[Grug]

http://australianit.news.com.au/articles/0,7204,18718221%5E15306%5E%5Enbv%5E,00.html

   
Game ban blocked
Correspondents in Detroit
APRIL 05, 2006
A US District Court judge has ruled that a law in the state of Michigan banning the sale of violent video games to minors is unconstitutional.

Federal District Judge George Caram Steeh issued the ruling in Detroit and said in court documents that video games were protected under the US constitution's First and Fourteenth Amendments.

The law, signed by Michigan Governor Jennifer Granholm last year, imposes civil and criminal penalties for anyone who knowingly distributes violent video games to a minor.

Judge Steeh said in the ruling the state "lacked substantial evidence to show violent video games cause minors to have aggressive feelings or engage in aggressive behaviour".

The Entertainment Software Association, the Video Software Dealers Association and the Michigan Retailers Association filed suit in September challenging the constitutionality of law.

Yay for a victory for games. If only more common sense was found throughout the worlds law systems.

[aldo_14]

Common sense has no place in politics!

[Turnsky]

score one for the smart people.

[Col. Fishguts]

But .... the children! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN ?!?

Seriously, the opportunity for politicians to play the oh-look-I'm doing-something-to-protect-your-children-card is too good. They won't be stopped by lack of valid studies or commons sense.

[karajorma]

Depends on what their definition of a violent video game is actually. Anyone who sells GTA San Andreas to an 8 year old should be looking at a fine for it.

[Turnsky]

But .... the children! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN ?!?

the children's parents -don't- think of their children, that's the problem.

[Flipside]

The basic definition is anything rated M should not be sold to someone under 17, that includes games like Warcraft 3 etc as well as GTA:SA. My own problem is with the rating system in the US, there's no descriptor for anywhere between, I think 13 and 17, there should be a 15 tag for 'fantasy violence' and the 17 tag for 'violence in a realistic setting.'. At least in my opinion.

The main problem is that the law is only being aimed at video games, there are no such restrictions being attempted for either the movies or TV industry, that's where the 1st and 14th Amendment comes in, A certain nutty Miami lawyer is actually trying to curveball this by saying that games do not represent 'Free Speech.'

[aldo_14]

The problem is that the US system has a ratings division between M (17+) and AO (18+) which is thus almost entirely useless.  We have stuff like GTA:SA getting attacked for (very mild) shagging, when it's rated at 17+ and thus above the age of consent in many states.  If they just adopted the UK 15/18 ratings, lost the strange association of AO with being naughty filth ala porn (does this happen to DVD/Videos?  I doubt it....) and stocked 15 and 18 rated games, they;d be sorted.

[Rictor]

Depends on what their definition of a violent video game is actually. Anyone who sells GTA San Andreas to an 8 year old should be looking at a fine for it.

Eight, no. But fourteen? I wouldn't have a problem with that. It's not like they're living in a pure and idyllic society otherwise. And honestly, almost everyone does things that they're age group is nt allowed to when they are actually in that age group. It would be hypocritical for 15-year old me to go around playing GTA while 20-year old me condemns it.

[karajorma]

Which is why they need to sort out the rating system as others have said and then enforce them as heavily as they enforce the other limits on videos\DVDs etc.

Furthermore the age ratings are meant to act as a guide for parents so that they can choose what they want to expose their kids to somewhat. I wouldn't have a problem with my 15 year olds playing GTA cause I figure that they aren't seeing anything that new to them. Which is is why I'd be willing to go into a store and buy it for them.

 If the kid has parents who are deeply against that sort of thing and don't want them to see it then it's likely that they have already inflicted all manner of psychological damage on them while they were growing up and it's probably a good idea to let them mature another couple of years before being exposed to GTA anyway

[Mefustae]

Furthermore the age ratings are meant to act as a guide for parents so that they can choose what they want to expose their kids to somewhat. I wouldn't have a problem with my 15 year olds playing GTA cause I figure that they aren't seeing anything that new to them. Which is is why I'd be willing to go into a store and buy it for them.

Assigning responsibility to the Parents? Sir, i'm afraid you've lost me.

[deftonesmx17]

I love how they go on and on about how "killing in a video game is bad and can cause kids to have violent thoughts in real life", but many games that have tons of killing in them are still rated T for Teen and they could give a crap less about them. They are only worried about the games that are mature and where you don't play the role of the good guy. Why is Ghost Recon rated T for Teen while Socom is rated M for Mature? They both serve the exact same purpose. KILL THE ENEMY. So in both games you do what? Kill people, kill people, and kill some more people. Now my next question is, why is it ok to kill people in a game just because they are "considered a bad guy"? IMO if someone is stupid enough to go out and kill people because they played GTA, they are also stupid enough to go kill people because they played Ghost Recon/Splinter Cell/Metal Gear Solid/Socom/etc. The worst part has to be that military based games are like killing simulators while GTA is not. Military games show you how to kill people without being seen, quietly, how to hide the body, etc.............yet its ok since you play the role of the good guy. What kind of screwed up logic is that?

[Fineus]

But .... the children! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN ?!?

Y'know in correctional facilities, they spend a lot of time trying to get pedophiles not to think of the children...

[Herra Tohtori]

That's the name of the game nowadays, isn't it?

Descent: Free Speech - The Great War on Terror. Now on your local government throughout the world. 

Col. Fishguts said he was woried about politicians playing the "im-protecting-your-children"-card. I for myself am much worried about politicians playing "this-is-for-your-own-good"-card in general.

[an0n]

But .... the children! FOR THE LOVE OF GOD, WILL SOMEBODY PLEASE THINK OF THE CHILDREN ?!?

Y'know in correctional facilities, they spend a lot of time trying to get pedophiles not to think of the children...

And they do it by giving them Xboxes - thus is the Great Circle of Dubious Hypocrisy.

[Deepblue]

Can someone please explain to me why the hell Halo has the same rating as GTA, Half-Life 2, and Doom 3? It just seems completely implausible.

[an0n]

Because it's violent and promotes vigilante militarism?

[aldo_14]

Can someone please explain to me why the hell Halo has the same rating as GTA, Half-Life 2, and Doom 3? It just seems completely implausible.

Because it has people being shot in a relatively realistic manner, probably.  Even if not shot by you......

It's because the US doesn't, again, have a proper ratings system.  In the UK, Halo is 16+ (under PEGI guidelines, which I think have been mostly dropped for the BBFC style U, PG, 15, 18 style; really it's about 15 rated) and GTA is 18.  Halo is 16+ for depicting 'graphic violence towards unrealistic human or fantasy characters', to paraphrase.  Call of Duty, for example, is 15 in contrast (not so graphic violence, I presume, because there's less by way of blood decals etc), as is Half Life 2 (possibly, I guess, because it shows unrealistic humans etc).  I suspect Halo would be 15 rated if they'd used the other (BBFC) code rather than PEGI. 

Anyways, it's because the US has a ****ed up system that meshes the equivalent to UK 15 & 18 ratings into a single 17+ one, because 17+ is overly high for it's content, and AO has an undeserved stigma akin to porno, both I'd envisage because the US (or at least its legislators) has become so prudish.

[Black Wolf]

Because it's violent and promotes vigilante militarism?

Yes, but it's a massive seller for the XBox and thus should be given special treatment.

Don't you know anything?

[NGTM-1R]

Can someone please explain to me why the hell Halo has the same rating as GTA, Half-Life 2, and Doom 3? It just seems completely implausible.

Blood.

To steal a quote: "Surely shooting Koolaid-blooded aliens out to kill humanity is as mentally traumatizing as shooting your fellow humans."-RealBigNUKE