents to monitor what their children see and listen to, but they shouldn't complain to the government if their kids get ahold of something "obscene". Of course some kids are gonna get ahold of GTA, Doom, Counterstrike, etc. anyway, but banning M rated games is censorship plain and simple. Age-restrict the sale of it... don't ban it.

[Dreddz]

M rated games already arent allowed by minors. Its parents that give them the games, so its the parents that need to be advised.....

[Madame Adequate]

Wonderful article. Anyone who thinks video games cause violence assumes TV tells the truth (which about 80% of time it doesn't), hasn't read your article, is ignorant, or is a total idiot.

And this is what I think of the media:

Just to clarify, the article was not written by me. Nevertheless, I agree with your general opinion on the matter.

[Azure Chrysanthemum]

I have no real qualms against restricting the purchase of M-Rated games to minors, but as was said, the parents who buy them for them will probably continue to do so. I work at Target, which requires us to card people on M-Rated games (but, interestingly enough, not on CDs with explicit lyrics or DVDs). However, I've seen parents come through (I've also seen this happen at Gamecrazy where a friend of mine works) with their kids and buy the game, completely taking in the kid's description of why they need to buy it. That description, by the way, is usually some sort of permutation of "It's rated mature so they won't let me buy it without you."

So really, I would hope that this would just effectively remove the ability for irresponsible parents to just mindlessly blame the games.

[Raven Nox]

This is kinda pointless, considering almost every store already does this, and also, being 18 doesn't always mean your smart enough to know not to blow things up, shoot people, and all that over stuff. Being under 18 also doesn't mean your immature enough to not know it's just a game. Parnets are gonna buy it anyway, and even when the parnets don't, they can just go find someone who will sell it to him, even though they're under age. I have quite a few people at my school at sell video games for quick cash (One used to do it right next to me, in the middle of class) and they can just get it from people like them. It's a hard thing to control, and if anyone is gonna try, it should be the parents, not the government.

If they think the child is mature (or at least smart enough) to know not to do what they see in a video game, then get it for them, if they don't think so, don't get it for them, and inforce it, as in, look at your child's video game collection from time to time, or check in when they're using the console. You can also make sure to talk to the parnets of the child's friends and tell them at they don't want them to play certain games, so that when they're over there, they won't be playing them.

Most people aren't mental enough to shoot people because they see it in a video game, and it'd be nice if Jack Thompson actually tried to do something useful, instead of competely ignoring all the facts that say at kids don't kill because of video games. There have been excellent articles to prove they don't, one was linked to in this thread.

It'd just be nice of people like this didn't worry about making their name known by causing a big something that doesn't NEED to be caused, because it's pointless and wastes peoples time. I mean, it's a good idea to keep certain games away from certain people, but it just shouldn't be done by the government.

[Lionx]

I think we all agree on the rating and that M games shouldnt be for minors. However i feel this law actually helps the gaming industry in that theres no more room to say "its the game's fault". :P

[Skyblade]

I think we all agree on the rating and that M games shouldnt be for minors. However i feel this law actually helps the gaming industry in that theres no more room to say "its the game's fault". :P

As though that will stop them from saying it anyway.

[Lionx]

Well in case they do, lets prepare the pitchforks :3

[Big D]

No parent would buy an R18 movie or magazine for their children, so I'm constantly surprised - and dismayed - that so many utter morons buy restricted games for their children. Age restrictions are in place for bloody good reasons, yet people still act like interactive electronic entertainment is in some kind of class of its own.

In my country, games - and any other media - can be restricted based on their content. The restriction is legally binding, so it can be an offence to supply to an underage person. The system is largely effective, except for the aforementioned morons.

Plenty of games are "murder simulators" and reward the player for murdering the innocent for personal gain. These games should be restricted so they're out of the hands of the young and impressionable. Contrary to what some people would like us to believe, exposure to violent media can - and does - potentially have a significant impact on developing minds. People who're exposed to gratuitous, graphic depictions of murder, suffering and cruelty become desensitized to it and, in some cases, more prone to 'copycat' offending.

Restricting games in the same way as other publications isn't stupid, it's bloody common sense. Something harmless and inoffensive should, of course, avoid restriction; but potentially harmful material should be restricted as appropriate.

[ljkkjlcm9]

it's as simple as this...
http://gr.bolt.com/articles/violence/violence.htm

yep that pretty much says how much crap this whole violence and video games issue is, that is all....

THE JACKEL

[Flying Mullet]

There's this too, which is a pretty nifty little discourse on the matter.

it's as simple as this...
http://gr.bolt.com/articles/violence/violence.htm

yep that pretty much says how much crap this whole violence and video games issue is, that is all....

THE JACKAL

Looks about the same.

[Elite Lord Sigma]

WTF is wrong with people these days? It seems like people are getting more idiotic and absurd.

[Pouring Rain]

o: ebil! Anyway, I thought there was already some kinda law about kids not being able to buy games rated M or A. That is ebil. And besides, that makes no sense. What, in 2010, everybody will be having beams and fireballs coming out of their hands and everybody will be turning to super sayians and then Sin will come and wipe good ol blitzball out of the earth? That's crazy xD

[Ouch!]

I've done debates on the affects of video games (and other media) on children relating to increased violence for school before, and I've found that there are very few studies that can actually prove that there's a negative relationship. Most of the tests just get ambigious results.

This is bogus.

[Erdrick Holmes]

Jack Thompson just hates video games because somebody stole his Cloudsong on a game of Dark Age of Camelot and somebody made a recording of it online.