Supreme Court Strikes Rule Banning Violent Video Game Sale to Kids

[Hans Ludwig 0]

Another thread where Vilas feels the need to shit in.

[nethawk 10]

Whoa, thanks for joining in the discussion folks, started feeling like I am the only one believing in education over law :D

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Lol I hope vilas doesn't have any kids.

Personally I think TV is far worse than any other media for kids to be exposed to. American TV is nothing but drugs, rape & murder...

[abs 2]

There have been no studies done that conclusively link violent videogame exposure to violent behavior in kids. Most studies done on the subject have conclusively demonstrated that there is no causal link at all. Your idea that kids getting access to Call of Duty will somehow lead to mass murder is hysterical at best.

But then that would mean that 95% of the time 80% of Vilas' quoted statistics are bullshit.

Abs

[dm 9]

But then that would mean that 95% of the time 80% of Vilas' quoted statistics are bullshit.

Abs

?

:D

[vilas 473]

my statistics come from Polish police sources plus reports about criminal activity of young

if in you country it not raised few times - good for you

but i live in my country and i look how it looks here how teenagers changed in mid 90s/2000s

[Big Dawg KS 6]

Violent people are just violent whether or not they play violent games. The point remains that playing a game will not turn a normal person into a violent criminal.

The fact that people target games for corrupted youths is just nonsense. There must be at least 100 other contributing factors. Games are just an easy scapegoat...

[STALKERGB 6]

The fact that people target games for corrupted youths is just nonsense. There must be at least 100 other contributing factors. Games are just an easy scapegoat...

In fact in this particular court ruling they essentially cite studies saying this, that video games are no worse than other media. in the one they highlight most often, the guy doing the survey suggested that there is no difference in behaviour after playing games as there is to watching cartoons. Both have a short term affect (possibly) but the effect is similar for both.

TV must love video games, seeing as games take all the heat for murders/rapes/theft and whatnot these days. Used to be violent films and then before that violent books. There is always an "evil" media source, just happens to be games at the moment.

[abs 2]

my statistics come from Polish police sources plus reports about criminal activity of young

if in you country it not raised few times - good for you

but i live in my country and i look how it looks here how teenagers changed in mid 90s/2000s

Your numbers most definitely seem arbitrary.

...cause no-life played games 10 hours a day (while parents are in work)...

In 2009...(8–12-year-olds) fell in the middle, with boys averaging 13 hours per week of reported game play and girls averaging 10.

civil rights are always limited because 1 or 2 or 5 percent of population would made a lot of problems to 95% of population - if they would have full rights to anything

society has to be controlled beacause there is minority who will ovedose any tiniest power they will get (look at school shootings)

What are you basing the 5% vs. 95% numbers on? Does this apply for everything? 5% of people who enjoy salads make problems for the 95% who don't? 5% of dentists who recommend a particular toothpaste make problems for the other 95% of dentists? ...or did you have a particular situation in mind for your sweeping generalization?

Also, what does school shootings have to do with people in power? It's not like a minority were afforded legitimate power and then decided that school shootings were okay. There is no connection between your point and your example.

how about if i say it was 3-5 times less before ? how about 1984 and 2004 criminal stats in countries from this side of steel curtain ?

Those number are not very reliable, are they? If the number used to be only 5 killings, then 3x more is 15, and 5x more is 25. That's a variance of 10. I'm pretty sure that the number is far more than only 5 killings, so the variance then grows. Are statistics with such a huge variance reliable for you?

cause 70% of parents do not look what their kid do and 1% of those kids can become dangerous cycos[sic]

I'd like to see the study entitled "Percentage of Parents who do not Care What Their Kids Do" that you are basing these numbers on, especially the section that states how 1% of those kids become psychotic.

Dr. Robert Hare "...estimates that about one percent of the population are psychopaths." Your view of video games and bad parenting lead to school shootings is severly limited.

For more info on someone who has been studying psychos since the 1960's check out his site and at least read his checklist for a better understanding. His work is very interesting, especially the sections that talk about how psychopaths do far better in corporate executive positions and politics.

===

Anyway, I await your reply.

Abs

Edited June 28, 2011 by Abs
Grammatical fix.

[Innomadic 10]

After Columbine people also blamed Marilyn Manson.

People like scapegoats, because a good lie is better than the hideous truth. It is easier to blame an arbitrary medium than admit you did something wrong yourself.

[Big Dawg KS 6]

It's kind of like how CoD is a scapegoat for everything bad in the industry... oh wait, that's actualy deserved. :p

[spooky lynx 73]

Should ban bad parenting instead. :rolleyes:

I second this.

BTW, who can say that some game is truly violent and will exactly affect every teenager or child in negative way? IMO people are too different, and somebody can go mad after 15 minutes of playing Quake or CS, and somebody is indifferent even to the most gore-realistic and bloody game.

[vilas 473]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AZHOKiHj7O0&feature=related

:]

[Innomadic 10]

And you can be sure those a legit...how?

[vilas 473]

my friends have similar boys (sons) too

my 2 friends forbid boys to play FPS, gave them books... now sons behave other way (as i said i work among people 40-50 y.o. who have 10-14 y.o. kids and we talk about rising families in work - such "Polish" attitude that you talk about family problems inside job, so we know each other family problems, it is typical to Poles to bring home to work and some times work to home... as i heard people on west do not talk about family in work, or is it myth ? )

i know about boy who punched sister after loosing mission in somekind of CoD to overreact game failure (most time playing on godmode and giveallammo cheats)

maybe you relative boys are grown more responsible, i have no idea, but maybe it is due to culture or what... country ? i have no idea, but when i observe teenagers around me (neighbors) i see age-bans totally right

Edited June 29, 2011 by vilas

[Innomadic 10]

Yeah you haven't exactly proven anything there.

[vilas 473]

look at behaviour of kids on movies, if you see nothing in this, well , you see nothing.. shame...

but i see, i see growing anger in those kids, i see some kids which might be addicted and frustrated angry on world around (for failing mission in game)

i heard once about boy who nearly mordered mother when she took away keyboard (he was playing CS all the time)

i heard about parents beaten by teenagers whom parents told to learn not play all the time

i know boys who not finished school because playing all days long etc.

it is too addictive to kids (8, 10, 12...) i don't say about 16 or 18, then teenagers have brains and he can judge better

i still say about bans for kids , not for teenagers or adults (bans for adults which someone prescribed are idiotic for me too, beer ban for guys under 21 is idiotic for me too, but not idiotic when it comes to 8, 10, 12, 16 up to 18 as voting rights)

if you know better kids, okay, you had luck that i don't have

thats why we might disagree,

cause all of us base opinions on people we met in life and statistics from our homeland

Edited June 29, 2011 by vilas

[Innomadic 10]

look at behaviour of kids on movies, if you see nothing in this, well , you see nothing.. shame...

but i see, i see growing anger in those kids, i see some kids which might be addicted and frustrated angry on world around (for failing mission in game)

i heard once about boy who nearly mordered mother when she took away keyboard (he was playing CS all the time)

Why was he playing CS all the time then?

i heard about parents beaten by teenagers whom parents told to learn not play all the time

Why do these kids have no respect for their parents? Why do they have no perspective? Its not the games fault thats for sure

i know boys who not finished school because playing all days long etc.

it is too addictive to kids (8, 10, 12...) i don't say about 16 or 18, then teenagers have brains and he can judge better

There are also kids who are skipping school for the sake of skipping school. No they don't go play games, they just walk the streets.

i still say about bans for kids , not for teenagers or adults (bans for adults which someone prescribed are idiotic for me too, beer ban for guys under 21 is idiotic for me too, but not idiotic when it comes to 8, 10, 12, 16 up to 18 as voting rights)

http://www.gamerevolution.com/features/violence_and_videogames

The issue is not at retail and game-making levels. Its at parenting levels. If games didn't exist there would be some other scapegoat to take the blame. If your kid (not necessarily yours, just an example) is so disillusioned as to be unable to tell the difference between reality and the virtual world, there is something bigger that needs to be dealt with rather than taking a Fox News attitude and ban everything. If someones giving an 8 year old Grand Theft Auto, whos really to blame? The game which was created with a mature audience in mind, or the parent/guardian who bought the game regardless of the rating it was given?

It has been recently attempted to link violent Bible passages to youth crime. Videogames are merely a scapegoat for all of societies unexplained ills. Movies, books, science, religion, music have all been used before, games are just the unpopular kid on the block.

[maddogx 13]

i know about boy who punched sister after loosing mission in somekind of CoD to overreact game failure (most time playing on godmode and giveallammo cheats)

I know a guy who broke his own hand because he punched his door after losing a game of FIFA soccer on his Playstation (he was 13 or 14 at the time). A long time ago, I witnessed how a friend of mine kicked and punched his mother because she took away his Super Nintendo.

On the other hand, I myself and two of my other friends played the first Mortal Kombat when we were about 9-10 years old, and played Doom and similar games when we were about 12-13. I personally have never been in a fight and haven't punched or kicked another person in my life. I can't say the same for my friends, but I know they're not and never have been violent people.

Some kids just get violent when they're frustrated, others don't. It's all a matter of upbringing and/or the way their brain is wired.

[vilas 473]

I know a guy who broke his own hand because he punched his door after losing a game of FIFA soccer on his Playstation (he was 13 or 14 at the time). A long time ago, I witnessed how a friend of mine kicked and punched his mother because she took away his Super Nintendo.

On the other hand, I myself and two of my other friends played the first Mortal Kombat when we were about 9-10 years old, and played Doom and similar games when we were about 12-13. I personally have never been in a fight and haven't punched or kicked another person in my life. I can't say the same for my friends, but I know they're not and never have been violent people.

Some kids just get violent when they're frustrated, others don't. It's all a matter of upbringing and/or the way their brain is wired.

great examples, but that why i said about factor, element in equation

If someones giving an 8 year old Grand Theft Auto, whos really to blame?

you know how parent buys game ?

parents do not know what is game about, they often LOOK at age presribtion at box ! yes, they do

so this "ban" is just yellow rectangle with number 6, 12, 16, 18

what is so frustrating most of you about having age sticker on box (cause this ban is in fact informing sticker)

if parent is responsible but has no knowledge about game , he looks at sticker

if someone will throw away this limiting age-ban, than parent will not know whether GTA is race game or shoot to cop game

cause they see no sticker

all is about this sticker and fact that seller won't sell GTA to 8 y.o. kid in shop or parents will not purchase it seeing number 16 on sticker

thats all, what is so wrong about this sticker

parents cannot know games, so they need to have source of information

age-ban sticker informs about it by looking at number 6 or 12 or 18

why you want to take away from parents this sticker on box ??? seller in shop also have no idea what can he sell to kid unless it is written like on cigaretes, beer, games cause shopkeeper has 10 000 products like glasses, pillow, tablets, chair, games, beer, chocolate, apples etc.

parents take care about marks in school and rent for flat, not about news in gaming world, i know many parents who not use PC at all , they know about stickers with age-ban (which inform whether to buy it or not)

why you not want to erase "parental explicit" sticker too ? aaa ?

this whole discussion is about this yellow rectangle sticker with age, you want to erase it and allow kid to told parent "GTA is car race mom"

cause maybe you all forget that this whole discussion is about this small rectangle with age (this is whole age-ban when it comes to games, movies , such like) just like "parental explicit lyrics" on CD with music, nothing more

it is so hard to look at sticker with number 6, 12, 16 ??? is it so hard that parent can see sticker with "16" and not buy to 8 y.o. kid ?

none o parents i know play games, none, so how could they know difference between GTA and Black Mirror ? how ? all they know is STICKER and number on it

Edited June 29, 2011 by vilas

[maddogx 13]

Is anyone actually trying or arguing to take the age indicator off the boxes? The topic here is about whether or not kids should be legally banned from playing such games. Even if they are not, it is still up to the parents to decide whether they think their child can handle a game that is not meant for their age group, so the age indicator will always be useful.

In any case, it comes down to the parenting again. If parents have kids with violent tendencies but let them play such games anyway, it's their mistake.

[vilas 473]

what is ban ?

ban is sticker , all times when i say about ban i meant this goddamn sticker

this sticker (age indicator) is called age-ban, age-limit in my country !!

all time i was telling having in mind this sticker as this is only limitation game have (informing parents, seller)

so when i read that someone want to remove ban, i understood he want to remove this sticker (which is information for parents, seller, teacher , whatever)

cause simply it limiting what parent will buy or not in shop (and what will be sold by shopkeeper and when shop keeper can say "i will not sell it to you" )

parents see sticker and it is ban for them "to not buy" just like you see "speed limit" road sign (only speeding cause ticket while playing cause behavior recorded on linked YT movies and sister/mother kicked because keyboard was taken away cause of "stressless growth and lack of punishment causing lack of respect" )

Edited June 29, 2011 by vilas

[Deadfast 43]

you know how parent buys game ?

parents do not know what is game about, they often LOOK at age presribtion at box ! yes, they do

so this "ban" is just yellow rectangle with number 6, 12, 16, 18

Alright little Johny, for your 10th birthday I shall buy you a game that says 18+, contains violence, profanity and drugs.

Oh heavens, my son is murdering people all day long, what a sick game this is!

[maddogx 13]

The laws about selling violent games to minors vary depending on the country.

The ESRB rating (U.S. rating system) is mainly used as a suggestion to the buyer, so they can see whether or not the game would be suitable for someone of their age (or their childrens age), but it's not technically illegal to sell violent games to kids, as long as they game is not rated AO (Adult Only).

See the wiki article on the ESRB:

Titles in this category may contain more blood and gore and some games may contain sexual themes/content/references (which is censored) blood and gore and vulgar language. This content is strong in impact. Examples of Games in the lower part of this rating include Ninety-Nine Nights, Crysis, Crysis 2, Jaws Unleashed, and the Halo Series. Games in the higher part of this category include the Grand Theft Auto series, Soldier of Fortune II: Double Helix, Manhunt, and Postal 2. Many retailers (like Target, Future Shop, GameStop, Wal-Mart, Toys R Us, Amazon.com and Best Buy) have a policy of not selling games with this rating to people under 14, at least without parental approval.

Emphasis mine. Most retail stores don't sell M rated games to minors, but it's not illegal to do so. California was trying to change that, but the U.S. supreme court nullified their ruling.

That's what this thread is about.

Edited June 29, 2011 by MadDogX

[vilas 473]

so what is this discussion all about ?

that someone want to remove sticker and allow shopkeepers to sell anything to anyone ?

cause i see it like this "let shopkeeper do money no matter how, sell anything to anyone" ?

cause this ban (age information sticker) is for shopkeeper to refuse sell to kid and information to parents (whether to buy or not if kid asked for it)

so what is problem? you have shops and you loose 1000 customers cause 500 eight years kids and 500 parents came to buy GTA but seen sticker "18" ?

of course seller must control what he sell and to whom he sell what product