Hi all, yuki here.

This is Why the industry needs to be activly taking legal action, shit like this. It's defamatory to the industry, based on lies and misinformation, and equates two compltely seperate issues together.

I swear if the ESA doesn't get busy I suggest we all start a campaign to get them fired and replaced with someone who gives a fuck about the industry.

Pornographic games? What games like that are sold in any store?

They are showing kids grabbing video games off the shelves like candy. (one of which is GUN.)

This message got hit by spam filters and thought it was spam.

- Warren Lewis

This "demonization" of video games is increasing to the point of being absurd. I don't think it's quite as fun anymore. If I'm walking down the street with a gameboy am I going to have to explain to people that I'm NOT actually a serial rapist?

what a douche.

first amendment wins everytime.

Yeah he's very unlikely to win. Sonny Perdu pretty much is favored to win.

Yeah, I was going to vote for him, til I saw this. Tis not fair, both our Guv candidates suck. The current one isn't too great, but no way I'm voting for an idiot like this.

I still want to see some of these easly availble pornagraphic videogames.

"Leaving aside the 'violent and pornographic videogames' for a minute, how does he plan to 'make it easier for parents to block pornographic websites'?"

He doesn't have to. Internet Explorer has a Content Advisor setting, coupled with the fact that services such as NetNanny exist. It doesn't get any easier to block porn on the internet than that, unless they passed that proposition that all pornographic websites should have a domain suffix of .xxx (blocking an entire suffix is the easiest thing to do when it comes to custom filters) which they didn't because they thought it would make porn more easily accessable (as if that wasn't easy enough, thanks Google).

The mere idea that this guy is putting together in his political ads (and hensforth in some way comparing) online sexual predators with violent video games is absolutly disgusting. A child playing GTA: SA is nowhere even near that of a child talking to somebody online, then going to meet them and being sexually molested and abused. Shit, it's not even comparable as one of then doesn't even cause harm.
Not to mention all these laws have been struck down as the 100% unconstitutional pieces of shit they are and will just flatout waste taxpayers money defending in court (as well as paying the plantiffs lawyer fees when it's struck down). I really hope this guy loses the election for Governor as playing the "protect the children", lets scapegaot the new guy in entertainment for all our kids problems bullshit is the lowest form of political manuvering and vote pandering.

"Mark Taylor will make the sale or rental of mature or adult-rated video games illegal to children 17 years or younger illegal. will apply the same standards to stores that sell violent and pornographic video games that we already apply to R-rated movies."

I got this off his election website, What Mr. Mark Taylor doesn't seem to understand is that the MPAA rating system is NOT enforced by law. It's volunatary just like the ESRB rating system. Obviously this moron has no idea what he's talking about. He should stick to the issues he understands.

“Mark Taylor will make the sale or rental of mature or adult-rated video games illegal to children 17 years or younger illegal. will apply the same standards to stores that sell violent and pornographic video games that we already apply to R-rated movies.”

Okay If I am not mistaken 85 % of the time an M rated game is bought by the parent. So making it illegal for children 17 years or younger to buy the game, hardly helps. And it is also unconstitutional to do so.

And I truly wonder where Mark gets his pornographic games from. In America they don't even sell those games in the stores as far as I know. When something is rated AO, it is no longer carried by most stores. Let me guess, he is referring to GTA again. GTA didn't contain pornographic images at all, not even with Hot Coffee. Since when is dryhumping pornographic? And you needed to download a mod to even see this in the first place. When parents don't want their children to do this, don't give them an M rated game. Also don't give them access to the Internet when you aren't there to monitor them. And when you don't have the time to do this, don't take any children. Don't expect the rest of the world to do the parenting for you. Our hobby shouldn't have to suffer because some parents are too lazy to parent their own children.

Zomg,look at the first comment here


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dVeUwnjhZU8&eurl=

Hahahahah!

Wait wait I got one.

Ok I have ATV Off Road Fury 3 this game can be called a atv simulator if Jack Thompson wants to call all games that. That doesn't mean I'm going to go outside and try jumping 200 feet while doing a back flip with it. It also doesn't mean I'm going to go chasing after a tornado with my atv just to be thrown a mile away to a different part of a track.

Or the Deer Hunter games, I don't hunt animals it's just something I don't find fair and challenging. But give it to me in a game and I go off hunting for the animals with no remorse whats-so-ever.

I play SOCOM Navy Seals but that doesn't mean I'm going to go enlist in the navy seals to become one.

I Play HotShots Golf but I can't stand real Golf just because I play a game about it doesn't meen I'm going to play the real thing.

I Play AIRSOFT!!! OMG this is an outdoors game which me and all of my friends have guns that look so real that the only way to tell they arn't is buy the orange tip that the law makes them have. We play all the time shooting each other. Doing different senerios like POW, All Against All, Terroist Vs Seals, Defuse Bombs, Capture the Flag. We play these games which teach us to aim a gun and shoot the other people with tiny plastic BBs that hurt when you get shot. But we don't do it for training to take out someone with real guns, we do it because it's fun and exciting. The same reason we play GTA:VC & SA it's fun but we know it's not real.

Somewhat off the topic of videogames, his "death penalty for repeat child molesters" is an interesting idea, but one that won't be accepted. People have enough qualms for giving the dealth penalty to brutal killers, they'll never accept it for someone who hasn't actually killed anyone. And for that matter, I'd be interested in how he defines "repeat child molesters." I'm all for strong punishment against molesters, but I'd want to be careful.

Ugh. More televised scaremongering to push an agenda. Reminds me of the "anti-terroism" commercials I saw on Fox on Sunday. Wish I could get a link to it, but a through search of YouTube and Google Video turned up nothing.

"Death to Child Molestors" ....? WTF? Isn't that a bit harsh? Is he projecting a bit much? I thought castrations of sorts worked well. I guess I was incredibly wrong. Shamefully, even.

Leave it to the government to decide what games children should play. Naturally this cant be left up to the parents who should probably be watching their children anyways. When it comes right down to it violent video games and the internet arent the problem, theyve always been there. Its your bad parenting and neglect that allow your kids to roam freely through the world of Liberty City and San Andreas. If I was asked whether to purchase a game entitled "Grand Theft Auto" (A felony in ALL states mind you) my last response would be "Sure timmy, but not past bedtime :3 ".

As far as the internet goes I dont think anyone should allow their child unlimited access to the internet, thats just a bad idea on the parents fault again. The internet contains way too much information you dont even want you child watching on television, why would you let them be exposed to it online?

The whole issue about our youth being corrupted stems from the already corrupt government trying to place blame on an easy target. Its just a shame they cant use their "power" to help better society.

well this is just another retard not thinking before he acts

Azarias. Correct me if I'm wrong, but shouldn't said "single digit-aged minor" have parents who make those kinds of decisions? At that age, it's highly unlikely that the kid would get their hands on anything that the parents didn't put directly in their hands. And let's face it, once it gets to that point, politics has done all that it can.

It's a little thing called responsibility, it's kinda important. Yes, there are accidents, and yes, things happen that shouldn't. HOWEVER, do you honestly think that any game retailer worth anything is going to put an M-rated game like God of War in the hands of an eight year old without their parents present?

"The notion of a nine-year old playing ‘God of War’ is a little disturbing..."

Yet the notion of that same nine-year old watching a movie like Sin City doesn't bother you at all? The problem isn't just that this guy is trying to legislate games, it's that he is trying to legislate ONLY games, and not other potentially harmful forms of media like movies, TV, etc.

And before you ask, no, there is no law that says a minor can't buy an R-rated movie. The MPAA is 100% voluntary, just like the ESRB. Not only that, but a relativly recent FTC study showed that it is easier for a minor to buy an R-rated movie than an M-rated game. What do you have to say about that?

And people ask me why I want to move to Ohio...maybe I should start sending them links to this page.

Terminator: Just because I omit something doesn't mean I support it. For example, I didn't mention the fact that I condone the Holocaust in that little diatribe, but that doesn't mean I support it. I don't think that an eight year old should be watching Sin City.

Semicolon: Congratulations, you have responsible parents. Lucky you. Know, what should we do for those who don't, hm? Granted, legislature doesn't work in one hundred percent of all cases, but every little bit helps.

Ufosde: Remember, he's trying to get elected. Take everything he says with a grain of salt. He's addressing a hot-button issue where, if he actually does follow through on his promise, it will do some good. Maybe not a lot, but some. (On a personal note, IQ is meaningless. Isaac Asimov wrote an essay on it. Go read it.)

JChaos: You admit that accidents do happen. Well, what's wrong with trying to limit these accidents?

One has to understand that I'm not endorsing this candidate; I dislike politicians in general. However, the idea behind his promise (protecting children) is worthy of merit.

Also, I understand that laws don't work one hundred percent of the time. Despite legal limits, children under 18 are still getting ahold of cigarettes. Does that mean we should scrap the age requirements on buying cigarettes entirely? Obviously not.

Help help! I'm being opressed! I am sick of people using videogames and the media as the scapegoat. When it comes right down to it, if the parents are too busy to watch their childrens access to the internet, or pay attention to what videogame they are buying, the parent should be smart enough to remove the problem. Password protect the computer and take the videogames away. Stop blaming everyone else for your inablillity to raise your own children properly. As for the 'death penalty for repeat child molesters', people already have a problem with killing dangerous criminals. Let alone people who haven't killed anyone. Granted, I am completely against child molesters, but this is crossing the line.

[quoted from Azarias] "Semicolon: Congratulations, you have responsible parents. Lucky you. Know, what should we do for those who don’t, hm? Granted, legislature doesn’t work in one hundred percent of all cases, but every little bit helps."

Even if this guy somehow made it easier for parents to block sites and/or stop kids from buying video games, the ones without parents responsible enough to do it now aren't going to benefit at all, are they? If they won't take simple steps to ensure their child's 'safety' now, then they aren't going to just because this man said so.

Ok, as a Georgia Resident and formerly at the mercy of the Georgia Board of Education I have this to say:

Azarias: Take it with a SALT LICK. Yes Yes, he's trying to get elected, we all understand that here. But out there, in the real world, there are parents who never touched a keyboard before and dont know what the internet is, thus they fear it... Again most of them have also never touched a Video Game, PC or Console, and knowing little about it, they fear it.

Mark Taylor is playing on peoples fears and using scare tactics to boost his support. This advertisement is not uncommon on our television sets down here.

Now, Straight UP, what can Mark Taylor Do For You? (Keep In Mind, I have done little research on the topic so far)
He can give you something that will block bad websites, if you dont have to program it or input any information, then he's not fixing the problem. If you do have to input any information, chances are you are a responsible parent, which means there was no need for Mark Taylor to give you the software.
He can ban sale of M and R rated media to minors... Last I checked, and everyone else apparently, Most retail stores refuse to sell those items to minors anyways, yet parents and older siblings often buy the games for the 'minor' to play. THIS IS NOT ILLEGAL. For someone over the age of 21 to purchase alcohol for a minor, it is illegal, for someone over the age of 18 to purchase an M or R rated media, it is not illegal, and thus any law to restrict the sale of M or R rated Media to minors is redundant to many policies already in place, and no more effective.

Death penalty to Repeat child molesters... This is the only statement that has any plausability in having an effect, yet... The Death Penalty is still a big thing... The current jail system however is overflowing and there has even been a number of successful escapes, and I would rather pay for an execution than giving free room and board to someone who happened to play footsie across the lunchroom twice.

In Georgia, the parents who can afford Internet and videogames for their minors often have no time to spend with the child and purchase anything to appease the child, even alcohol and drugs... example, a 40,000$ new car at age 16... which kills at least one high school student per school a year (I made this up, but every year at my highschool, there was at least one fatality due to accedents.)

I understand he wants to be popular, but unfortunately, the truth is the hardest thing for a grown adult and parent to hear, unless they happen to be good parents. Untill parental quality improves, there is no saving the next generation...

Bigman-K: Take a step back. You berate me for comparing video games to cigarettes, and then go off on a tangent about Harry Potter. Think about that. But I see what you mean.

First off, there are several similarities between cigarettes and video games. One, they're both addicting. Two, cigarettes should not be given to young children, and neither should violent video games. There lies the crux of my argument: we have laws limiting the sale of cigarettes to minors because it damages them. It's the same idea with violent video games. We can both agree that a nine year old should not play God of War, nor should he be smoking. Just because kids are still getting cigarettes the same way kids are still getting violent video games doesn't mean that we should scrap the laws prohibiting the sale of cigarettes to children.

Second: Scientific studies concerning how video games affect children are notoriously untrustworthy, with different studies supporting either side of the argument. However, I'm sure we can agree that a young child should not be playing a violent video game.

Granted, there are different levels of violence (I would not prohibit a five year old from playing a game where the antagonist gets bopped on the nose, especially if the characters are fluffy, anthropomorphic teddy bears, but I would stop him from playing Grand Theft Auto), and I probably should have clarified this earlier: I am against giving games that have an excessive amount of violence to children; I think the ESRB ratings are spot on when it comes to determining whether or not a game is suitable for a certain age group. (As a side note: Damn, was that a long sentence! It should be in a Nabukof story...)

Quote: "Thirdly the whole parents can’t be around their kids 24/7 is not an excuse for government regulation in our lives." Here's a Canadian example: why should the government bother sending one hundred dollars a month to parents for childcare? Obviously, since parents can't look after their toddlers twenty-four seven, the government has no excuse to muck about their personal lives. The government should withdraw all assistance whatsoever! (For the ignorant, that was sarcasm)

Finally, there was never a call for banning these video games. I agree with the American First Amendment: these games should not be banned, that is a violation of free speech. I'd say something about Jack Thompson, but I'm afraid of getting sued. However, just because Mein Kampf can be protected by the First Amendment doesn't mean it should be on the summer reading lists of eleven and twelve year olds, does it now?

(As an aside note: If you acknowledge your poor spelling, why don't you correct it?)

Parents need to learn to take responsibility for their own damned children. If your child is playing violent video games or going on pronographic websites then it's your own fault for not supervising their child. I mean seriously, because people are too stupid to pay attention to what they're children are playing they have to bring politics into it? It's a damned video game. I mean if you have a problem with your child playing a video game where they can rip a person in half, don't buy them the game!

Bigman-K: Take a step back. You berate me for comparing video games to cigarettes, and then go off on a tangent about Harry Potter. Think about that. But I see what you mean.

I wasn't comparing Harry Potter to violent games. What i was saying was that Harry Potter like Violent Games can be found unsuitable and inappropriate in the eyes of some parents. SO ,if we were going to restrict access to violent games to minors SOLELY because they were offensive in the eyes of some parents, we'd have to do it with Harry Potter books to, because some parents find Harry Potter novels offensive for their children.

First off, there are several similarities between cigarettes and video games. One, they’re both addicting. Two, cigarettes should not be given to young children, and neither should violent video games. There lies the crux of my argument: we have laws limiting the sale of cigarettes to minors because it damages them. It’s the same idea with violent video games. We can both agree that a nine year old should not play God of War, nor should he be smoking. Just because kids are still getting cigarettes the same way kids are still getting violent video games doesn’t mean that we should scrap the laws prohibiting the sale of cigarettes to children.

Yet unlike cigerettes there is no evidence that violent games actually damage children as i mentioned in my first post. As for addicition, all video games can be addicting to kids, not just the violent ones.

"Second: Scientific studies concerning how video games affect children are notoriously untrustworthy, with different studies supporting either side of the argument. However, I’m sure we can agree that a young child should not be playing a violent video game."

I agree that an 8 year old should be playing GOW, but like i mentioned in my first post, 8 year olds don't go out on thier very own to the local video game shop with $50 in hand to buy the latest GTA. With that said though by the time someone is in teen years or close to it i believe they should be able to play any game, watch any movie, read any book, or listen to any song they want. By the time they're that age they have the full capability to understand the difference between right and wrong, reality and fantasy and the difference between right and wrong. and if they don't, something is seriously psychologically wrong with them and they should be locked in a four room padded cell.

"Quote: “Thirdly the whole parents can’t be around their kids 24/7 is not an excuse for government regulation in our lives.” Here’s a Canadian example: why should the government bother sending one hundred dollars a month to parents for childcare? Obviously, since parents can’t look after their toddlers twenty-four seven, the government has no excuse to muck about their personal lives. The government should withdraw all assistance whatsoever! (For the ignorant, that was sarcasm)"

Read my post again and you'll see what i was talking about. Actually read my first post in this reply and you'll see what i meant by that. I was talking about government regulation in regards to helping parents keep their kids away from things they (as in the parents) find inappropriate or unsuitable for their children. Barring any sort of proven harm (of which there is none), this should be the sole responsibility of the parents.

"Finally, there was never a call for banning these video games. I agree with the American First Amendment: these games should not be banned, that is a violation of free speech.

The First Amendment also protects a Minors access to Free Speech materials. Minors like Adults have the ability to form there own viewpoints based on unrestricted and uncensored access to information, messages, opinions and viewpoints brought forth through Free Speech materials. The only material that can contitutionally be barred to minors is material that is obscene to minors as Obsenity isn't protected by Free Speech. The obscene to minors laws are the same as the obscenity laws to adults as brought forth through Miller vs. California except all three prongs of the test are in regards to minors rather then adults. Violent games or even Mein Kampf shouldn't be banned either to minors or adults.

"(As an aside note: If you acknowledge your poor spelling, why don’t you correct it?)"

Sorry, I didn't bother to have a spellchecker on me.

I think Azarias is missing the point.

I posted this in the forums and in the LJ:

Children(and everyone else, for that matter) are already being protected. Rights are never taken away or kept from people. They're just being "protected" from something else thanks to our buddy, the First Amendment.

Amendment I:
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.

Now, we all know the old "you can't yell 'FIRE' in a crowded theater" rule, which is always given as an example of how freedom of speech is not an absolute, as you can't use it to put others in harm's way. However, if you are going to infringe on a Constitutional right such as freedom of speech, you had better damn well show the people absolute proof that the speech in question(in this case, "violent" video games) is in fact dangerous. Guess what? It's NEVER been done. There is no absolute proof that any harm will come of anyone who plays a violent video game.

If there's a danger so clear and so threatening to the American people that Congress feels the need to step on the First Amendment and pretty much say "We're changing this Amendment and making laws abridging your freedom of speech," wouldn't any rational thinking person believe that the danger would have to be so obvious and so clear that there's no argument about it? You're directly contradicting a Constitutional amendment, so you should have a damn good reason to look at a Constitutional amendment and say "We're changing this"

Bottom line is, we have not given any reason to believe this abridging of our freedom of speech is necessary, as there just isn't any evidence whatsoever of any danger from "violent" video games. Thanks for the offer, but we really don't need this protection. Please feel free to use my tax dollars for protection against things like 767 cockpits entering the workplace or 20-foot hurricane storm surge entering the home.

Most of this is culled from a comment Anthony Cumia(of the Opie & Anthony radio team, who also did voice work for GTA:San Andreas and GTA:Liberty City Stories) about the Congressional hearings into the Janet Jackson Super Bowl incident a couple of years ago.

First off, you're right, Bigman-K, I shouldn't have stooped to the level of commenting on another's grammar when that isn't the point of the argument.

Last post: I don't have the time, nor the energy to defend myself in this forum.

Let me summarize my position.

I believe that violent video games (violent in the sense that God of War is violent), along with violent movies, and other mature content, should not be in the hands of children. This is because, the younger you are, the more susceptable you are to different ideas (that was the theory behind Hitler Youth, not that I'm comparing video games to nazism), thus a child of eleven of twelve should not read mein kampf, nor should he play God of War.

However, the older one gets, the more fluid the rules. For example, I played Diablo II at the age of fifteen, despite the fact that it's rated mature. Why? Because my parents trusted me. However, not everyone is so fortunate. Not every child has good parents. Thus, when parenting fails, the government steps in (the same principle applies in Child Welfare, though I'm not saying that the same severity that comes with Child Welfare should come with violent video games).

While I acknowledge the fact that this politician is probably saying these things to get votes, I believe in the original idea —of regulating violent video games, and other mature media— not its proponent. However, I'm not calling for a total ban of video games; that is in violation of the first amendment.

That is my opinion. I'm sorry that it came out in such a convoluted manner, mixed in with rebuttals and the like, but there it is, nice and neat. Read it, comment on it, whatever. I'm done. Good night everybody.

If I knew, was 100% positive and could not be wrong, that an individual was a child molester, I would condone their elimination. However the justice system is not 100% perfect, it's lucky if it's 51% correct on a good day. Evidence can be wrong, lawyers can be incompetent or exceptionally competent on either side, witnesses can lie or (in the case of children) be made to believe things that are actually untrue.

I've heard of people who were falsely made out to be accomplices to child molestation, while they themselves were young minors and lacked the vocabulary (or legal representation) to defend themselves, and these people are now considered sex criminals for life. That's right, it doesn't disappear when they turn eighteen. Propensity for child molestation is considered a lifelong afflicton and therefore the law will give them scrutiny until their dying day.. so let's extend that a bit, say this unlucky bastard goes out in their underwear to get the newspaper or get a UPS package and somebody's kid sees them. Charges get filed, and that unlucky bastard now faces the death penalty if convicted.

Protecting kids is one thing, passing pointless laws especially when it involves invoking a very hasty and irreversible penalty on someone who may actually be totally innocent, is quite another. That's sponsoring random murder by lottery. Hell, I'd castrate a sumbitch just for choosing to look at child porn, I'd chemically castrate anyone who gets a little too into child beauty pageants for that manner (I mean WTF, just go to the petstore and look at puppies they're a thousand times cuter, you're just a perv if you want to see a 3 year old girl tarted up like a french whore). But, I still don't support killing someone who might actually be innocent-- and anyone, and everyone, accused by the justice system of any crime MAY IN FACT BE INNOCENT.


And about the violent videogames-- I actually feel quite passionately on this issue, I have turned against Leiberman and Hillary Clinton because they've taken this same 'facts last, soccermom voters first' attitude. They're following the democratic party's current policy, pleasing no one and pissing people off, very frustrating to me as I'm a person who believes the Republican Agenda equates to pure evil.

Violent videogames are not bad for anyone, anymore than violent films, violent comics, violent lyrics are. Furthermore, violent media cannot harm a person who has a healthy environment and healthy brain chemistry. The killers at Columbine had everything wrong going on with their life, there was violence, I'm pretty sure they were molested, they had access to weapons and bombmaking materials with no parental supervision whatsoever. Being able to take out their aggressions on Cacodemons and Imps did them more good than harm, it just wasn't enough to stop them from killing people. They were sociopaths, videogames cannot make you a sociopath.

Real-life hurts kids, entertainment doesn't hurt kids. Being over-prescribed on various meds before they hit their 14th birthday is hurting kids, but this blowhard isn't talking about that. Poor funding for schools, and the 'No Child Left Behind Act' which will make our education system on par philosophically and truly with that of Communist China, is harming kids.. but I guess nobody's able to compress that down to a nice tasty soundbyte.

Wow, makes me even happier to be Canadian. We aren't so anal about our media.. We do have violence, just last week an emo douche killed a young girl in Montreal and wonded 19 other people with an AK before Montreal police blew his brains out (or he killed himself, one or the other is true), and yeah, we did become more anal. But here the general focus of elections isn't "protect our children" bullshit. We have other bullshit, but gamers generally are safe.
By the way, if they have a porn problem in their video games in Atlanta, well, I suppose I should be making a trip down south very soon.

Actually, the games they picked up were pornographic. Sorta.

There's whores in GUN, although you don't see anything. Meh.

In the Directors Cut edition of Indigo Prophecy there's a sex scene as well.

But that's just about it.

He fails anyway. They're already illegal to sell to minors anyway.

Dang, nobody commented on my first post, though I seem to have set the stage for some impressive tirades. I'm rather pleased with the comments from everyone so far, and I must commend most of you for remaining civil even on a *gasp* internet forum. now if you excuse me, i'm off in search of a 9/10 year-old with $50 on their person for the express purpose of purchasing a pornographic video game, i may not return for a while becuase neither damned well exists beyond a quantity of absurd minutiae. Sure, there are some (and I do mean some, I've encountered perhaps one or two in my 13 years gaming, both were obscure items featured in gaming magazines) games with a pornographic emphasis, but the odds of a child encountering and purchasing one are about the same as that child wandering into a sex store and purchasing a dvd. I can't believe the man who approved this ad is being allowed to wield a pencil. The ignorance is staggering.

Er... It's hard enough coming into an EB games for a mature person and saying "Uh... can i get a copy of Leasure Suit Larry 55?" Or "What porn game would you recommend?", let alone children buying them... There already ARE ways to block pornographic websites but most people find too much of a hassle... I mean do you wanna type 2million web-domains into a little program? Child molesters... er... no comment... they're just creepy...

Ok few comments on all of this, and YES i work at a video game store and have for 4 years, this is fact as i have seen in that time.

1)Bigman-KI agree that an 8 year old should be playing GOW, but like i mentioned in my first post, 8 year olds don’t go out on thier very own to the local video game shop with $50 in hand to buy the latest GTA.

Ill start with this, you'd be supprised Id say about 4 or 5 a week come in with 50 bucks to buy games under the age of 10, most of the time, parents just sit in the car, OR go to the other nearby store to shop, useing us as babysitters and giving the kids money to keep them happy

2) It is not illegal to sell M or AO games to minors, but it is against most company policies to do so and many companies will plunish workers who sell those games to a minor knowingly. That being said, many places do still sell M rated games without parental consent which is the issue.

3)As for parents, they do need to do something. I think if anything, the government should take some time to teach the parents about the ESRB ratings rather then make laws. Many parents are unfamiliar with the rateing system, and are interested in learning when you start to inform them. Many parents think that the rating has nothing to do with content but difficulty of the game itself. If there was a mass information about it going out, it would be much more effecient from what I have seen. Sure you can find info in the game mags. but not many parents read them, ill stop this rant.

4) Many parents DONT CARE, I have seen parents run the gauntlet from buying the Guy game, GTA(all version) playboy, halo, to everything else you can think of for kids of everyage. Do i think all are bad, no, but when i have a kids in the store who drops the F-bomb every other word, and telling me to mind my own F-in bussiness when i tell his grandfather about GTA being rather bad, it shows something is wrong, and BTW the grandfathers response, "He is a good kid, he knows the differece between right and wrong right little Jimmy." Biggest responce when you inform parents of GTA's health regen by hooker, " O they are to young to understand all that stuff" If the child is to young to understand it, dont give it to them.

Long rant short, its not the developers, its not all the parents, its not all the games, its not the goverment, and its not all the retailers. Its a majority of lack of informantion, misinformation/misrepresentation, and that handfull of parents who dont care, untill it is to late.

i live in europe and we have pegi laws they always say on the boxes PARENTAL ADVISORY ADVISED now thats a system,and believe it or not IT WORKS !!!

Ok child molesters must get death penalty's but leave the games out of it i have played doom in my youth i have played half life 2 ,i live in europe im 13 and i get good grades and i live on dorm...


and yes i have played violent games and no i am NOT a bad person

if anyone gives bad comment on this...fine

if anyone understands what i mean thanks for the sympathy

When videogame-related violence happens in America and the media/parents/politicians get all uppity about it, this is what I all BANAL.

When videogame-related violence happens here in New Zealand (which I have yet to see, noting that GTA and other crime/gang-related games as well as copious amounts of violent games that would be put in the same category as GTA and its ilk are very VERY common), I call it ANAL.

It's so unheard of here in New Zealand to kill someone because of videogames. Like some of you guys, I grew up playing violent videogames since I was 3, the most notable of which was DOOM and DOOM II (btw I turn 18 next month if you're wondering about my age).

Here's how videogames may have affected me:

1 - I'm so socially inept it's not funny... and I mean REALLY socially inept. I believe this to be good, however, because unlike in the U.S. where there is more videogame-related violence than any other country (at least I think so anyway), most if not all violence in NZ stems from gang-related issues that in turn stem from the fact that our country's gangs are following the gangs in the U.S., going so far as to label themselves red (Mongrel Mob) and blue (Black Power).

2 - I'm somehow very good at aiming and shooting with guns in real life. However, to this day I still don't know how to reload a gun, nor how to turn the safety on/off. This applies to ANY gun.

3 - I think the GTA series is pathetic. However, this is just my opinion, and anyone is welcome to have their own.

4 - I would rather play videogames than go out and party at some random teen's place. At these parties, there is ALWAYS drinking, drugs, and sex going on. I would much rather sacrifice any social standing I have should I have a choice between partying and World of Warcraft, and I know that time would be better spent and harmless leveling up my Undead Mage/Rogue and completing quests that I have on standby, rather than going out and drinking and subsequently discovering the "joy" of drugs or f***ing some really fugly chick (or tranny) while drunk.

5 - PC gaming is my life, however I'm not going to skip sleep or fall dead when my comp gets taken away for a week. Goodness knows I think those lind of people who ARE like that actually do need to go out and get some fresh air. I mean, just look at PHWonline forums. They openly admit to getting the shakes or skipping sleep without their comps with them.

6 - Unlike a lot of the general internet culture I've met in online games and stuff, I'm not going to swear and spew incoherent bile in BIG CAPSLOCKED TEXT just because someone said he doesn't like a certain band or seems to be having a serious bout of bad luck while playing against other people.

Umm... what I talking about again? :P

Oh yeah... Mark Taylor, just another one of the uber-conservative hypocrites who probably doesn't seem to remember that his particular choice of music when he was a teenager or even just a kid was thought of by parents everywhere to be evil and demonic among other things.

Such as Elvis Presley... back in his day, strict fathers would apparently forbid their daughters from watching him or even listening to his songs.

There is but one solution to this plague of stupidity: INFORM THE BLOODY PARENTS OF WHAT THEY NEED TO KNOW in an effort to counter the obviously biased and one-sided arguments offered by these moronic politicians and overbearing parental organizations.

Okay ranting over.

Ark

you know what? now i'm ashamed to live in georgia.
and honesty the current system works if the parent is any good.

You know what that sad sad thing is. Other than running for death penalty for repeated child molesters, everything he is running for is already illigal. If your 12 years old and you walk into walmart. You go to electronics and go buy any mature rated games and your sale will be refused. I know im 22 years old and i still get carded at the register for game. ok....so its already illigal for kids to buy violent game AND most parents already have prental controls. So other than the death penalty (which is odd for a democrat) what is this guy running on? ....

lol to Broken Scope

Okay

1- good thing punish repeated molester (bastard like this should be on prison for life or better kill 'em).
2-Game ratin is to much already c'mon is just a lil bit of a blood bath so what? (irony aplies here) EX: GTA on PS2 you cant have the hot coffe stuff soo rate better the computer one.
3- guys will search for what girls have and so do girls we might be humans but we still animals.(yeah its true blame me at my mail if you want to do soo).
4-just about blockbuster: burn it to the groound it will shred haunt tension as soon as it goes to public this sucks the monkey hairy butt.
wanna spam my mail prynydood@hotmail.com

Don't most video game stores and rental places like blockbuster set an age limit to who can buy and rent M and, if they have it, AO games anyways. Like everyone else has been saying, the parents should be the ones keeping tabs on the kids. There are so many programs out there that let them do that, and if they wanted, they could, you know, NOT GIVE THE KID A COMPUTER! Or not even be so harsh as that. Just don't put it in their room.

Holy fucking shit, its a fucking douche; holy shiiiiiit, what thee fuckkkkk....

Wow, am I glad i don't live in georgia.

interesting fact for the canadian guy who tells eveyone how candians are


my girlfreind knew that emo douche bag as you put it she says he was a gun nut when she met him in london (dont quite know how) she told me when she foundout he killed those people

Actually you can pick up all the pornographic video games you want in JAPAN! For the most part I think that country really didn't care much when that kind of stuff came out.

Funny, maybe it's the violent video games, but I have the uncanny urge to kill him...

@Nillaz! interesting isnt it? our video games teach us how to operate any automatic weapon, and gives us the know how and strategy to use em...

there are already a million programs that allow parents to block porn from their kids, not to mention a little something called parent supervision.
where do kids get the money to buy video games? their parents, so really its not the stores problem

Once again, yet another politician or lawyer who thinks that the parents aren't doing the job well enough to "protect" our children. I agree their are some really stupid parents in this country, but the bottom line is that a child is still under the guidance and authority of the parents, not the federal government. That's why I am completely against the government on video game legislation. (Other than the fact it's against the 1st amendment.) Our forefathers fought for a country that isn't 100% controlling over it's people. The King of England had that authority over his people then and our forefathers felt that he violated our God given rights. Well, it seems like the government are doing that now.

Parent: I govern my child. It's my responsiblity, not yours!

Government: No, the child is not an adult, thus he doesn't know anything. He is essential a property of the state and what we say must go. You have no authority!

Yeah, I'm not going to accept that. The Federal Government needs to worry about far more important issues than video game laws. If anything, parents need to be held fully responsible for the actions of their children. Bad parenting is entirely their fault. The government feels that children are just stupid and only their wisdom can protect them. You know, it's only a matter of time before Congress comes out and says "Governing our nations children is completely up to the government, not to the parents. WE are the authority."

Again, I point out that not all politicians are after full out video game bans. They just say that to get votes. All that matters is votes. It disgusts me the way politicians and our government acts.

Say no to violent video games...

...say yes to killing.

Once again, Video games are a decoy that murdering children blame. It has been proven that violent video games have about as much influence on kids as television, why don't we call for legislation on that?! death penalty I have no problem with, but stop trying to police what people (and kids) can look at! at this point they probably know more than adults do when it comes to "mature topics".

Okay legislating video games is totally gay. HOWEVER...
Total w00ts on the death penalty for rapists!!

He won't be able to pass that "make video games illegal" shit, it's already been shot down in a few states as unconstitutional, not to mention impossible to enforce.

Unfortunately, for those of you who think the whole 'legislate Video Games' wont fly, you need a little education on the topic. Mark Taylor as this Bill, called the Child Protection Act of 2007. In it is legislation that supports parents in blocking pornographic websites and reports communications of a dangerous/sexual nature involving minors. It also states tha the sale of Adult and Mature video games to a minor will be illegal. And lastly it states the death penalty for repeat child molesters...

This is all or nothing. The Entire Act passes or fails. He is getting people who feel strongly about Video-games to support his campaign to protect the 'children' and KILL the people who attack them. He is also getting people who fear the 'evils of the internet' to support his campaign to protect the 'children' and kill the people who attack them.

I wouldn't be suprised if there was a programming company in the background supporting him so long as they get to make all this 'internet safety' software he's gonna need.

Mark Taylor is using the parent's fear of raising children to support his desire to raise them himself.

Just a little thing to think about here.
If the parent didn't get said game for child, then child got the game themself, correct?
-Where- did child get the $$ to buy the game? last time i checked, 10 year olds don't usually have more than $5. Even then, they spend it on candy, not games =/

Also, i'm not sure if the sale of M+ gmaes to minors is "illegak" here in New Zealand.. But if the guys at the store get caught selling one to a kid, they get fined like $10,000.
So, yeah. it probably is illegal here. We didn't care, got parents to rent/buy for us! they dont know what they're doing anyway. Last time i checked, i'm not a child mollester yet either. though i have craving to hump people while they're sleeping (Thanks MGS:2! (yes, i'm kidding.. =/))
So, while you may moan and complain about the sale of M= to kids being illegal, if it actually happens, you probably wont notice, or you'll find ways around it.

sorry. As Azareas would say.

"People don’t seem to be getting the point.
‘Outlaw violent and pornographic video games to minors’
So everyones having a fit because 12 year olds wont be able to beat hookers and have sex with them before they shoot them in the face?"

One of the problems is politicans are targeting just violent games and not other forms of violent media. Not to mention these type of laws are unconstitutional and an outright waste of taxpayers money that could be going to actually important legislation that deals with REAL PROBLEMS.

"Why do people under 16 (minors are under 16 where I live, heard it’s 18 in other places) need to play pornographic video games in the first place?"

Why does it need to be law. No one is saying that we need to put these games in every young childs hand. It just doesn't need to be legislated.

"Sadly, the parents seem to need some help."

But just for violent games and not for other forms of media though, the fact is the government is only targeting games and not movies, music, books, newpapers, the news channels or other forms of Speech containing violence that parents might not want their kids to see.

"I see my cousin’s friends who play grotesque video games around the age of 9 or 10 and its obvious that it’s affecting how they act."

Is this just an assumption or do you have definite proof? There is a difference. Assumptions don't mean it true.

I am not a fan of censorship. Period. I was never censored growing up. I remember watching slasher horror movies at the age of 4 with my mother. I am not violent criminal or sex offender. I have a good career and a solid goal in life. All in all I think that I turned out pretty good. And that is because my mother talked to me. She was completely involved in my life. Now days parents are lazy. Pure and simple. Nobody communicates anymore with their children. The only reason television and video games are such glowing political targets is because they are the modern version of Mary Poppins. Parents don't raise their children. The all mighty boob tube does.
I'm not saying that television is the devil. I was a true couch potato growing up. I was just lucky enough to have a mother that was actively involved in my life. Granted, she drives me crazy with her interfering ways but I know it all comes from a good place.
I've done alot of stupid things as a child but I would've some really really stupid things if it wasn't for my mother and the fact that she'd surely kick my ass.
So I say let your children watch or play whatever they want but for crying out loud get off of your lazy asses and actually try raising your child for a change.
Oh and don't read too much into the "kick my ass" comment. She's not abusive it's just a figure of speach people...although she probably could if she wanted to...she's quite strong.

I do think that there should be stricter regulations, but I also think that parents should be more active in their kids lives.

Aaaaah, politics... like emos. Always complaining about the problems and never doing the right thing to change it, if anything at all.

And having a society full of Dee-Dee-Dee's doesn't help, either.

Now, I'm getting tired of people like this saying such things. However, I'm also getting tired of all the senseless, uninformative bashing that some of the people posting here are doing. Not that he doesn't deserve it, but, for example, if you hate my post, don't just say, "MAKUA!1!!!!11! U SUK!!1!" If you hate it, tell me why you hate it.

Nevertheless, his technique is genius. The lighting in the room-- dark, brooding, and then the transparent chat windows overlapping each other, trying to show parents how many "child predators" that children talk to every single day! It's untrue for the most part, but his association of violent and pornographic video games is rather...well, intelligent. Most parents don't know what violent video games are like, but they definately know what pornography is. He affiliates the two, and suddenly violent video games become much worse. I'm smart, and while I'm not trying to brag about it, I do like to think that I can tell the difference between fantasy and reality. I've played Dead Rising. Does that mean that I'm going to go to the local mall, hallucinate, and start cutting up what appear to be zombies? Sure, it's possible, but I'm not a violent person. After all, I have enough discipline to take some punches, get called a pathetic coward. Have no doubt-- I can fight back. I know Aikido, and I love to play fighting games. Does that mean that, if someone throws a punch, I'm going to rupture their liver(the first technique I learned in Aikido, in fact), and crack my fist against their temple, effectively killing them? No, it doesn't. Now, that doesn't carry into the realm of true self-defense, where someone comes at me with a weapon. Nevertheless, before I digress further, I'll get back onto the subject of this sample of marketting inginuity.

It shows two teenage kids(possibly younger) in a video game store, literally clearing the shelves of every single violent video game with a sadistic smile pasted across their faces. Have you ever seen evil-looking people walking into a gaming store and picking the shelves clean? I would, if I had the money to nuy hundreds of dollars worth of games, but that's beside the point(always room for a little humor).

Then it shows him talking to the kids. Have you ever known a governor to actually get out of their office(don't get me wrong-- there are some good governors out there) and come to random schools without their own agenda? He taps the kid on the shoulder as a friend. Never before has a better way to get parent's attention been seen.

Now, my opinion. Parents quite obviously need help. I've done my best to retard the urge not to be a hypocrite in this post and avoid needlessly ripping Mr. Taylor's point-of-view to pieces, but he's taking advantage of the stupidity of the larger population of the voters. Ask your friends(or your parents' friends) what the rating of a violent game is. If you're lucky, some of them might know. My parents sure do.

Nevertheless, and I know this has been said before, parents know mostly what their children tell them. They see commercials like that, and it changes their point-of-view entirely. Now, if they were to do some research into the subject(such as reading some of the rather intelligent reviews on this webpage) they would see that he is entirely wrong.

Just as well, and this has also been mentioned, he will not do anything to cut down economic flow. If children can get ahold of violent video games, it gives the state money. It's well-known that there are not nearly as many adults playing video games as there are children. Video games are a multi-billion dollar industry, and states get a percentage of that money in the form of taxes. Stop children from buying video games, and not only will the tax from the individual games be cut, but many of the video game companies might downsize, sigjnificantly reducing the amount of taxes they pay.

If he wants to help children, he should keep violent video games, and use the tax money to help fund schools.

As I'm almost done, I'll begin closing. You remember my comment that I was smart? I have a knack for learning definitions and such through video games and movies hours before I need to use them in school. Seventy percent of my knowledge(not how to shoot people or anything-- I have some of the least steady hands of anyone in my school, and I couldn't shoot someone if they were standing three feet from me. Rather, I am speaking of school-needed knowledge, such as definitions and terms.)

You know the closest thing to violence that video games have inspired me to do? I started collecting swords. Most of them are decorative swords, and are attatched to my wall, and then some of them can be drawn and wielded, though I'd think I'm a bit more skilled with my hands.

On a final, parting note(and this may discredit much of what I've said), I don't live in Georgia. I don't pretend to know what conditions are like over there("conditions" being good and bad), and how unfair the government might be. I've read several of these posts, and I really have a very harsh opinion of anti-video game activists like Jack Thompson and Mark Taylor. Jack Thompson is a moron-- he might actually think he's trying to help. Mark Taylor, though...with that advertisement, he's got to know what he's doing.

a lot of murderers don't even get the death penalty....

although it would be funny to see a catholic priest get lethal injection I must admit.

Ufosde, an IQ score of 181 by 15 SD percentile would imply that you are in the 99.9999966604th percentile, making you roughly the 1330th smartest person in the history of humanity. I wish when people arbitrarily made up a number for their IQ they wouldn't base it on what they've learned from scooby doo and the simpsons. Please do not try and claim you are that smart, when clearly you're not. As for video games, it's entirely the parents fault, anyone who is not old enough to make decisions for themselves and to be exposed to things, should be monitored by their guardian.
Personally I watched pornography since I was about 10 years old, and I am perfectly well adjusted and not particularly interested in killing anyone. The whole notion is laughable, but I think the States has a major problem of randomly assigning an age to be old enough to do things, the young are often much smarter then the old, and of course, vice versa. It should be based on the parents to decide whether their kid is mature enough. Frankly, if your child is smart enough to get at porn and M rated video games without you knowing, perhaps you shouldn't be able to buy M rated content without your child there, 'cause you're not very mature

The line between Democrat and Republican is a very fine one, even more so today. The line between Democrat and Liberal is one to notice.

Pornographic video games? Sold at Blockbuster? I'm missing out!

I love how they threw in the death penelty in that PSA (or whatever you want to call it).

Since when is it the role of government to "protect" us from the evils within ourselves? Censorship is here because parents are too dumb or lazy to teach their kids right from wrong? Video games are the reason that our society is going in the crapper and not because of the lack of regulation within our own government?

Liberal or Republican, there is no way you can equate thes two any more than you can movies, restaurants, or theme parks and pedophiles. What's next? Are we gonna outlaw the operation of theme parks? Are the movie theaters gonna go under? Will Chuck E. Cheese be closed down? This logic is complete bullshit. What happened to parental responsibility for the children?

you want to know what you're kids are on, watch them, or get a hack for every site displayed on the compy. (yes, they are out there). And as for the pornographic thing, they are coming out in america, but have been out for years in japan, and the child molester thing is that in some asian country, either china or japan, don't remember which, you only have to be 12 to be in a porno (or so i hear). only connections i can make

As far as the whole "1st-person shooters train kids how to operate real guns" myth goes, let me just say this:
I'm in the Air Force, and I have to qualify yearly with an M-16. I've earned the Expert Marksman ribbon three out of four years running. Safe to say, I'm pretty deadly with a real gun.
Sit me down with a game of Halo...I SUCK! No really, I can't shoot anything to save my life. If I live, it's only because I ducked under the bullet by accident, or something silly like that.
If being an excellent shot in real life didn't make me the greatest Halo player of all time, then why would being a master of Halo (or any other 1st-person shooters, for that matter) make someone a Super Sniper?
The End.

It's quite humorous the way most of you blame your parents for not doing their jobs, then continue on to say "I've been watching/playing violent movies/games/porn since I was *insert the young age here* and I've turned out fine."
With this knowledge, do you really think we need our parents to interfere with this sort of issue? As long as the parents and we ourselves know we're old enough, and show to our parents that we are, they'll allow us to do so, and we'll do just fine. :) This point's been proven.

Your parents are doing the best job they can, even if it's not a very good job. However, a lot of parents now can't do a "very good job" any more because they're too busy trying to support us and make money for us and all the things we want.
If you really think your parents are /that/ dense and need to know this, as Arkaine pointed out... instead of waiting for the government to get the brains to do this... Why don't /YOU/ teach them about the ratings, the games, and what you're interested in? If you do this well, they'll see how much you know about it and learned from it to fit the "real world," and how you're not that stupid, thus, (hopefully, ideally) start trusting you more and not be so afraid to let you do anything....and won't vote for this idiot.
For example: My dad all his life was refused porn(though he wanted it badly) and was limited in the games he could play. As soon as he turned 18, he went hog-wild for porn (which he still looks at, but it's toned down for, I hope, obvious reasons).
My point: We should be allowed things that are not physically or mentally harmful to us. Why? Because when we're out of our parents' grasp, or even before then, we'll just freak out and need extreme amounts of it later, and all through our life, even. Why? Because we were denied it.
We're not complete morons that can't handle anything just because we don't have life-experience; we can all clearly see this from these responses. And the times when we are- uh, hello, we're only human and learning! Yes, we make stupid mistakes (repeatedly, even) but that's how we grow and learn (some of us just take longer to learn-those that repeat mistakes.)
Besides all that, it's better for kids to /look at porn/ then to go out there and have sex young- risking the chance of creating a child, or getting an STD to spread around. We should be allowed to play violent games, it releases tension and keeps kids from actually going out there and killing someone/thing. Yes, there are always going to be exceptions, but we are only human, no one is the same, nor perfect. Get over it, and stop trying to "protect" us from that which we do not need protecting from.
I realize I did not mention very much the root of this debate, and that's in part because I think it has been debated far more than necessary with the same arguments repeated... I am not, and won't get into everything, so please don't assume I'm not taking into consideration the real debate/problem addressed, I'm simply limiting what I say, for I have more than plenty to say as is.
There should definitely be limitations and variations to what I and others have said, but saying /all/ the gray area takes too much space.



Replying to others:

I couldn't help but say "HERE, HERE! Completely agreed, thank you for finally someone bringing it up!" when I read, from Defender, "...who is more violent? The 15 year old who enjoys playing Halo 2 or God of War or Resident Evil with some friends or the man who wants to mass murder criminals? "


"useing us as babysitters and giving the kids money to keep them happy"
Do you guys really think that this is the case? I mean, seriously. When you do something you enjoy (play video games) do you consider yourself being babysat to keep happy while your parents are off busy with having a life/trying to support you/etc? Honestly. Do your parents /really/ monitor /everything/ you're doing?


"Oh yeah… Mark Taylor, just another one of the uber-conservative hypocrites who probably doesn’t seem to remember that his particular choice of music when he was a teenager or even just a kid was thought of by parents everywhere to be evil and demonic among other things." said by Arkaine
Remember this, everyone, as we get older and have kids... and then, more importnatly... when they start liking/doing things "like" this, things that you know nothing about. You don't want this taken away, so learn about what they're interested in if you're worried about. I realize for most of you this is a ways off, but seriously. You don't want it happening now, and your future kids/grandkids won't want it to happen either! Furthermore, this applies for /ANYYYYYTHING/ you don't know about, and that includes even now at whatever age you are!
DON'T REPEAT THIS STUPIDITY!

To Wrap Up/re-itterating some points:

Let's not forget too the fact that there is soo much violence in the world, as many of you have pointed out, that no one can shelter us from it. And if we did try to- we wouldn't be living in truth, we'd be living behind rose-tinted glasses.

Then again, maybe you're only saying the opposite of what I said because it /is/ the parents' responsibility to decide our mature age, not the governments. But let's not place blame where blame is not entirely necessary.
Yes, parents need to be active in our lives. They need to pay attention to us to be able to know when we're mature enough to handle this content. But we need to help that along, too. If we're not active in return, then it's your own fault.

So, before you place blame on your parents for this, put yourself in the shoes of whom you are blaming. It's just as much our fault as it is our parents. Our parents wouldn't have to buy us movies/games/etc if we didn't want it to begin with.
Meaning:
YOU make the choice in what games you buy, NOT your parents! They just buy them for you. So take some of that blame yourself if you want to go that direction! They aren't going through saying "OH, Here's one rated M or AO, great, I'll get it for my son/daughter!" The fact of the matter is they don't know anything about the games, they get it because you like it and have at least some faith and trust in you in what you choose for entertainment. Some people/places will even warn them about the rating, and if they don't mind them being exposed to it, TERRIFIC! You're going to get exposed to eventually, why not let them see it through entertainment purposes that you choose?

Sorry this is so long. x_x =/

Besides all that, it's better for kids to /look at porn/ then to go out there and have sex young- risking the chance of creating a child, or getting an STD to spread around. We should be allowed to play violent games, it releases tension and keeps kids from actually going out there and killing someone/thing. Yes, there are always going to be exceptions, but we are only human, no one is the same, nor perfect. Get over it, and stop trying to "protect" us from that which we do not need protecting from.
I realize I did not mention very much the root of this debate, and that's in part because I think it has been debated far more than necessary with the same arguments repeated... I am not, and won't get into everything, so please don't assume I'm not taking into consideration the real debate/problem addressed, I'm simply limiting what I say, for I have more than plenty to say as is.
There should definitely be limitations and variations to what I and others have said, but saying /all/ the gray area takes too much space.

Replying to others:

I couldn't help but say "HERE, HERE! Completely agreed, thank you for finally someone bringing it up!" when I read, from Defender, "...who is more violent? The 15 year old who enjoys playing Halo 2 or God of War or Resident Evil with some friends or the man who wants to mass murder criminals? "


"useing us as babysitters and giving the kids money to keep them happy"
Do you guys really think that this is the case? I mean, seriously. When you do something you enjoy (play video games) do you consider yourself being babysat to keep happy while your parents are off busy with having a life/trying to support you/etc? Honestly. Do your parents /really/ monitor /everything/ you're doing?


"Oh yeah… Mark Taylor, just another one of the uber-conservative hypocrites who probably doesn’t seem to remember that his particular choice of music when he was a teenager or even just a kid was thought of by parents everywhere to be evil and demonic among other things." said by Arkaine
Remember this, everyone, as we get older and have kids... and then, more importnatly... when they start liking/doing things "like" this, things that you know nothing about. You don't want this taken away, so learn about what they're interested in if you're worried about. I realize for most of you this is a ways off, but seriously. You don't want it happening now, and your future kids/grandkids won't want it to happen either! Furthermore, this applies for /ANYYYYYTHING/ you don't know about, and that includes even now at whatever age you are!
DON'T REPEAT THIS STUPIDITY!

To Wrap Up/re-itterating some points:

Let's not forget too the fact that there is soo much violence in the world, as many of you have pointed out, that no one can shelter us from it. And if we did try to- we wouldn't be living in truth, we'd be living behind rose-tinted glasses.

Then again, maybe you're only saying the opposite of what I said because it /is/ the parents' responsibility to decide our mature age, not the governments. But let's not place blame where blame is not entirely necessary.
Yes, parents need to be active in our lives. They need to pay attention to us to be able to know when we're mature enough to handle this content. But we need to help that along, too.

Meaning:
YOU make the choice in what games you buy, NOT your parents! They just buy them for you. So take some of that blame yourself if you want to go that direction! They aren't going through saying "OH, Here's one rated M or AO, great, I'll get it for my son/daughter!" The fact of the matter is they don't know anything about the games, they get it because you like it and have at least some faith and trust in you in what you choose for entertainment. Some people/places will even warn them about the rating, and if they don't mind them being exposed to it, TERRIFIC! You're going to get exposed to eventually, why not let them see it through entertainment purposes that you choose?

Sorry this is so long. x_x =/

Playing a violent video game like GTA doesn't make you kill people. It's the fact that you're fucked up in the head and can't distinguish reality from fiction.


... and that's all I have to say about that. Pr0n rules.

I dont get it. I'm a Australian, 18 year old year 12 student, hoping to get into the games industry as a graphic designer/ 3d modeller.

It offends me, as I’ve been playing games since i was... 3? I'll say three, that at the age of 18 I am somehow a pedo? GFTO! I think the guy must have been looking at a Japan site of something about their 'games' or something!

And this talks about GTA:SA... people have been whacking in mods with epileptic content for years and years.... damn q3 arena has models of *cough’nude’cough*.... But the second someone adds a “3rd party mod” to unlock content that could not be used any other way…. **and the main characters, they’re both in their 20’s or something weren’t they?**

Yea, it shows what the pollies trying to do. Trying to suck in the votes of a blind majority who believe whatever they’re told on the TV.

Okay, this'll be about the 8th post like this that has been made in here and hopefully it will inform people some more.

It is NOT illegal to sell Mature rated games to minors. Nearly every major store chain in America (Sorry, but I can't speak for all you other countries) has a policy banning it though. Does everyone get that now? IT IS NOT ILLEGAL.

I saw a few posts related to this so I figured I'd address it. In spite of whatever the media has fed you, America and probably the rest of the world is not as violent as they make it seem. Nor is the root of the violence what they tell you. The media will tell you a general idea of what happened but they will NEVER be able to effectively tell you WHY it happened. I am not saying there isn't violence, just that the media plays it up about 20 notches.

Statutory rape, as I have seen it in a legal document is the knowing act of sexual intercourse with a child that appears below the age of 16.

And finally, there IS a correlation between violent media (spotlight on video games) and actual violence in children. But then again, there's also a correlation between brown eyes and getting hit by cars.... What happens is the media plays off that correlation and they don't tell you what the data means, they tell you something completely different. Correlations mean that if something happens, then this something else happens more of the time. Now if it were a Causal correlation (one in which the something was actually responsible for the other something happening more often) they'd have a reason to attack video games. But they'll continue to overlook that fact until the current generation of leaders dies off and the new ones take their place to gripe about something else. I sometimes wonder if the politicians even know the truth or if they think they really are on a righteous crusade.....

Alright, that was my 4 cents.

Dang! I am foiled by his great and powerful internet filter of doom! Now i cant rape random kids on the streets anymore! I cant even BUY a computer game without the police on my tail! All is lost! Seriously, why doesnt any gaming company sue these politicians for defamation? And what happen to the time when parents simply asked their children who they are messaging on the internet? If he doesnt tell you, its your frigging fault for not letting him trust you. If anyone votes for this guy, let me tell you this. I Know Where You Sleep...

Jeff's mom: umm, yeah my son could be watching porn. (shout)JEFF ARE YOU WATCHING PORN?
"woman moaning from computer"
Jeff: NO MOTHER
TV ad: with ABX broadband, you can access to the fastest internet connection, plus you can protect your child by blocking pornographic websites, and it is only $30 a month!! connect to ABX, connect with the world"
Jeff's mom: bahh, $30 a month, what a rip off.
----------------------------------------
Jeff 's mom: hey this guy will stop him buying violent video games!! I am so going to vote for him.

Jeff: my dear mother, I would like $30 dollars please, I need the money to buy a game.

Jeff's mom: here you go, knock yourself out.
--------------------------------------------

ok ok, lets face it, politics are dumb because dumb people vote. How to fix all of this, only let the upper class vote! Yeah lets change our society from being run by no-nothings and tards, to being run by the upper class. Once we do that... we should probably just choose one family to be the most wise, and then follow their guidence from generation to generation, untill we totaly disagree with the ignorance and stupidity (or greed... or religion) or one memeber, then we should replace him with the most blood thristy person. (even I lost track of who Im' attacking at this point, you're not alone).

These issues are issues because you don't have to know ANYTHING about... well anything to vote. Ups and downs... up being that everyone is fair and equal (basis for America, right?)... and down being that... the vast majority of campaigning now is not to say candidate A is good, but rather to somehow trick the voters into votng for him.

When you think about it... the upper class is manipulating the facts to rally lower/middle class people behind them... so.... it's really not as free a democracy as we want to think.

Thats all really... just the fact that stupid people are allowed (pushed) to make a choice (vote) means that stupid choices (votes) will be made.

How to fix it? Hell if I know... you obviously can't force feed people information... you can't make them care...

(just to clear it up, I'm not suggesting people shouldn't be allowed to vote, and I'm not claiming to have the answer for deciding who is smart enough to earn that right.

I do however think that it's obserd that for every person who actually knows something about a topic, there are 5 more willing to believe the blatent lies about that topic... it's rediculous and we are winning elections in the same way people pick lotery tickets.

I'm guilty of it to, I do not vote... because my one voice, informed as it might be, counts for nothing. If you were required to do some sort of research on the topics yourself, or some sort of truthful information giving was in place and required before one was to vote, then I would attend such a thing and cast a vote. As for now... I'm just going to leave this country to the millions of voters who use a dartboard for their decision making.)

I totally agree with you Kaytor.

This guy is a douchebag. he is either really stupid, and assumes everything without proper research, or he wants to convince that the roots of all evil are video games. people who waste their lives away, do so themselves. its their fault, and the parents should be yelled at for not taking action, like how they pay for games, WOW subscriptions, and internet. People are so stupid "the kids that shot up columbine played doom, they were influenced". hey, lets have a more logicla blame, WHY NOT FUKING YELL AT KMART FOR SELLING THEM LARGE AMMOUNTS OF GUNS AND AMMO. Seriously, they make a big deal of video games, which maybe influences a school shooting every 4 years worldwide. This kills like 3 people. If i recall, you are more likely to be killed by a drunk driver on the way to school. i dont see anyone yelling at alchohol here.


The fact is, is that the price of freedom will cause lives due to abusers and iresponsible people, it makes far more sense to target those people, instead of yell and blame the corporations, who clearly not to blame. People say that just because someone is irresponsible and they drink and drive, the rest of us shouldnt have to suffer by banning alchohol, so why is video games any different?

just think, you walk into a store. you cant buy halo,Half-Life? Far Cry? FEAR? Oblivion? Grand Theft Auto? God of War? Resident Evil? Devil May Cry? Metal Gear? SOCOM? SWAT? Splinter Cell? Gun? Quake? Doom? because morons point fingers without thinking.

All the parents who say things like "video games ruined my kids lives" should be in no condition to complain. they should blame theirselves for buying their games, computers, consoles, and paying for their internet and WOW subscriptions, and raising their kid to be an idiot.

i swear, if they do ban those games, there WILL be more violence and school shootings.


ps: i have no objection to alchohol, i just used it as an example

This just proves my point that politicians and most other people are just god damned idiots.

I've read through a lot of this, and I agree with almost all of the comments.

I myself am an avid internet gamer, playing a lot of Counter-Strike and Starcraft, both games that can be considered violent. If a parent is too lazy to be responsible and watch over their children's behavior to make sure they're not doing something they'd disapprove of, like playing violent games are watching pornography, they shouldn't even HAVE those kids to begin with. I know that sounds harsh, but it's true. You're too occupied with other things to watch over them, so what's going to stop them from going out when they're a little older and partying to a dangerous extent? Doing drugs? Getting involved in other kinds of criminal activity? These parents that seek an easy way out such as voting for a politician that gives empty promises of reform need to mature and find out what REAL parenting is.

I'm not saying that violent video games and criminal activity have anything to do with each other. In my opinion they don't, since the majority of people can differenciate between simulated/fake violence and real violence occuring in the real world. I'll admit that I started playing Doom and Doom II when I was only around five or six years old. My parents let me play it without a care. It's not that they didn't care about my wellbeing, it's because they knew that even though I was young, I could tell the difference between a Cacodemon's guts being spilled onto the ground in a game and a grown man's head being cut off in front of me in real life.

Simply put, people need to actually parent their kids and take care of other parts of their life, and not expect some stupid Governor or President to solve their problems for them.

Why does everyone critisizing this guy? What exactly has he done wrong? Did anyone care to notice the age of the child buying GUN? They were under 10 years old, I would personally support him on that. I support Canadian ratings (most 18+ games in America are 14+ in Canada) because they make sense. Gratiutously violent games are rated mature along with games that have heavy sexual content. This makes sense to me. And you all need to understand that when he says death penalty for child molesters, he says REPEAT child molesters. this means people who've already served a jail term and were NOT rehabilitated. If you can't be rehabilitated and still choose (whether it's subconcious or not) to disobey the law, there is no way for you to coagulate with today's society.

He's NOT pointing anything at the video games, you all need to understand that. Most of you are young teenagers (I can easily tell this by your writing style, name choices and grammer) and instantly place biases on anything that's Patriotic and/or Republican. These politicians aren't stupid people who are out to point fingers. You, atleast most of you here, would not even be effected by this law. When he says minors banned from excessivley violent and pornographic games. That's what he means. He never said "games were a contributor to colombine" So don't THINK he meant to say that.

I don't get you people, i'm a democrat but I can't understand why you all hold such strong anti-republican biases becase you think they are out to get at you. If you're not being effected by these video-games then get your parents to purchase them. If you aren't allowed to purchase pronographic games when you're under 18, well then don't purchase them. You don't need to get your fixes from electric projections. I'm a heavy gamer myself but I choose to play games selectivley and violent games often tire me because they aren't often indepth whatsoever and run off of theiir violent aspect.

Stop being so god damned biased and listen to what people have to say.

i cant stand bs like this, people defamating a popular industry to score votes because the industry promotes fantasy violence in a totally fictional setting, e.g. GTA: San Andreas, yes gang culture/violence is a real issue, but playing a game like that isnt going to make people start stealing military issue helicopters with "miniguns" attached to them, killing everyone on their way to a good vantage point to get the police's attention, and spending a good half hour seeing now many pedestrian and police heads they can shoot off, and if anyone DID do that, i can assure you that they would be sitting there with their rifle and when someone eventually shoots them, theyre going to pick up a PS2 controller and hammer in the health cheat, to no avail of course, if that DID work i'd carry a ps2 controller around ALL the time, who needs band-aids when you have an input device for a popular console?

Anyway, jokes aside, this man is a FOOL, associating fantasy violence and internet paedophilia is out of order, KILL HE! (just a joke of course ;p)

Okay now. I work at an EB Games and right now, policy stands at NO SALES OF M RATED GAMES TO MINORS. If the parent is not present and consenting, we do not sell the game. Plus, if it's an EXCEEDINGLY VIOLENT game, like Manhunt or Nanobreaker, we tell the parent about the content before making the sale.


And it's not fair to ban all M-rated games. A title, such as the aforementioned Manhunt, is probably one of the most violent, gory, and brutal games I know; you are a serial killer, and the goal of the game is to escape a prison-town scott-free, killing your adversaries as violently as possible. On the other end of the spectrum is Halo; it has some cursing in it- MOSTLY words like "damn" or "asshole" and the occasional "shit"- and alien and human blood- but it's no worse than most war simulators, which stay at a steady T for Teen. Why is that?



Sometimes parents are bullied by their children to buy games, and they don't even know what it's about; there was a case when a mother was going to buy GTA: San Andreas for her son without even knowing anything about it. Once I told her, however, she immediately told him "No." And that was that; she left, thanking me for telling her. There are other parents who come in and buy GTA for their five-year-old, even after me telling them about the game. It's up to the parents' what game their child plays, and frankly, half the parents who some into my store are horrible parents and horrible people, who thinks the world revovles around them and passes that idea to their children.



I know sometimes cashiers ignore the policy to sell to minors, but honestly, even if it's made a law, they'll still ignore it. Some people in that company will do anything to make a sale, and there's not much you can do to monitor it more than it already is. The big executives don't care either, and passing a law will only cause them to find a way to duck around it.


If Mark Taylor TRULY wanted to fix the problem, he'd do one of three things:


1. Destroy every game under an E-rating.

2. Kill every child and run a screening test for every human being before allowing them to get pregnant.

3. Bring on Armageddon.





Besides that? Even a new law won't help. We'll just have more felons in this country than we already do.



And about the sexual offenders? I don't particularly have a standing on the death penalty, but a sexual offender officially includes an 18-year-old boy having sex with his 17-year-old girlfriend. Should he be killed for a stupid mistake?

-_-' Well, by stupid mistake, I meant, "something that could possibly get you sent to jail." If you want to nail your girl, rock out and nail her. But just make sure Mark Taylor doesn't get you executed for it.

Governor fights all the right battles...

Mark Taylor wants you to know he has all his priorities in order. He intends to fight for all the things that matter, mostly your kids. Stopping pedophiles, Killing child molestors, and stopping violent video games. Well who can argue with that? I mean...

A reply to the Canadian:
While most of the posts on this particular topic were undoubtedly by teens, your grammar is not much better. He's implying that children have for TOO much access TO videogames. Instead of coagulate, you should've used something along the lines of reintegrate. Your spelling is also quite subpar (its disprove, not dissprove).

You imply that these people hate anything republican or patriotic, I AM BOTH, but these statements are still unacceptable, no matter what your political views.

And as for the reason why everyone is getting on this, its because to be honest, THIS MAY WELL BE THE GATEWAY INTO SOMETHING SO MUCH WORSE. If they pass this law, the fear is that it'll lead to outlawing all of a certain type of game (no GTA, it causes kids to go out and shoot things). It may well become the snowball effect, starting out as a tiny snowball and ending as an avalanche, with first the banning of one game series, one genre, one company, then the banning of another, till we're left with either no games or that 'edutainment' bullshit.

Why are video games the new scapegoat? Because Dungeons and Dragons got too old. Seriously though, its because when things like this happen, no one wants to take the blame. In Columbine, it couldn't be the parents fault, for not checking in on what their kids were doing in the garage (if my kid was to do such a thing and ask me not to come in the garage, he'd get a hearty 'fuck you son this is my house I'll go wherever I damn well please.' If my son got caught stealing a car, he wouldn't have to worry about what the cops would do, his bigger problem would be me.

When I was young, I played games like Wolfenstein 3d, Duke Nukem, and Doom. I have yet to kill a civilian, or to take out my frustrations on others in so violent a manner. I'm not gonna go into a school shooting because 'the jocks were mean to me'. Boo fucking hoo. I turned out fine, everyone I know turned out fine so could it be conceivable that these kids were just fucked up to begin with? I do not doubt that they were 'mentally unstable and in a fragile state, along with antisocial'.

To parents: PAY ATTENTION TO YOUR KIDS!
Spend time with them.
If they like to game, pick up a controller and play with them.
Some of my fondest memories of my family of late is of my father, my son, and my cousin all playing Guitar hero.
Look at what your kids are doing on the internet. It should not be the government's job to watch them! They're YOUR kids.
And sometimes, its good to just go out somewhere and do something with the kids. Take them out to the park, on a run. Take them out to a real shooting range. Spend time with them.

Don't let people like Taylor ruin our hobby.

I've got a killer idea for a game, one that would clearly be government approved! Hell, they'd love it!

Torture Chamber: Syria Edition! Screw dumping people's heads in toilets in Bully, now you can half drown some terrorist suspect until he confesses!
Play the sounds of screams in another room and tell him you're killing his wife and kids! Cord him to a wall and hit him with bull whips! Beat him, strip him, humiliate him, and all in the name of national security!

Then deny that it was torture instead of if it happened. In fact, be PROUD of it. THAT'S a game I know our government would want shipped out to all children.
Next one: Pedophile 'Lectric Chair. Strap them to an electric chair, hang them, and burn them. Cruel and unusual is relative!
And why not every single kind of person that the government doesn't like? If games really affect psychological responses that much, then why don't they cut MORE out of education and start mass-producing these suckers? With HDR!

NOTE: Sarcasm ^

In all seriousness, why can't people like this leave their heads in their asses (reference to a political cartoon aired in MA that got thrown off the air for retardedness and indecency)? Then they couldn't talk to anyone. I seriously have doubts that any of them even believe the things they say. If they had any knowledge on the issues they dissemble endlessly on about, they're the biggest lying bastards that have ever been elected to office.

Oh, and Canadian? When he said they weren't actually buying those games, he meant that it was friggin' staged. And what he's actually saying is not important since it's a sound bite, designed to get people's attention about how righteous and holy he is. He's condeming video games and he's condeming pedophiles. Yes, in the same comercial, thus linking them. Why is he doing that? Probably to seem like a hardass to his majority Republican voters.
Ayuh, it's true, by the way: ESRB is voluntary. But since no self-respecting store will sell any lacking such a rating, and since all those stores are now refusing sale to anyone under eighteen of all M video games (never understood the difference between M and AO, since an eighteen year old can buy either but anyone under can't) ever since parents started suing the stores after they stopped paying attention to their kids and the kid played some horribly gruesome game like Half-Life 2. We don't NEED legislation about video games since the industry is already VERY hard on itself about these issues. Harder, in fact, than most movies are (watch A History of Violence or Underworld: Evolution and don't tell me that they'd be M rated, the equivalent of R. They'd not even make AO; No producer would make them). On the other hand, plenty of eight year olds happily go to watch those movies. Probably unescorted by parents, just like they were when buying Gun. And, of course, nobody cares about movies since they've been around for such a long time. I mean, both of those had sex, swearing, nudity, intense violence, gore, and varying levels of mortality (Violence had fewer people dying but much more graphic depictions; Underworld's worst was either a werewolf's jaw being ripped off, a man's head being cut apart, a werewolf's head being ripped in two, or Marcus being torn up by a helicopter's blades (fully shown, not like Indianna Jones at all)

www.MAVAV.org. Mothers against videogame addiction and violence. Another soccer-mom (sorry) society hell bent on "Protecting our children." Check out their "studies."

I think giving the death penalty to child molesters is wrong. the fact is

statistics show that 1-6 girls will be molested before age 18. if we were

to create a law to have child molesters killed. we would be creating mass

genocide. including cops, the government would be sending there own

police to death. I saw on tv were a cop hade charges filed against him

for child molestation. Americans need to rise up and get some balls and put

pressure on the government to stop creating such crazy laws. there are

millions of child molesters out there. and we need to sue the government

for even trying to create such laws. I mean what next are they gonna be

dreaming up? public executions for parents that spank there kids for

doing something they shouldnt do?

WTF?!?!? WHO THE FUCK GIVES A HELL ITS ALL BULLSHIT LET THEME BE ASSHOLES!