Wow October? Thats a while.. I remember when I was a little kid I bought turok 2. (little kid being 11-12) The guy joked at wal-mart at whether I had the money or not.. When I was 19 I bought castle wolfenstein for GBA and got carded.. My parents always watched me playing my games and would talk to me every once in a while about some of them that were really violent like cutting guys head's off in turok 2.. They knew it was their responsibility not the freaken store's.
I swear porn is often more socially acceptable than violent video games. I'm all for educating parents about violent video games, but why does the government have to be involved in this shit? The game industry already has a self rating policy. -1 for California.
[citation][nom]touchdowntexas13[/nom]So what exactly does this law do? Please excuse my ignorance, but I thought that retailers were already not supposed to sell M-rated games to those under the age of 17.Does this law make it to where you cannot sell T-rated games to kids under the age of 17? Or does it make the punishment more harsh for retailers failing to abide by current laws.Sorry but I'm a bit confused here. I've never been to Cali either.[/citation]
I'm not sure if it's actually law at the moment, but rather company policy for the time being. But for the most part you are right. I've seen so many retailers being lax on the rules and just selling games to kids without checking IDs or having an adult present. (I do live in California).
Ok ....they should ban also news on tv because they show violence also. I always wondered how come there is no sexual acts in video games (show it all )but chopping heads and killing people GTA style is normal.
If I were a game developer, I'd welcome this because it would get my content into more minds. It's like underage drinking. People do it mostly because they're not supposed to and they find a way around the system.
Currently the game industry regulates itself through the ESRB Rating system. This is what you see on game boxes, the "E for Everyone, T for Teen, M for Mature" etc. The video game industry is self regulated, much like the MPAA for Movie Ratings. Industries do this to AVOID having Government regulation because it's a huge pain in the a$$. Right now game developers, publishers, and everyone in between are watching this because they don't want to have any more red tape or regulations that would ultimately affect sales and revenue.
I'm for regulation of violent video games, violent movies/music, etc, but let the industries regulate themselves. It's worked fine so far; How does the saying go? If it's not broken, don't fix it?
[citation][nom]tayb[/nom]Let the parents parent their children. The state of California need not tell parents what content is suitable or not suitable for their children. That is the role of the mother and/or father. [/citation]
I fully agree with you (well... at least most of them). My only problem is... it appeasrs to me that there are more and more parents are not actually parenting their kids responsibly these days?... that does not really rationalize this case. However it does look worrisome to me.
[citation][nom]sublifer[/nom]Do children even have constitutional rights? The right to bear arms for example? This is irrelevant.[/citation]
Are you serious? Of course children have constitutional rights. Just because various rights obtain only at the age of majority doesn't mean that they have no constitutional rights at all.
Moreover, the only irrelevant point here is yours, given that no one is arguing that the law infringes on a child's right to free speech. The argument is that the law unconstitutionally violates the 1st Amendment rights of the publishers, distributors, and sellers by banning sales to a particular group of people - children.
Reading the article, or even the Tom's Guide summary, might have helped you sort that one out. Ought to give that a try next time.