In yet another example of lawmakers trying to usurp the role of parents in making decisions for their children, a San Francisco Bay area lawmaker is trying to pass a law making it a crime to sell violent video games to minors. Leland Yee, a Democratic Assemblyman from San Francisco, will introduce a bill this week which would prevent minors from buying any and all first-person shooters, stating these games “teach players how to stalk, maim, torture and kill people.”
KCBS.com
Assemblyman Leland Yee (D-San Francisco) plans to introduce legislation this week that would keep minors from purchasing first (person) shooter videogames, where players need to kill in order to advance.
“These first person shooter videogames really teach kids how to stalk and how to maim and torture and kill people,” Yee said. “That’s not what we should be doing for our kids.”
Yee is also a child psychologist, and he said, it is time to “draw the line.”
The bill would penalize retailers and other stores that sell the games to anyone under the age of 17. A second bill would require video game retailers to separate children’s games from adult games.
“It classifies these first person shooter violent videogames as having a harmful effect, just as pornography, alcohol and cigarettes have harmful effects towards our children,” said Yee. “There are penalties then exacted for those individuals who sell these products to minors.”
I agree that kids below certain ages shouldn’t be playing the games, but imposing such a ban is not a good thing. It should be up to the parents of the child if whether or not their child is mature enough to know that what they’re doing is <b>wrong</b> in the real world, but okay in the fantasy world that they are in inside the game.
I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: If some kid plays Doom or something andf splatters his friends all over the walls with an AK, then that kid was fucked up to begin with.
It warns you about the violence right on the box, and most places won’t sell you an m-rated game unless you’re 17 or older or have a parent/guardian with you. So if you have 9-year olds getting ideas from playing GTA, don’t blame the GAMES.
And personaly, playing violent games KEEPS me from going on killing sprees. I’m sure many here feel the same way. Especialy those that work in retail.
This has already been done in Rio de Janeiro. It included other games besides FPS ones, too (GTA, 2d fighters…) The number of players under 14 didn’t drop even 1% - it’s actually rising in a steady pace. I don’t know if people are simply plain ignoring the law or (more probably) it has been taken down.
I support the ban. Some parents don’t care about the children to begin with, which is part of the problem. it’s to ensure a safer society, and since all of us are gamers, it’s natural for some of you to think such a thing would be stupid. I however believe that most children today shouldn’t be playing FPS or higher rated games in general. Although i go against that (meaning I played more “violent” games as a preteen, and I rent 18 and up anime, movies, etc), I know where to draw the line and know what is acceptable on a console, and what is acceptable in real life. Many kids and teenagers <b>do not</b> and it doesn’t hurt to crack down on this. The ban can easily be skirted by parents who trust their children enough to actually rent more mature stuff FOR them (or whoever). So either way, the ban could just save the area from one future killer or whatever, or it might not do that at all. better be safe than sorry.
To say that if a kid goes on a killing spree because of what he saw in video games and because of the fact that he or she was fucked in the head already is like giving a gun to a potential psycho. If the ammo and potential is there, then…what is the dangerous scenario that can happen?
Video games don’t teach kids how to stalk, maim, torture and kill people, I DO!
“It classifies these first person shooter violent videogames as having a harmful effect, just as pornography, alcohol and cigarettes have harmful effects towards our children,” said Yee.
Kids can be exposed to these things no matter what, it’s a matter how screwed up their own parents or relatives or friends are. Let’s ban second hand smoke, i so wish we could, I’m losing about one year of my life whenever my mom or brother lights up rar. But really alcohol and cigarettes can be kept away from some kids because of certain laws. How much of the internet is filled with porn? How is some kid suppose to research exotic pets without getting something…else heh? I think you can’t prevent children from being exposed to some of this stuff, i mean the world is one big ball of happy poop so bound to be tossed to them.
This concludes my pathetic attempt to sound quasi-intelligent yay:yipee:
Originally posted by GunsmokeMist
[b]Video games don’t teach kids how to stalk, maim, torture and kill people, I DO!
“It classifies these first person shooter violent videogames as having a harmful effect, just as pornography, alcohol and cigarettes have harmful effects towards our children,” said Yee.
Kids can be exposed to these things no matter what, it’s a matter how screwed up their own parents or relatives or friends are. Let’s ban second hand smoke, i so wish we could, I’m losing about one year of my life whenever my mom or brother lights up rar. But really alcohol and cigarettes can be kept away from some kids because of certain laws. How much of the internet is filled with porn? How is some kid suppose to research exotic pets without getting something…else heh? I think you can’t prevent children from being exposed to some of this stuff, i mean the world is one big ball of happy poop so bound to be tossed to them.
This concludes my pathetic attempt to sound quasi-intelligent yay:yipee: [/b]
Kids don’t have to be exposed to video games. it’s a matter of getting a console and renting or buying a game. With smoking, you simply have to walk into someone’s path. Also, smoking doesn’t corrupt people into potentially harming others or believing that things appropriate in a make-believe world are also appropriate in reality.
Same with the internet. There are filters. parents watching their children. Common sense. Looking at porn and wanting to have sex isn’t the same as shooting in a video game and wanting to take that power into your own hands.
because video games require at least two steps to be “exposed” to kids, that situation can be monitored more closely, and can have instant and sucessful restrictions. And just because the world is shitty does not mean we have to give up on trying to prevent violence. Just my way of looking at it:ah-ha!:
Kids will want the newest consoles and the coolest games like killing games. Smoking corrupts the lungs As if parents or relatives smoke they can’t get away from that sometimes. Yeah yeah doesn’t make the kids go morally wrong though. Oh forgot about filters on the net heh those probably suck. Parents that watch their kids on the net that’s just a little uh scary to me but it would work or make some kids find ways to rebel against their parents. Children can always go to their friends house and play one of those games though.
“And just because the world is shitty does not mean we have to give up on trying to prevent violence.”
Yeah i know, but i just look at the world pessmistically ;p
It takes the parents to teach the kids that this stuff isn’t appropriate.
Basically i think it is weak to ban violent games because it’s blaming the violent games to be the thing to place these ideas that killing is good. It could i guess, but I would just rather see parents taking a few minutes with their kids to tell them what is right and wrong or what they think about such and such.
I personally think that all M-rated games PERIOD shouldn’t be sold to people under the age of 17 without parental permission. Granted, i played/rented a couple m-rated games when i was, say, 15, maybe even 14, and look where I am now! …wait, I was trying to prove I’m still sane, right? Oh crap…
Yeah I know, that’s the sad part about it; why these bans can exist (or the other reason, that despite what the parents say it will never be accepted by the kid and they just go wrong out of free will…hmm)
Out of curiosity: most of us watched Warner cartoons (bugs bunny & his gang) back when we were kids. Those cartoons seemed quite innocent, but there are tons of explicit violence in them. Don’t you think those could affect children as much as FPS?
Looney Tunes are just one out of about 80 examples I can think of right now, from a list I had made last year. I was listing cartoons that I watched in the 80’s and early 90’s, and all of them turned out to be quite violent. I’ve never commited any kind of violence I’ve seen in a toon (or FPS, for the matter of the topic), though.
I was thinking of saying lets ban cartoons like those. I’ve never liked fpss’, like doom, seemed too realistic for me, because you of course couldn’t see behind you. I haven’t hurt anyone too badly ^ _ ^ uwhehe, but seriously i haven’t ever been in a fight.
Originally posted by Ren Looney Tunes are just one out of about 80 examples I can think of right now, from a list I had made last year. I was listing cartoons that I watched in the 80’s and early 90’s, and all of them turned out to be quite violent. I’ve never commited any kind of violence I’ve seen in a toon (or FPS, for the matter of the topic), though.
I don’t support the ban, but toons are way different then FPS games. Obviously you can’t really emulate the violence in cartoons (we’re not going to go around dropping pianos on people’s heads). I think the violence in Looney Tunes is absurd enough to not be taken seriously by anyone.
However, FPS shooter games are becoming more and more realistic as time goes on. Many of the newer title’s revolve around army activities or urban violence. I think the biggest example of this is GTA 3, where you essentially run around a town killing people and blowing up crap. These situations are almost “too real” for younger kids, as you use realistic weapons, to do realistic damage in a realistic town.
But seriously, most kids can draw a line between fictional violence, and the real stuff. Parent’s just have to be there to help them out a bit.
The ESRB Ratings are there for a reason. I can’t sell an M rated game to someone under 17. And if their parents are there with them, I have to confirm that they’ll allow it as well. Some places just don’t care. My sister bought me an M rated game for X Mas last year. And she was only 13.
Originally posted by Ren
[b]Yeah, we can’t throw pianos at each other, but not all violence in those toons was far from reality. They used a lot of guns and homemade bombs too.
With or without unrealistic violence, it teaches the children that getting what they want by violent means is not wrong. [/b]
The difference between Bugs Bunny cartoons, etc. and FPS games: No one ever dies in the cartoons.
Originally posted by demigod The difference between Bugs Bunny cartoons, etc. and FPS games: No one ever dies in the cartoons.
Which only makes the cartoon worse.
Once a little girl was beaten to death. The kids who did it thought she’d stand up again like nothing had happened, like they had seen on TV. What they had seen was Tom and Jerry.
As if parents or relatives smoke they can’t get away from that sometimes. Yeah yeah doesn’t make the kids go morally wrong though. Oh forgot about filters on the net heh those probably suck. Parents that watch their kids on the net that’s just a little uh scary to me but it would work or make some kids find ways to rebel against their parents. Children can always go to their friends house and play one of those games though.