Happy Independence Day

July 4, 2011 -

Happy Independence Day, everyone. We are taking a day off to enjoy the weather, good food, excellent company, and our freedom. We'll be back to our regular schedule tomorrow. This July 4 is made all the more important in light of the recent decision in Brown v. EMA. While a great victory was won on behalf of free speech. The door is still open and the wolf is lying in wait.

Our liberties and our freedoms mean everything. We should never forget the sacrifices made on behalf of those freedoms and we should always be vigilant, never be complacent, and always ready to stand up for what is right and just.

Happy Independence Day.


Comments

Re: Happy Independence Day

I don't think Brown vs EMA was a great victory on behalf of free speech. It was a great loss for the principles of Federalism. There is nothing in the Constitution that says that individual states have to allow minors to buy videogames at all. I think that wasn't a very good law in California, but it was perfectly Constitutional, and it was passed by the duly elected representatives of the people. It is none of the business of unelected judges to overturn such a law. The right way to get it overturned would be to elect canidates who would overturn it through the legislative process.

Re: Happy Independence Day

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.


When the SCOTUS makes a Federal decision on the Constitution, in covers all the states (Georgia tried that with the Freedom of Religion back in 1939 because the 1rst Amendment says "CONGRESS shall make no law..." but that only ended in the SOCAS, bringing it down from Fedral to State level).

Now cybernatography definitely qualifies under the 1rst Amendment (as I have said repeatedly).

1. It is Free Speech, given its narrative.

2. It is Free Press, given its published works.

3. It is Peaceful Assembly, given its online multiplayer.

Now. Do you need anymore proof?

Re: Happy Independence Day

Re-read the Constitution, motard. Hell, re-read Scalia's majority opinion in Brown v. EMA.

Brown v. EMA wasn't just about selling games to minors. It was also about a state trying to treat one form of free speech differently than others, on the basis that the speech in question is "dangerous", "new", and "more interactive than the others".

Article III gives the Supreme Court(and the courts below them) judicial review of all laws passed by the US Congress(and affirmed through Marbury v. Madison), and through the Fourteenth Amendment, all laws passed by the states, thus making it the business of the "unelected judges" to overturn a law if it's found to be unconstitutional.

The First Amendment states, "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."

Edit: The Ninth Amendment states, "The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." Meaning that just because a right is not explicitly guaranteed in the Constitution doesn't mean that the right in question doesn't exist.

Section 1 of the Fourteenth Amendment states, "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." (Note: for Constitutional purposes, corporations like Microsoft, Sony, Nintendo, etc. are considered to be people, as a corporation is a collective of persons.)

To summarize: California passed a law abridging the freedom of speech; the video game industry petitioned the Government for a redress of grievances as the Judicial branch is part of the government; Federal district judge overturned the law as unconstitutional; California appealed to Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals; Ninth Circuit affirmed lower court ruling; California appealed to U.S. Supreme Court; SCOTUS affirmed Ninth Circuit ruling.

The representatives in the California State Legislature being elected by the majority of people in their districts is irrevalent. The Constitution protects the minority from the tyranny of the majority.

Bottom line: California's law was never "perfectly Constitutional", and California lost. Deal with it.

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra. Hell will stay frozen over for quite a while since the Saints won the Super Bowl.

Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Pelicans. Solidarity for the Saints = No retreat, no surrender. 2013 = Saints' revenge on the NFL. Even through the darkest days, this fire burns always.

Re: Happy Independence Day

hm, disdain for judges.  Not believing that video games are speech protected by the first amendment.  Now all we need is a false statement about how the MPAA is enforced by the rule of law and we might just get suspicios that ol' John Bruce is using a false identity to spread his lies again.

-Ultimately what will do in mankind is a person's fear of their own freedom-

Re: Happy Independence Day

I asked you before, I'll ask you again: "How is a law that singles out a particular medium for a content-based restriction aimed at a select group of individuals "perfectly Constitutional"?"

Also:

"It is none of the business of unelected judges to overturn such a law. The right way to get it overturned would be to elect canidates who would overturn it through the legislative process."

Just out of curiosity, is this how you think it should work or how it does work?

 

Andrew Eisen

Re: Happy Independence Day

Wrong. This was exactly the right way to get the law overturned.

The Supreme Court of the United States was established by the Constitution for the purpose of reviewing laws passed by the US government and with the passing of the 14th ammendment the state governments to check the constitutionality of the law.

It is part of the whole checks and balances aspect of our govenrment. Without the check from judges, govenrments would be free to pass any law they wanted with no possible reprieve from unjust laws.

E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming

Re: Happy Independence Day

Happy Independence Day to all the GP community! I hope yours is a pleasant one.

_____________________________________________________________________________

"Power means nothing without honor and pride."

http://grifsgamereviews.blogspot.com My video game review site.

Atlanta Video Games Examiner for examiner.com

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
MattsworknameYou make a good point, i keep thinking of these as groups but there more movments then groups, I guess.05/04/2015 - 8:20pm
Andrew EisenAnd I wouldn't accuse people who block others on Twitter of being unwilling to discuss their views. From what I've seen it's mostly to keep from being harassed, dog piled, avoid topics you have no interest in, or simply to keep your Twitter feed readable.05/04/2015 - 8:16pm
Andrew EisenI don't know who you think the two groups are but I've never seen anyone claim that one group has a monopoly on people who misbehave (unless you're grouping the people who misbehave, of course).05/04/2015 - 8:14pm
MattsworknameI dont disagree on the jerks sentiment Andrew, so long as all agree that both side had there fair share of jerks got inolved with this whole clusterfark.05/04/2015 - 8:10pm
Andrew EisenI speak from experience. I'm not a jerk face and I've never had a problem discussing things with a huge variety of people.05/04/2015 - 7:59pm
Andrew EisenGreat, so long as they're not jerk faces, they should have no problem.05/04/2015 - 7:58pm
Goth_SkunkOr if they have the unfortunate distinction of following certain undesirables on Twitter. i.e. Milo Yiannopolous, Roguestar, Mundane Matt, C.H. Sommers, Mark Kern, Adam Baldwin et al.05/04/2015 - 7:53pm
Andrew EisenThere's no need for anyone who's not a jerk face to admit to vile actions they didn't commit.05/04/2015 - 7:52pm
Goth_SkunkI disagree. I believe all the parties wanting discussion are on the GG side. The parties against GamerGate aren't interested in discussion, as evidenced by the propensity to simply block people on social media the moment they identify as pro-GG.05/04/2015 - 7:51pm
Andrew EisenShe used to allow comments on her videos. Blame the jerk faces that that's no longer the case.05/04/2015 - 7:49pm
Andrew EisenSarkeesian has given plenty of talks in venues where anyone is welcome to attend. It's not her fault that most of her audience supports her. That said, she HAS fielded questions from detractors.05/04/2015 - 7:49pm
Mattsworknameboth sides to start taking things off the table that are not relevant to the actuall issues they hold, so we can find out where these 2 groups really stand, not what a biased media labeled them ass05/04/2015 - 7:48pm
Mattsworknamechallenge her or disagree. Second ,I want both sides to admit to the vile actions there more fringe and extreme supports commited and admit it was wrong on both sides. I want both sides to argue what there core issues are and why they hold them, and i wan05/04/2015 - 7:47pm
MattsworknameTo clarify andrew, in all that ive seen, anita only talks or gives qas to audiance that share her views, never any opposing viewpoints. She does not allow any commensts on her videos and only ever did interviews with those who support her, not those who05/04/2015 - 7:42pm
Andrew EisenIf so, I'd have to agree with most that those are viewpoints that are simply not worth entertaining.05/04/2015 - 7:23pm
Andrew EisenAre you really looking for a discussion where one side is advocating hate, bullied self censorship and no discussions of women in video games?05/04/2015 - 7:22pm
Andrew EisenAnd for your three things you'd like to see discussed, Sarkeesain wants the hate to stop, doesn't want to bully the industry into self censorship and already talks about women in video games.05/04/2015 - 7:22pm
Andrew EisenDon't know about Yiannopoulos. I don't follow his work because I find it roundly terrible.05/04/2015 - 7:19pm
Andrew EisenGG and anti-GG aren't groups. You can't organize people like that. It doesn't work that way. Sarkeesian participates in discussions complete with Q/A all the damn time. It's why her videos take so damn long.05/04/2015 - 7:18pm
MattsworknameMaybe among themselves andrew, but I cant find any indicatoin that the gg or anti gg groups ever tried to honestly debate each other, name one time anita debated someone or milo debaated someone from the other side, I cant find any05/04/2015 - 7:15pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician