Federal Judge Says Counties Can Limit Video Game Access

[sleeve]

A federal district court judge held yesterday that a St. Louis County ordinance restricting video game sales to minors under the age of 17 without parental consent did not violate the First Amendment. Here is the link to the original MSNBC story.

Here's an interesting excerpt, relevant to the current "sorry state of gaming" thread:

Limbaugh said he reviewed four different video games and found “no conveyance of ideas, expression, or anything else that could possibly amount to speech. The court finds that video games have more in common with board games and sports than they do with motion pictures.”

Comments?

[Saint of Killers]

They shoulda made the judge play Final Fantasy.

I've actually posted (either here or on GG, I can't remember) that I didn't think games would fall under the umbrella of protected free speech. Still a scary ruling, though.

[johnk_]

it's sad that the ruling was based on only 4 individual, random games (which were probably sports games of some sort) that weren't even named...
many games can be considered forms of art or expression, and it's too bad that the judge took the lazy approach by only taking 4 games instead of taking a bit more time to look at gaming as a whole..

i don't know if i have a problem with not selling mature games to kids, but if someone brings the argument of censorship and freedom of expression, etc, to me, i can't really argue against it, knowing what i know about games.

[EThugg]

This is a GREAT ruling, I can only hope the ruling spreads. Minors shouldn't be allowed to piss without their parents permission.

[Saint of Killers]

I suppose this is a little off-topic, but it seems to fit into this thread: Why are books the only remaining form of media that hasn't been subjected to warning labels and such? They can be just as disguting, vile, violent, pornographic and profane as movies, TV shows, and videogames, but an 8 year old can walk into a bookstore and buy, say, American Psycho and no one whines about it. Why is that?

[Nash]

Originally posted by Saint of Killers
I suppose this is a little off-topic, but it seems to fit into this thread: Why are books the only remaining form of media that hasn't been subjected to warning labels and such? They can be just as disguting, vile, violent, pornographic and profane as movies, TV shows, and videogames, but an 8 year old can walk into a bookstore and buy, say, American Psycho and no one whines about it. Why is that?

damn, i could go on about this, but i'll keep it short since i have class soon.
1) kids don't read for fun anymore (sad, really), so they aren't very likely to pick up a book.
2) the general public has forgotten what imagination was, so anything without pictures is ok.
and...
3) people are retarded.

[xS]

Originally posted by EThugg
This is a GREAT ruling, I can only hope the ruling spreads. Minors shouldn't be allowed to piss without their parents permission.

I concour. Kids shouldnt play violent games without the consent of their parents.

[BioMechanic]

Ethugg: You are 100% right on, sir. One reason why kids are so jacked up these days is they're raised by parents who don't give a crap and won't take responsibility for their own children.

Saint: That is an amazingly good point. On the same level with Nash, I betcha the reason is because "it's a book, so it's LITERATURE, and reading literature Junior a better person." Blech.

I like the idea of the ruling, but only if it's implemented in a way that's fair to the gaming industry; i.e. don't make a blanket ruling on ALL games just because of a suspect title or two.

[innova]

Originally posted by EThugg
This is a GREAT ruling, I can only hope the ruling spreads. Minors shouldn't be allowed to piss without their parents permission.

For once i agree with you. Now with this into affect we don't have to listen to soccer moms whining about their children playing violent videogames.

[James]

Ah, books. Living the good life the way all media should.

"A federal judge said local governments should be able to limit children’s access to violent or sexually explicit video games, saying they’re not constitutionally protected forms of speech."

Where!?!? Where the hell are the damn "sexually explicit" games that you always hear about when people get a bug up their collective ass about video games corrupting out nation's youth? GTA3 is suggestive at best, Leisure Suit Larry never went beyond a very light R. Where's my damn porno!?

Thanks, had to get that off my chest.

In a fit of aggravation, I once tried to design a game concept revolving around sex, and keeping it consensual and fun. Best I could come up with was an application rather than an actual game. Anyone want to toss me a development budget, we can rake in the cash, but it's still not a game...

James