Game Retail Bill Introduced in Congress

My problems with this bill:

1. Restrictions on selling to minors in particular, and restrictions on expressive media in general, are matters of state, not federal, regulation. Porn sales and alcohol and tobacco sales (despite serious "nudging" from federal spending programs) are regulated by states. This is because something that might be unacceptable in Nebraska might be fine in New York, or vice versa.

2. This makes the ESRB basically worthless, because this law doesn't refer to ESRB ratings but judicial determination of "explicit depictions." So our games are going to be rated, not by people who know what they're talking about, but ignoramuses like Judge Stephen Limbaugh. And all despite the reports of success of the ESRB last December.

3. I've yet to see any demonstration of the link between violent games and violent behavior. Until there is such evidence, attacking violent games is a red herring. Moreover, do depictions of prostitution fall into this bill because Congress is worried about 12-year-olds going out and soliciting whores?

The retail enforcement of ESRB guidelines has been weak and ineffective. But I think the solution is either state laws that reference ESRB guidelines or IDSA regulation of retailers.

So if I sell my copy of Grand Theft Auto III to some 16-year-old kid across the country, would I be guilty of violating this law?

I can just see it now... :D

"Pssst! Hey kid, over here! You want a copy of GTA3? I'll give it to ya for special price. Only $200..."

Joking aside, here's a question I have:

If it becomes illegal for a minor to purchase games with questionable contents, wouldn't it give developers a bit more freedom to explore the mature subject further in the end? Since they don't have to worry about sensoring it to cater for "general audiences"... (not that I want to see games to become more violent, mind you)

I think the ESRB ratings should become law.

It IS up to parents to parent their children, but I don't think kids should be able to walk up and buy certain things.

Kids follow images they see. Do games/TV/movies/musid cause people to kill? Heck no, but little kids ARE influenced by what they see. I used to mimic the Ninja Turtles when I was a kid. I don't care if a kid mimics Mario, Mega Man or Link, but when he starts to mimic the guy off of GTA 3, then it becomes unnerving because of the sheer graphic-ness of the whole deal.

Kids should be sheltered from certain things like this. Extreme violence, pornography and harsh language. Listening to 4th graders talk in detail about sex or using harsh language isn't very appealing when you realize that they're next in line.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dorikyasu
If it becomes illegal for a minor to purchase games with questionable contents, wouldn't it give developers a bit more freedom to explore the mature subject further in the end? Since they don't have to worry about sensoring it to cater for "general audiences"... (not that I want to see games to become more violent, mind you)

---

This is exactly one of the MANY benefits of such a law, but ppl here are to ignorant and short sighted to see these things.

Oh man... Here's my 2 cents.

I don't like a bunch of political buttinskis regulating what games are sold to minors. Let IDSA/ESRB do their work. There's that old saying "You give 'em an inch, they'll take a mile".

If this law happens, the game industry in the U.S. may end up censoring some localizations of Japanese games that would have gotten an M in their original form, so that minors may purchase them. Do you want a watered down Resident Evil with a mere "T" rating? How about House of the Dead 3 with no gun support?

Regarding GTA III, it takes a total dullard to go out and mimic the game's criminal acts in real life. The GTA series is not a game to be taken seriously; it's a satire.

Stores can enforce the ratings voluntarily if they want to, but there should be an exemption card- namely a yellow card that would enable purchase of T games and a red card to allow purchase of M games.

Violent games are NOT the culprit. Rather, they reflect some things in society. Maybe they should ban teaching History classes to minors, and allow only colleges to teach this subject? :rolleyes: History has plenty of violent subject matter.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by dorikyasu
I can just see it now... :D

"Pssst! Hey kid, over here! You want a copy of GTA3? I'll give it to ya for special price. Only $200..."

Joking aside, here's a question I have:

If it becomes illegal for a minor to purchase games with questionable contents, wouldn't it give developers a bit more freedom to explore the mature subject further in the end? Since they don't have to worry about sensoring it to cater for "general audiences"... (not that I want to see games to become more violent, mind you)

---

I think it works the other way. Why spend all that money making a mature-themed game with a limited market when you can increase your sales dramatically by taking out the questionable stuff? Conker was a great game, but it didn't sell because it wasn't marketed to kids. (And the 64 was dead, but that's another issue.)

Anyway, I don't think that justifies sales to minors, though. The problem isn't with developers, but retailers. I just don't want Congress or the courts involved in videogames at all.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by JefmcC


I have to say you have no arguement in this matter what so ever.

The reason porn was brought up is not to compare it to movies. It is to show that protected under the first ammendment doesn't mean that it can/should be sold to minors. There are a LOT of things protected by the first ammendment that are only allowed to persons 18+ and some 21+. Extremly violent video games should also fall under this, and I hope it does.

Now for your other comments.

A: Who says kids need to drive to a store? Ever hear of the internet? Ever ride a bike? I used to WALK 10 min. to a mall near me when I was kid.

B: No money? I was working since I was about 10 years old. Paper routes, mowing lawns, raking leaves, shoveling snow, ect. Don't tell me kids have no money.

And I started making real money at 14 working for the city during the summer. If you had no money as a kid, then you were/are a lazy little boy. Get a job.

---

So maybe I was lazy, accourding to you, but at least I had a childhood, something you might lack?

I would not let my child work at 10 years old, they dont even know how to play, let alone work, there are child labour laws for this.

And even if a kid had a paper route and rode his bike a lot, that does not mean the parent has no control over what the kid buys. A good parent would always monitor what a kid buys and should monitor his money spending. I know my mom did.

I don't think federal regulation is the answer. Let certain states make it illegal if they want, but basing their decisions on the ESRB, NOT on the ruling of some uneducated judge.

A kid who's young enough not to fully understand the difference between right & wrong or fantasy & reality certainly isn't going to realize that GTA3 is supposed to be a satire - that's a major part of the danger. This is why the parent should make the decision, and NOT the minor. How this should be implemented is the issue.

Not only is history full of objectionable subject matter, so is the Bible. Anyone who's read A Clockwork Orange (also a satire) knows what happened to "our little Alex" after he got his hands on it, with its "peeting Hebrew vino, tolchoking, and the old in-out." Point is, you can't hide the fact that human depravity exists, but I don't think it belongs in the hands of minors who don't yet really understand society and consequences.

TV fucked the world and this won't save it.