It is Unconstutional, Next person please

All this anti-culture legislation is a direct example of why a centralized government is innapropriate.

People are much more psychologically well adjusted when allowed to influence the policy that affects them directly. Centralized governance breeds irrationality, and tends to end up promoting war and economic exploitation.

I'd rather see people freely fighting in games, than fighting in real life, over ideology or resources.

Prediction: This goes nowhere.

It will be shot down.  Again.

Tax dollars will be wasted.  Again.

M. Carusi

Capitol Gaming

http://capitolgaming.blogspot.com

According to his bio page, he was involved with the Heartland Institute, which seems to be opposed to anti-smoker laws (they also have crazy ideas about global warming).

Seems odd to be against smoking laws but for legislating games. 

I doubt the video game Law is going anywhere(It is going to end up being stuck in commitee)

Not to mention that he is opposed to smoking laws, which smells like HYPOCRYTE ALERT(x2)

How nice of him to include activities between concenting adults in his list of horrible things that little Jimmy shouldn't be corrupted by.

*grrrr*

I'm surpised he didn't include 'homosexualty, non-christian religions, global warming, evolution, or tofu' in his bill.

So it'll be like shopping at toys r us for videogames eh?  They have to bee hidden behind the counter?

What idiocy.  Meanwhile, you can find porn at suncoast on the racks behind opaque sheets of plastic ooooh.

So this bill:

-Is unconstitutional because of the 1st Amendment

-Is redundant because of the ESRB

-Singles out video games while ignoring movies, television, and other media

Yeah, threes strikes and it needs to be scrapped.

Jack Thompson's video game bill is picking up steam in Utah and will probably be passed.

This is just bogus.

Reminds me of a joke told by Hedburg, about questions on an application:  "Have you ever tried PCP or sugar?" Wait a second, I have not tried PCP, but I had sugar on my cereal just this morning.

They are putting rape, sodomy and beasty on the bill just to lump it together with "violent crime". If EVERY movie that "glorified" violent crime was required to be rated R and locked up, then I wouldn't mind so much. As it is, R rated movies are kept in nice, low, child friendly racks in the middle of the videogame department at WalMart. And a lot of PG and PG-13 movies would count as glorifying violent crime.

In the end, the law will be struck down for numerous problems. The biggest problem I have with it is that it wants to treat videogames and movies so differently. It really seems that a lot of these people are so disconnected with the real world that really think video games are porn.

I wasn't aware that bestiality ran rampant enough in games to merrit a warning... or at all for that matter.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety" - Benjamin Franklin

This proposal is fully constitutional.  Restricting physical access by minors to adult products has been deemed constitutional for about 220 years now.   If the industry doesn want sequestration of adult materials, then it can unilaterally take its ESRB age ratings off the product.  It's a voluntary system, and the ESRB is the entity that put the games into this little corner.

GameStop already sequesters certain games  behind the counter.  Are you posters here serious in not knowing THAT?

Wrong, Andrew.  R-rated movies are restricted to consumers over 17.  Been to a Blockbuster lately?  You think that a movie is not speech but a video game is? 

This is from the Texas Code.  Note that it contains a shield and sequestration provision, underlined.  Same thing they want to do in New York.  Constitutional, sorry guys:

Sec.

A43.24.AASALE, DISTRIBUTION, OR DISPLAY OF HARMFULA (a)AAFor purposes of this section:AA"Minor" means an individual younger than 18 years.AA"Harmful material" means material whose dominantAAappeals to the prurient interest of a minor,AAis patently offensive to prevailingAAis utterly without redeeming social value forAAA person commits an offense if, knowing that theAAand knowing the person is a minor, he sells,AAhe displays harmful material and is reckless about

MATERIAL TO MINOR.

(1)

(2)

theme taken as a whole:

6

(A)

in sex, nudity, or excretion;

(B)

standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is

suitable for minors; and

(C)

minors.

(b)

material is harmful:

(1)

distributes, exhibits, or possesses for sale, distribution, or

exhibition to a minor harmful material;

(2)

whether a minor is present who will be offended or alarmed by the

display;

Why argue the legality of it?  Why not just argue the common sense of it all?

Restricting sales to minors will not bring down violent crime.  It will not stop the next Columbine from happening, and it won't keep little Timmy from seeing or hearing things his mom and dad don't want him to see and hear.

You cannot sanitize the world for your children.  Better to prepare them to deal with the realities of life than blind them with the illusion of your delusion.

"You know what I wish? I wish all the scum of the Earth had one throat and I had my hands about it."

Why is there a rating system?

Simple.

Because not every individual or Parent thinks alike.

We do not share the same beliefs, interests, or consider the same material appropriate for our child that someone else does.

As with the MPAA and the TV Rating system, the ESRB contains information that each individual and Parent requires to make at least a partially informed decision.

It contains an overall flashcard lettering system.  Each rating system does.  The rating systems have changed over time.  Look at the MPAA article in Wikipedia.  That rating system has gone through several changes over the decades.

We should also note that while there are age ratings, what constitutes an "age appropriate" value changes over time.  Society either grows more leinient or more strict.  Watch TV for the past 30 years.  Look at what has become of language censorship.  It varies.  Both based on WHO is doing the censoring as well as overall society.

The very fact that one person may see a game as rated T while another thinks it should be rated M is evidence of this.  Indeed, the previous article about the Nintendo game supposedly containing "Islam is the light" is another example.  Notice the implied complaint that because the game supposedly contained that one line, an E rating was not strict enough.

Imagine trying to set a rating system for written literature (books, magazines, newspapers, etc).

Why have ratings?

Because while one person may not think that GTA I is appropriate for their 10 year old, another may think, after knowing their child for the last 10 years and evaluating the content, design, context, and other factors, that the game may be sufficiently appropriate for their own child.  They may learn otherwise.  But in the end, they know better what is or is not appropriate for their own child.

It isn't about the material being "harmful".  It's about Parents being informed. 

"Hey, it's an M rated game!  Why?  Let's see..."  :: Looks at the various descriptors. ::

The flash card ratings are eye catchers that say "pay close attention, there is content in this game that you may not approve of."

I like the rating system.  What I don't like is some Tin-Pot-Dictator-Wannabe telling me what I SHOULD find appropriate or not appropriate for myself or my own child.  (Note I said "dictate" as opposed to offering a simple opinion that I can follow or dismiss at my leisure.)

Nightwng2000

NW2K Software

Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl

So are they going to make you take M rated games out of the door in non-descript brown bags now too?

Can't you just see it, sleazy guys in sunglasses, hats, brown trench-coats going up to the counter "So, can I get a copy of GTAIV?"

Old lady: "YOU STAY AWAY FROM MY GRANDSON YOU PERVERT!"

Clerk: "Ma'am its just a video game. Not porn."

Old Lady: "Well that's worse!"

Yet another unconstitutional piece of garbage for the pile, as it violates both the First Amendment's guarantee of freedom of speech and the Fourteenth Amendment's guarantee of equal protection under the law, and is unconstitutionally broad.

Now then, on to the latest jabroni troll, saulytarsus, Metropolitian Moron of Miami, Painus in your Anus, it doesn't matter what his name is:

-Rating systems are merely suggestions, nothing more, nothing less. Although, you can now argue that the MPAA's system has turned into a joke now that the movie studios have been releasing unrated versions of the films on DVD with more and more frequency.

-On that note, it is much, much easier for a 12 year old with "no parent in sight" to buy unrated movies such as Superbad, Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Step Brothers, Pineapple Express, the American Pie movies, National Lampoon's Van Wilder, etc., than it is for that same 12 year old to buy GTA IV, Fallout 3, Call of Duty 4, Call of Duty: World at War, Saints Row 2, etc. And not just because most of the stores either have most of the more recently released games(most Greatest Hits games and other older games are put on shelves next to those cases) behind a glass case or behind the counter(all due to potential theft/shoplifting issues), unless it's the Guitar Hero and Rock Band packages. The Federal Trade Commission gave the video game industry its best grades ever in the last report.

-Funny, you neglect to mention that it's not just M-rated games are behind those glass cases or behind the counter, but also E and E-10 rated games like Madden NFL, NASCAR, Kingdom Hearts: Re: Chain of Memories, Chrono Trigger DS, Pokemon Diamond and Pearl, etc.

-Come to think of it, sales to "12-year-olds with no parents in sight"(if it actually happens) only accounts for less than 1% of all video game sales! Do the math.

Now, onto the Constitution:

If you’re going to infringe on a Constitutional right like freedom of speech based on the claim that the speech in question is “dangerous”, then you better damn well show absolute proof of that. It’s NEVER been done. There is no proof that any harm will come of anyone playing a “violent” video game.

If there is a danger so clear and so threatening to the American people that causes these self-righteous politicians to step on the First Amendment, wouldn’t any rational thinking person have to believe that the danger would have to be so obvious and clear that there would be no argument against it? Especially since you’re directly contradicting a Constitutional amendment.

We, the American people, have not been given any valid reason to believe that this abridging of our freedom of speech is necessary. There just simply isn’t any evidence at all of any danger from “violent” video games. This “protection” from “violent” video games isn’t needed or wanted for that matter, but please feel free to use everyone’s tax dollars for protection from things like a 10-foot storm surge from a Category 3 or greater hurricane or the fuselage of a 747 airplane entering the workplace or the home.
 

And two more things:

1) if Arizona wins the Super Bowl, it will be by a field goal at best(Pittsburgh's defense is the best in the league). I said on another forum Arizona 27-24.

2) American Idol Sucks. And that's the bottom line. 

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.

Forgot to mention this one, but it's relevant to the discussion: in another blow against censorship, on Friday night, David Letterman and CBS air the late Bill Hicks' final performance on Letterman's show in 1993 that got censored.

www.austin360.com/blogs/content/shared-gen/blogs/austin/tvblog/entries/2009/01/28/the_late_bill_hicks_coming_to_fridays_late_show.html

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.

For Jack Thompson, also known as "saulytarsus"

I have found a flaw in your argument, so kindly shut the fuck up.

Actually, I found many flaws. Too many to either count or name, but the commandment to shut the fuck up still stands.

EDIT: There goes the effect.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------

"Game on, brothers and sisters." -Leet Gamer Jargon

"Retailers would be required to keep such games either in an area "inaccessible by the general public"  or "in a sealed and locked container.""

You mean like they already do?  Retailers like gamestop keep the games behind the counter, places like Best Buy use those clear plastic cases with the magnetic locks (which are easy to break into once you know how). other places around here use the locked glass cases

This is all common sense, as they are all used as anti-theft methods

Hang on...

"Retailers would also be mandated to make copies of the offending games available for examination by parents."

So let me get this straight... the retailer would be forced to keep free copies of mature-themed games that adults could play... for free?

How do we get this one signed into law and what can we do to get it enacted throughout the US?

Hey sauly or should I say Jack Thompson, you wanna know games are rated? BECAUSE PEOPLE LIKE YOU WOULD BITCH AND WHINE IF THEY WEREN'T!!!!! The ESRB was founded after there was a public outcry from people like yourself over the content of games like Mortal Kombat and Night Trap. The 17+ on the M-rating is nothing more but a recommendation and a warning to these game's content. Also since the age on an R-rated movie is 17, it basically says that the game contains content that would be found in an R-rated film. Second of all the statue you pulled up applies to SEXUAL CONTENT ONLY!!!!! That statue does nothing to stop a kid from buying a copy of Rambo or The Matrix. In fact it doesn't even stop a kid from buying a copy of American Pie which is a sexually explicit R-rated film. It only applies to pornography and violence cannot be considered pornographic

What's up with the video game bill in Utah?

Here's another odd question I thought of - what about sacrificing oneself for a heroic demise?  Y'know, like someone jumping on a grenade to shield the rest of the platoon from it.  Or **SPOILERS**the end of Independence Day, when the crazy pilot guy crashes his plane into the alien super ship to destroy both.  I'm sure similar situations have happened in games (though the only one I can think of off the top of my head is in FFXII).**END SPOILERS**.  I can easily see that being viewed by some as 'glorified suicide' - and yet it's a well-known and accepted plot device in all forms of media.  Apparently emotional moments of ultimate sacrifices are inappropriate for anyone under 18 now?

Sad, isn't it, Thompson goes on about usbeing addicts, but now he's been barred from JaaBlog, he couldn't go for more than a week without inventing a name, and using deliberate methods to avoid his IP ban all to post on a Forum.

You want to see addiction, you only have to look at the lengths Thompson goes to in order to post on here.

I told a friend, I want to make a game with everything mentioned. "violent crime, suicide, sodomy, rape, incest, bestiality, or sado-masochism"

Yes, everything. With how my head works, I already got the basis of a story and plot for it.

If I ever do it, it's gonna be distributed online, and for free. Touch that, lawmaking bitches.

so is this moron really thompson or who is it????  as for the whole discussion thing a 15 year old has the right to buy gta 4..the parents have the right to say yes or no..the store has the right to tell the parent its not for billy and if they still buy it then thats their problem....once again to quote george carlin

"what about the children"   "F*** The Children"

Assemblyman Brian Kolb
*SNIP CONTACT INFO*

EZK: Please don't post other people's contact information.

And here's our weapon:  http://www.esrb.org/ratings/ratings_guide.jsp

Go, go!