New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

July 22, 2008

Nearly 90 days post-launch, Grand Theft Auto IV is still raising the ire of watchdog groups.

The New Zealand Herald reports that the Society for the Promotion of Community Standards has been granted permission to appeal GTA IV's R18 rating. The group notes on its website that the appeal will be made to New Zealand's Office of Film & Literature Classification.

The SPCS quotes from a decision issued yesterday by Brendan Boyle (left), New Zealand's Secretary of Internal Affairs:

I found no evidence in the [SPCS] application to suggest that it was vexatious... I then considered whether the application for leave was frivolous (trivial, needless or unfounded, or so untenable that it could not succeed) under the Guidelines... I found that the application for leave from the SPCS appeared to be tenable in that it could possibly succeed. The application was therefore not frivolous. It is also my view that the SPCS has established an arguable prima facie case for the application to be considered by the Board.

Since R18 is New Zealand's most stringent rating, a successful appeal by the SPCS would result in a national ban of the exceedingly popular game.

GP: Thanks to GamePolitics reader Solufien for the tip!

Comments

Re: New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

Which means Rockstar are going to make bumper profits for the next few weeks.

Where would their profits be without morality watchdogs I wonder?

Re: New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

I have always wondered where their game would be with out the nonstop watchdogs screaming havoc.  After all the first GTA sucked the second one was eh the third one was the second one but "3D"!.!.! and frankly all of them after that were number three rewraped with one or two new items.  In fact other than the sandbox concept which was being developed by other companies (and you might even claim other games had already capitalized on the concept) the game is just not that great; the storylines are usually lacking (imo) and the over all gameplay is really lacking (once again imo).  But I will always give them kudos for driving Jack nuts and pushing the envelope on what should be allowed in games (I come from a time when hidden sex scenes is what sold the game in the first place not outraged the buyer, good old Larry looking for love and never finding it =( )

Re: New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

I'm assuimg R18 means 18 year olds ... so in New Zealand are they saying their Adults are so weak will and weak minded that the horrors of playing a video game with animated graphic is to horrible to beyond the scope of their intelligence that it will crack the very reality they live in causing them moral, emotional, and physical damage?

Re: New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

correct Jeremy, but that's watchdog groups for ya...
To blinded by their own ambition and sense of self-importance to see that it's already labeled as high as it'll go and won't be sold to minors. (atleast not often, I doubt the measure is 100% effective)

Porn is so much more wholesome.
Silly, Hypocritical goons, all of them...

Re: New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

I think it's more of a bragging rights / image thing. If you can say that you got GTA banned, you'd get major kudos from fellow narrow-minders.

Now I'm confused...

Hmm, I just checked the SPCS' website and they are appealing the rating given to the US version, which as I understand it was the one rated by our censors but not the one sold. We ended up getting the same cut version as the Aussies (Grrrr).

So even if their appeal is succesful the version currently sold shouldn't be banned as it is the tamer version. Having said that though, I'm still unclear why the cut version of GTA IV we got was rated as R18 when it was cut specifically to obtain the R15 rating (or whatever) in Australia?

Also on the subject of hipocrisy: While they are appealing the rating of GTA they also appealed against the rating of a movie about Christianity which contained violence and got the film lowered from R16 to R13.

So violence is okay, as long as its suppors their message? Nice.

-ConstantNeophyte: always the newb, ALWAYS.

Re: New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

It got an R18, why ban it?

Re: New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

Hmm, first post was eaten (because of the link to SPCS' website?)

Anyway, the reason for the banning is that the game doesn't fit their ideals, that and they have a petty grudge against our Cheif Censor and his "Gay Agenda"...

Check out their website: just google "Society for the Promotion of Community Standards"

-ConstantNeophyte: always the newb, ALWAYS.

Re: New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

Morality: Stopping you from seeing, playing or doing anything I dont like. This is an R18+ which means only adults can buy it. Adults can make their own decisions, especially when it comes to moral decisions.

Conservatives dont want "morals" they want tyrany and freedoms suppressed. I am supprised this is happening in NZ, I thought they were alot more liberal than Aus.

Most likley nobody will listen to these bible bashes.

Re: New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

There are moral gaurdians everywhere.

Like rats...

-ConstantNeophyte: always the newb, ALWAYS.

Re: New Zealand Clears Morals Group to Petition for GTA IV Ban

And like flies on rats they come and spread their disgusting disease to innocent people irregardless of consequences or (ironically) whether it would be moral or not.

Although unlike a real disease their infectious bile doesn't seem to effect die hard christians or other die hard 'moral' (I use the term only as an identifier not as a means to describe them) crusaders.

Post new comment

By posting comments on this Web site you agree to abide by the Comments Policy.
The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.

More information about formatting options

CAPTCHA
This image is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions. The letters in the picture are all UPPER-CASE.
Image CAPTCHA
Copy the characters (respecting upper/lower case) from the image.

GamePolitics ShoutBox

Posted 09/05/08 at 01:50am
Flamespeak: To be fair, if you dismiss video games as contributors to violence in youth, it is hypocritical to say they cause heroism.
Posted 09/04/08 at 09:21pm
Tarosan: @gamepolitics has he actually lost his job or is on the verge of being disgraced forever?
Posted 09/04/08 at 09:21pm
HalfShadow: If either of you waste good music on him, I swear I will kill you.
Posted 09/04/08 at 09:19pm
Tarosan: I shall blare out "We are Champions" as soon as he gets sacked and post a celebration video on Youtube :P
Posted 09/04/08 at 07:45pm
King of Fiji: @Austin: Go try "I'm Going Slightly Mad" it describes Jack 's mind greatly. xD
Posted 09/04/08 at 07:25pm
Austin_Lewis: @King and Grizzam: I'm going to stand on my mansion's front porch with my Les Paul and Marshall half stack and play both.
Posted 09/04/08 at 07:17pm
ZippyDSMlee: gamepolitics: loseign the bar dose. mostly, hecan still sit in with other lawyers tho..
Posted 09/04/08 at 06:51pm
gamepolitics: He has no job to lose...
Posted 09/04/08 at 06:16pm
King of Fiji: @GRIZZAM PRIME: Instead of the standard "We Are the Champions" might I suggest trying "Hammer to Fall" instead? :D
Posted 09/04/08 at 05:49pm
GRIZZAM PRIME: Jack's disbarment...I already have the giant speakers and the Queen CD rigged up...
Posted 09/04/08 at 04:40pm
Tarosan: I'm hoping Jack loses his job in two weeks... the stupidity in his posts is just well DUMB
Posted 09/04/08 at 03:18pm
ZippyDSMlee: Bannign is stupid,but regulating things for the use by the..er.. "mature" is not so bad.
Posted 09/04/08 at 03:01pm
ZippyDSMlee: SimonBob:and if he was drunk he would be a bad shot, at least at range(8+feet). 20+ proof needs to be reserved for 25ish+ year old while 5-12% beer and wine be approved for 18+.
Posted 09/04/08 at 02:59pm
ZippyDSMlee: SimonBob: why? a 6 pack or 2 would be enough to get anyone drunk, theres no point is banning the harder stuff. sipping the harder stuff in small shot glasses having about. 15oz of it is alot better than drinking 10 12oz cans in a row..... and if he wa
Posted 09/04/08 at 02:53pm
SimonBob: You guys suck at this. The article says Gill drank "2 to 7 drinks a day, including the day of the shooting" and not one of you
Posted 09/04/08 at 02:53pm
SimonBob: countered me with "obviously they should ban alcohol." (And hey, I'm all for criminalizing anything over 100 proof.)
Posted 09/04/08 at 02:49pm
sortableturnip: I remember some woman died from sniffing a man's armpit...ban deoderant! ban armpits!!
Posted 09/04/08 at 02:48pm
sortableturnip: No more gas? Does that mean I have to hold in my farts?
Posted 09/04/08 at 02:27pm
PHOENIXZERO: Pencils too! The kiddies could go out imitating the Joker and want to show people a magic trick! Heck, ban the Dark Knight!
Posted 09/04/08 at 02:18pm
JustChris: @barra: damn, that just reminded me of the lady that died from too much water in a radio-hosted contest.
Login or register to post shouts