If you have read 16-year-old Sonoma Academy junior Daniel Willens' editorial supporting the California Game Law, then you will be interested in reading this rebuttal in the Press-Democrat. 18-year-old Sonoma Academy Senior Jonny Moon opens his editorial with a discussion of afternoon adventures. Just like his parents sitting before the television watching re-runs of Gun Smoke or Bonanza, Jonny speaks of exploits in the Wild West:
"I came home from school and jumped into the saddle of my American Standardbred. I galloped through the plains of the Midwest and dueled my way to fame. I shot criminals, hogtied bandits and saved a revolutionary's wife. My good deeds saved the life of innocent people, but these actions may soon be banned, as I did this while playing 'Red Dead Redemption,' an alleged 'overly violent video game.'
In 2004, California passed a law banning the sale of violent video games to anyone under age 18. The law forces games to display a rating label, in addition to the already-existing Entertainment Software Rating Board label, and imposes a maximum fine of $1,000 for each infraction. The law was signed and passed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2005 but was not put into action because it was challenged by the Entertainment Merchants Association (EMA) as a violation of the First Amendment."
Moon goes on to explain why the law should be ruled as unconstitutional, upholding a lower court ruling. He also points out how a recent decision on "crush videos" (videos that show violent acts against animals) may give a good indication on how the highest court in the land will rule in this case. He adds that Schwarzenegger v. EMA and laws like it - no matter how they are written - should be ruled unconstitutional.
You can read the whole article here.
Commentary: The Press Democrat proves to be a fair and even handed publication by providing both sides of the issue. Hat tip to them.
