 Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 02/05/2009(UTC)
Posts: 729
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
|
For those who don't know the U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments this week in the case of Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association. The background is that California introduced a law in 2005 that would ban the sale of violent video games to minors and also fine retailers up to $1000 per infraction. The law used a variation of the Miller test to define a violent video game. Similar laws in other states had been shot down in both district and appellate courts and the Supreme Court had refused to hear any cases on the matter until now. A few questions to ponder: Does the government's duty include regulating media content available to minors, especially in a society where media access is harder to monitor and control than ever? Are video games worthy of First Amendment protection? Can an industry be trusted to self-regulate its distribution of content (such as the MPAA or ESRB rating systems)? |
 Axiom is Mike Peck- Production/Guitars/Piano/Keyboards/Hammond Organ/Vocals Tim Dunn- Production/Guitars/Bass/Drums/Saxophone/Vocals |
|
|
|
|
|
 Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Moderators, Registered Joined: 13/02/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,094   Location: Probably not here Was thanked: 113 time(s) in 76 post(s)
|
Personally, as a resident of the UK, where age-ratings have been in place throughout my lifetime, I cannot see the big deal. Here, if a game or movie is rated 18, and you look under 18, you will be asked for ID, otherwise they are legally not supposed to sell it to you - unless you are with a parent. So the fact that in America, age-ratings are basically valueless and unenforced just seems strange.
I personally think the rating system is a reasonable compromise to protect children from adult material, while allowing parents to make the decision about what they do and don't want their children to see or play. Of course, kids still break the rules, everyone watches 18 rated moves at 2:00AM on TV when they're 12 and supposed to be in bed. But the point is, in retail, I think it's an okay system.
The flaw is the ratings board, who sometimes make regrettable decisions. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 02/05/2009(UTC)
Posts: 729
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
|
Gildermershina wrote:Personally, as a resident of the UK, where age-ratings have been in place throughout my lifetime, I cannot see the big deal. Here, if a game or movie is rated 18, and you look under 18, you will be asked for ID, otherwise they are legally not supposed to sell it to you - unless you are with a parent. So the fact that in America, age-ratings are basically valueless and unenforced just seems strange. The system is actually pretty well enforced voluntarily by retailers/theaters here. It is enforced enough that recent poll results showed that most Americans believe that being carded to enter an R rated movie or purchase an M rated game is already a law in most states (it isn't). The issue is because of the wording and common interpretation of the First Amendment. First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution wrote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Of course, that by extension means the states cannot enact a law that would infringe upon the First Amendment. The law that restricts the sale of a game is considered to be restricting the freedom of expression of developers, therefore the law is unconstitutional. The California law is looking to define certain games as obscene speech/expression. The Supreme Court has ruled that obscene speech is not protected by the First Amendment and therefore can be subjected to regulations. The fear is that this would lead to developers changing what they develop or not developing certain games altogether for fear of the governmental ban. |
Axiom is Mike Peck- Production/Guitars/Piano/Keyboards/Hammond Organ/Vocals Tim Dunn- Production/Guitars/Bass/Drums/Saxophone/Vocals |
|
|
|
|
|
 Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Moderators, Registered Joined: 21/07/2009(UTC) Posts: 54,407 Location: Leeds, England Thanks: 3468 times
Was thanked: 11549 time(s) in 5886 post(s)
|
This is not a criticism of the US at all, but I sometimes wonder what it must be like trying to live life dancing around this first amendment thing all the time |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Moderators, Registered Joined: 11/02/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,340 Location: Narsik Thanks: 295 times
Was thanked: 539 time(s) in 290 post(s)
|
I think the whole video game argument is retarded. Violent or vulgar games are rated M, to let parents and stores know who should and shouldn't buy this game. Just like movies are rated R. But there is no argument about Rated R movies and how they are open for kids to watch. At least not like there is for video games. Why is this?
Also, why is it I can watch someone get their throat slit, or watch forensic labs open someone up on national network television on CSI and Supernatural but I cant watch the same thing on a video game cinematic?
Ultimately, parents need to be taking control of their kids lives and limiting what their kids have and do, not complaining to the government about it. If parents groups spent half the time on their kids as they do as "protecting" them by whining to the government then maybe something would actually get done. This whole argument made a great South Park episode too. |
Proud member since September 6th, 2007!
Proud to be a mod since May 5th, 2011!
Currently writing the longest Solo-Written RP in Rockstar Game History |
|
|
|
|
|
 Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 20/08/2010(UTC) Posts: 5,694 Thanks: 1990 times
Was thanked: 1784 time(s) in 975 post(s)
|
genocidal king wrote:This is not a criticism of the US at all, but I sometimes wonder what it must be like trying to live life dancing around this first amendment thing all the time Speaking for myself and myself only it's not bad at all because it doesn't come up that often. We talk about whatever and then it's done. The First Amendment is great when it comes to other things though, Freedom of Assembly & Religion are pretty great. |
I feel numb, born with a weak heart
I guess I must be having fun EARN BY WORKING LIKE A DOG
SPEND LIKE ROYALTY |
|
|
|
|
|
 Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 05/03/2009(UTC)
Posts: 3,255
Location: Glasgow
Thanks: 34 times
Was thanked: 107 time(s) in 82 post(s)
|
Man, the fucking US constitution. Woohoo, some guys wrote a constitution. The English only did that in 1215 so big fucking deal. First thing to acknowledge, it's a thing written by humans, so even if you believe in sky fairies you accept that this is not some divine scripture. It's a 225 year old document that held some wonderful ideas for its time but is I'm afraid to say outdated. So these people who only accept what is said in the constitution, I really do have to roll my fucking eyes at these morons.
And shit guys, OK, the second amendment was put in place in case anything occured like the War of Independence so your people could once again nobley overthrow the chains of monarchy, and to legitimise that uprising in law. It's not there so you can replace your genital inadequacies with a fucking assault rifle.
Also, state funded healthcare is moral. Leaving healthcare to private corporations who only care about profit is immoral. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 02/05/2009(UTC)
Posts: 729
Was thanked: 1 time(s) in 1 post(s)
|
forkboy wrote:Man, the fucking US constitution. Woohoo, some guys wrote a constitution. The English only did that in 1215 so big fucking deal. First thing to acknowledge, it's a thing written by humans, so even if you believe in sky fairies you accept that this is not some divine scripture. It's a 225 year old document that held some wonderful ideas for its time but is I'm afraid to say outdated. So these people who only accept what is said in the constitution, I really do have to roll my fucking eyes at these morons.
And shit guys, OK, the second amendment was put in place in case anything occured like the War of Independence so your people could once again nobley overthrow the chains of monarchy, and to legitimise that uprising in law. It's not there so you can replace your genital inadequacies with a fucking assault rifle.
Also, state funded healthcare is moral. Leaving healthcare to private corporations who only care about profit is immoral. Can we please not turn this into a health care debate? |
Axiom is Mike Peck- Production/Guitars/Piano/Keyboards/Hammond Organ/Vocals Tim Dunn- Production/Guitars/Bass/Drums/Saxophone/Vocals |
|
|
|
|
|
 Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 12/02/2009(UTC)
Posts: 1,529
Location: Give me more sunliiiiiight!
Thanks: 4 times
Was thanked: 31 time(s) in 23 post(s)
|
asdf wrote:
Ultimately, parents need to be taking control of their kids lives and limiting what their kids have and do, not complaining to the government about it. If parents groups spent half the time on their kids as they do as "protecting" them by whining to the government then maybe something would actually get done. This whole argument made a great South Park episode too.
As the saying goes, quoted for truth. |
 _____________ The Black Gates- Progressive technical metal The Infidels!- Retro doom funk grindcore The Graveyard Sluts- dirty, slutty rawwwwk Psycopathologist- old school death grind Everyone is entitled to an opinion, it's just that your's is stupid. |
|
|
|
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Moderators, Registered Joined: 13/02/2009(UTC) Posts: 3,094 Location: Probably not here Was thanked: 113 time(s) in 76 post(s)
|
TheCDs wrote:Gildermershina wrote:Personally, as a resident of the UK, where age-ratings have been in place throughout my lifetime, I cannot see the big deal. Here, if a game or movie is rated 18, and you look under 18, you will be asked for ID, otherwise they are legally not supposed to sell it to you - unless you are with a parent. So the fact that in America, age-ratings are basically valueless and unenforced just seems strange. The system is actually pretty well enforced voluntarily by retailers/theaters here. It is enforced enough that recent poll results showed that most Americans believe that being carded to enter an R rated movie or purchase an M rated game is already a law in most states (it isn't). The issue is because of the wording and common interpretation of the First Amendment. First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution wrote:Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Of course, that by extension means the states cannot enact a law that would infringe upon the First Amendment. The law that restricts the sale of a game is considered to be restricting the freedom of expression of developers, therefore the law is unconstitutional. The California law is looking to define certain games as obscene speech/expression. The Supreme Court has ruled that obscene speech is not protected by the First Amendment and therefore can be subjected to regulations. The fear is that this would lead to developers changing what they develop or not developing certain games altogether for fear of the governmental ban. I'm not sure how regulation like this is in conflict with the First Amendment, because freedom of speech is not the same thing as selling a product. Don't get me wrong, I like the idea that things be more open, and there not be restrictions on everything, but at the same time, I don't think, in the case of a visual medium where often there is extreme graphic violence, that's necessarily protected under freedom of speech. It's not like it's okay to go into a school and show kids re-enactments of brutal serial murders or anything. As far as I see it, there is a middle-ground between blanket constitutional ideal and modern regulation. I'd love everything to just be available to everyone, but parents must have some ability to raise children in a more shielded environment if they wish, so I absolutely understand the reason for this kind of regulation, at least where visual media is concerned. So for me it's a big grey area. Frankly though, I think gun control is far more important of an issue. The Second Amendment has long been absurdly misrepresented. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Rank: Advanced Member
Groups: Registered
Joined: 06/05/2010(UTC) Posts: 804 Location: Why do you wanna know?
|
forkboy wrote:First thing to acknowledge, it's a thing written by humans, so even if you believe in sky fairies you accept that this is not some divine scripture. You sir are a hero to me and a roll model |
Old Successes
The Rebels
Iron Hammer
Till Death Do Us Part
Now-Act Of God-New Wave of American Heavy Metal/Nu-Metal
Sounds like-Slipknot, Avenged Sevenfold, Stone Sour, Godsmack, Black Label Society, Black Sabbath, and Ozzy.
Signed to-Monk on Fire Music
Jason Wilson
Connor McWilliams
Geo
Sebastian
Alex Walkman
Nominated for Best Band at the 21st IMAS/Birdies |
|
|
|
|
|
Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
