NY Lawmakers Argued Over Video Game Bill But Never Came to Blows, Says Report

NY Lawmakers Argued Over Video Game Bill But Never Came to Blows, Says Report

June 6, 2007
In yesterday's coverage, GamePolitics picked up on a Statewide News Service report which said that a pair of New York legislators nearly came to blows while debating violent video game legislation.

However, a source who attended the hearing in Albany quickly informed GP that the SNS report was overstated and we made that fact known in an update. The Staten Island Advance has more on the incident:
A report that state Sens. Andrew Lanza and Ruth Hassell-Thompson almost practiced what they were preaching against - nearly getting into a slugfest at a violent video game hearing - is bunk, the two lawmakers said today.

...While the senators briefly raised their voices, the exchange never grew nasty, and neither rose from their chairs on either side of the dais.

Sen. Ruth Hassell-Thompson (D, left), one of the participants, said:
It was passion on both our parts, not real anger. I think [Statewide News Service] overreacted and I wasn't excited about reading it.

Sen. Andrew Lanza (R) added:
It was the type of constructive debate we want to have at these hearings. People have opinions and we're not there to quell them. She and I have worked together on this, and we don't agree completely but we both want the same thing.

Comments

lol, I can't wait untill their legisterations get shot down anyway....

I think after this little fiasco it's going to be more funny to see their bills get shot down.
So was I the only one who took the "almost came to blows" comment figuratively?
Rather then putting unconstitutional restrictions on video games (as apposed to all other forms of media with violence in it) why not just pass a law along with the ESA and ESRB that would educate parents through commercials, and advertisments in newpapers and magazines about the ESRB rating system and what it entails.
The fact of the matter is, beyond any sort of proven harm it's up to parents to make sure their children aren't getting ahold of Free Speech materials that they find innappropriate or unsuitable for their children (whether it be "M" rated games, Harry Potter books or even the Holy Bible which if it was put into game or movie form would be an R rated movie or M rated game). This would give the parents the tools to deal with it themselves.
If parents are to lazy or stupid to use these tools then it's their fault and maybe they shouldn't be having fricken kids to begin with. Hell, if parents are to lazy or stupid to raise their own children and need the nanny-state to do it for them, then they should probably have their kids taken away from them for awhile until they're willing to be give it their all in raising their own kids.
Too bad they didnt get each other sent on leave for fighting....

Would have taken down the Bills number of helpers.
See, then it wouldn't be fear mongering if the ESRB educated parents about the ratings system. If that were to happen, what would the politicians do with all the taxpayer money they didn't spend on funding pointless video game laws, or paying the legal fees of the ESA? They'd probably do something wild and crazy and TOTALLY unheard of... like funding schools that aren't doing so well, or trying to fix health care. Then where would we be, huh? Suddenly we have better schools and hospitals, but no video game laws to protect the children...

Blech, early morning doesn't agree with me. My sarcasm generator is broken.
@MaskedPixelante

Ah! Just grab a cup of coffee and you'll be back to normal. And yes, taxpayers money would be better spent on fixing the health care system, fixing the school system and of course educating parents on how they themselves can protect (God, i hate that word) their children from entertainment materials that they think they're children need protection from.
"It was the type of constructive debate we want to have at these hearings. "

LOL Constructive debate would be one in which they were debating the constitutionality of both bills.
@ BMK

There is no law necessary to fund a state wide education promotion of the ESRB ratings. They do need the House and Senate to approve the allocation of funding to such a project. But that would make too much sence for the government.

But I aggree, education not legislation is the key for parents to successfully regulate the media consumption of their kids.
The mainstream media engaged in hystrionics and hyperbole over an issue related to gaming?!

Say it ain't so!
So let's translate what was being said here.

Sen. Ruth Hassell-Thompson
"He pissed me off! That sonofabitch was just getting on my nerves. I think my bill should be struck down first so that all the soccer moms and ignorant fools who voted for me can feel like I am doing something about a non-issue. Then the @&$%ing media had to go and report on it. Damn, I hate those bastards. Always reporting on stuff. They should just trust us! Then the world would be a better place."

Sen. Andrew Lanza
"She said what!? Oh, that bitch. Stealing my thunder! I started this whole pissing contest! I had the original bill! She should just shut up and make my dinner! Which is what I was trying to tell her yesterday. That She needs to shut up and let me regulate this pornography. This is my free votes generator. She and the others have just jumped on the band-wagon. We want the same thing? I don't care! This is my gravy train."

Yea, that sounds a little more like what they were really saying.
If you read the full artcile, Lanza contradicts himself, big time.

From the article:
"Lanza said most games already include the rating, and the mandate would not include restrictions on selling them -- the point on which other laws were killed"

Section S 614 of Lanza's bill:
"No person, partnership, or corporation shall sell or rent or attempt to sell or rent at retail a video game in contravention of the rating affixed thereto"
Oh..my..god.

I had no idea that Anti-gamers were so violent.
@Gameboy

No. That's not at all what they were saying.
@ Korrd

OK, I'm a little biased (let me have a little fun). In truth, they made statements that were designed to make it sound like they are not out of control loose cannons. They wanted to show solidarity and assure the voters that they are completely competent, responsible individuals who work hard to ensure that bad legislation doesn't get passed.

It's all bunk though. Lies and deceit.
Gameboy
not to mention it mostly revolved around them bickering over whos bill will be passed and not the reason why both would fail....
"It was the type of constructive debate we want to have at these hearings."

And yet not one of you 'polichickens" can have such a debate with anyone from the industry you both wish to attack.
Apparently parents in America want to protect their children to give them a strong moral code and a strong character as adults. But I was flipping through the channels trying to find something entertaining on TV and I found a 16 year old being thrown an extravagant party and receiving a brand new vehicle that most adults I know couldn't afford. Whats the occasion? 16th birthday.

We are setting a grand example of how to run things. Take all credit for yourself, give the blame to others and do everything in your power to make things easier and more pleasant for your offspring. The next generation be weaker, more selfish and more foolish than this one. Good news is that things will probably become more interesting and entertaining. Joy.

I'm glad I don't live in NY but it still angers me that people are willing to put someone in prison over the sale of a video game. Take away someones freedom and embarrass them daily for a large portion of their because the store manager at FB games has been busting their balls to sell more video games. Even if that wasn't the case and the individual just sold a minor a game plain and simple is prison a justified punishment? Little Jimmy played a bad game so a small replaceable cog in the machine gets thrown into prison. Why can't the parent simply take the game, return it, and smack their kid. Whenever I did something stupid or wrong at the very least I was yelled at and I knew that It wasn't a good thing to do. Maybe the southern states aren't truly the breeding(or inbreeding) ground for stupidity. Maybe it moved north to NY... wait... hold on.. let me check... yeah... I think it did.

Perhaps the supporters of this bill should be sent to prison until they can no longer procreate. So in case stupidity is genetic perhaps the future generations will have a brighter future.

Zoink
Just another battle of the Crips vs. Bloods, it didn't even matter what they were actually debating about, just that one was a Repugnant and the other a Democrap. That's why we couldn't even tell who stood for what.
Hello! Good Site! Thanks you! ksmxhlvnkiypod
[...] Game Politics reports on Sen. Charles Bishop (R) slugging Sen. Lowell Baron (D) on the floor of the Alabama state senate. This comes as a follow-up to an earlier report, since clarified that U.S. senators nearly came to blows over video game legislation. [...]

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 07/04/09 at 09:24pm
PHX Corp: For those that want to know what i watching it's called man vs cartoon(a.k.a fixing Wile E. coyote's Mistakes one trap at a time by EMERTEC)
Posted 07/04/09 at 08:20pm
GoodRobotUs: Went out for my Mum's 65th Birthday, which is the only relevance 4/7 has in the UK for me ;)
Posted 07/04/09 at 08:18pm
Andrew Eisen: Beach + fireworks + root beer + strawberries, blackberries, raspberries, whipped topping, and pound cake = my Fourth of July!
Posted 07/04/09 at 07:58pm
GoodRobotUs: Which seems to be the only point Jack proved, that some people find some games offensive. i.e. Nothing.
Posted 07/04/09 at 07:57pm
GoodRobotUs: The discussion was supposed to be whether games were dangerous not 'Do you find some games offensive'...
Posted 07/04/09 at 07:55pm
GoodRobotUs: Some agreed, some didn't, but it was their choice to make, not the governments.
Posted 07/04/09 at 07:55pm
GoodRobotUs: By asking the audience their opinion, he more or less proved that it's a matter of personal choice
Posted 07/04/09 at 07:55pm
GoodRobotUs: Meh, he ended proving Mark's point for him
Posted 07/04/09 at 07:26pm
Erik: Jack if you are reading this you are a LIAR. There is no legal weight to the MPAA's ratings.
Posted 07/04/09 at 07:24pm
JDKJ: I still think my buddy the midget who rides a unicycle backwards while juggling four bowling pins would have been a much bigger hit with that crowd. And he can make up statistics and misinterpret studies, too.
Posted 07/04/09 at 06:33pm
Alyric: Of course, Mark falls into the common trap about Columbine, which had nothing to do with bullying, etc. See: http://slate.msn.com/id/2099203/?GT1=3256 for a more thorough explanation.
Posted 07/04/09 at 06:32pm
PHX Corp: Read this http://www.destructoid.com/sgc-09-liveblogging-the-jack-thompson-debate-138502.phtml#ext
Posted 07/04/09 at 05:54pm
PHX Corp: JT is afraid of such ban then advocates it That's what i call a total Hypocrite
Posted 07/04/09 at 05:50pm
PHX Corp: AE: JT is a -Bleeping- Jackass
Posted 07/04/09 at 05:07pm
Andrew Eisen: JT "knew it would be a good audience." Not what he said on Tuesday.
Posted 07/04/09 at 05:01pm
Andrew Eisen: VG cause violent behavior. VG companies influence behavior to get sales. Yeah, that makes sense. (To be fair, the Twitter feed makes deciphering JT's point pretty tough.)
Posted 07/04/09 at 04:52pm
Andrew Eisen: Yes, it's been proposed but as far as I know it has not been passed. Big difference.
Posted 07/04/09 at 04:50pm
Cheater87: http://www.gamezine.co.uk/news/formats/xbox360/all-violent-video-games-be-banned-in-germany-$1301757.htm
Posted 07/04/09 at 04:49pm
Andrew Eisen: Far as I know, Germany has not banned all violent video games.
Posted 07/04/09 at 04:44pm
Cheater87: Jack wants the US to follow Germany's total video game ban.
Login or register to post shouts