Violent Video Games Free speech Right

[JohnEdward]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/06/27/us-usa-court-videogames-idUSTRE75Q35820110627

(Reuters) - Governments cannot ban the sale or rental of violent video games to minors because it would violate free-speech rights, the U.S. Supreme Court said on Monday in its first ruling in a video game case.

Seems it's all about lobbying, to increase those profit margins. But, if you are a minor you are restricted to what movie you want to see. Movie ratings favor violence to be more acceptable than sexual content, if you ask me both should be treated equally. If it were really a violation of free-speech rights, then nothing should be bleeped on tv or in music, kids should be able to have free access to prono. Corporations have far more threatening power than the government, and we should fear corporations to govern us, and act in the way we prohibit our government.

 

[elder999]

Seems it's all about lobbying, to increase those profit margins. But, if you are a minor you are restricted to what movie you want to see. Movie ratings favor violence to be more acceptable than sexual content, if you ask me both should be treated equally. If it were really a violation of free-speech rights, then nothing should be bleeped on tv or in music, kids should be able to have free access to prono. Corporations have far more threatening power than the government, and we should fear corporations to govern us, and act in the way we prohibit our government.

Geez, y'know my kids played video games. If there was anything I didn't want them playing, I'd say No. Pretty much the end of the story.

 

[Cryozombie]

Geez, y'know my kids played video games. If there was anything I didn't want them playing, I'd say No. Pretty much the end of the story.

But but but Little Bobby down the street might play it. If he does then there is no way to stop your kid from being exposed, don'tchaknow.

 

[Sensei Payne]

Games are no longer geared just toward Children.

I agree that adult material should be kept out of reach of young children, because we should empower parents.

But if I want to play Duke Nukem: Forever, I should be able to buy it anywhere games are sold.

Games are art, and they are geared to my age group..Halo, Gears of War, Mass Effect, etc...weren't made for kids at all. So it really comes down to empowering parents to be able to make the best choices for their children, which I am completely behind...

But just don't mess with my beloved game time.

 

[jks9199]

The MPAA codes for movies are voluntary, and voluntarily enforced. I'm not aware of any law preventing a movie theater from selling tickets to any person for any movie. The USSC overturned a law -- a government action -- controlling the actions of private entities, finding that it was impermissible to create new areas of restricted speech. The California law targeted games because of their violence, not obsenity or sexual content.

This Court has consistently drawn a sharp line against government infringement on speech; I suspect that if obscenity cases were to land before them, they'd pull back the restrictions there, too.

It's the job and responsibility of the parents to control what their kids are exposed to and what games they play.

 

[cdunn]

Hammer that home - There is no law, whatsoever, preventing any theater from selling a ticket for an NC-17 movie to a minor. It is enforced voluntarily. There is a parallel rating system for video games, detailed well enough that parents can be parents, though there may, or may not, be enforcement issues at the retail level.

In any case, the California government failed to show it had sufficient cause to abrogate the right of free speech. What data there is on the theory that media violence begets violence in life is heavily conflicting, and therefore, we do not have the direct speech-to-harm link that exists in the cases of fraud, libel, and shouting fire falsely in a crowded room. Thus, no regulation. (Obscenity regulation is also absurdly overwrought, but chipping it away in front of the pearl-clutchers would be difficult.)

 

[Sensei Payne]

Pron* won its obsenity cases due to the first amendment right, and we have to keep that only in certain places/away from children.

Why wouldn't they do the same for games? Especially for those games of an adult nature? Because games are specialty items. Sure wal-mart carries them..but there are full on Video game stores that would have to revamp the way they do things, if they can't even display Mature rated games.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

Pron* won its obsenity cases due to the first amendment right, and we have to keep that only in certain places/away from children.

Why wouldn't they do the same for games? Especially for those games of an adult nature? Because games are specialty items. Sure wal-mart carries them..but there are full on Video game stores that would have to revamp the way they do things, if they can't even display Mature rated games.

Simple answer - the morality of our nation on balance. Despite the fact that we are a secular nation, we are made up of deeply religious people in general. More in some parts of the country than in others, and values and standards differ. But in general, (and VERY generally), Christians find obscenity more objectionable than violence.

Obscenity laws have been largely left to local community standards. A hotel manager in Cincinnati was sentenced to prison for allowing adult movies to be shown in the rooms of the hotels he managed; despite the fact that his hotel was part of a national chain and such movies were being shown in hotel rooms across the country. It was illegal there, and that was the community that set standards there.

So understanding that laws on obscenity are not based on presumed harm done to society, but simply on the desire of society to not permit it because it is morally objectionable, one can see that you can't really compare obscenity laws to laws against the depiction of violence. They're not the same thing to a deeply religious society; even when the logic just makes no sense at all.

This is an example of something I've talked about before. Laws do not have to be logical or based on truth or science. They only have to reflect the will of the voters and not infringe on civil liberties. In the case of violent video games, the majority of the voters don't really care, and restricting them does infringe on civil liberties. In the case of obscenity, the community cares very much, and the courts have found that community standards are sufficient to permit a minor (reasonable) infringement on what would otherwise be a strong 1st Amendment right.

We want our laws to be logical. They often are not, and in reality, there is nothing that requires them to be that way. This causes great consternation among the logical, which I totally get.

 

[Sensei Payne]

Simple answer - the morality of our nation on balance. Despite the fact that we are a secular nation, we are made up of deeply religious people in general. More in some parts of the country than in others, and values and standards differ. But in general, (and VERY generally), Christians find obscenity more objectionable than violence.


We want our laws to be logical. They often are not, and in reality, there is nothing that requires them to be that way. This causes great consternation among the logical, which I totally get.

American Censorship:
Boobies Bad
Guns Good

 

[Steve]

I think that the current rating system works just fine. There are games that are rated "M" for Mature, and for good reason. This is just another law we don't need.

I do believe that there are games kids shouldn't play, but making yet another mostly unenforceable law won't change anything.

 

[Bill Mattocks]

American Censorship:
Boobies Bad
Guns Good

Yes. But that's what we (apparently) want. Not saying I agree with it. Just noting what is.

 

[MJS]

Seems it's all about lobbying, to increase those profit margins. But, if you are a minor you are restricted to what movie you want to see. Movie ratings favor violence to be more acceptable than sexual content, if you ask me both should be treated equally. If it were really a violation of free-speech rights, then nothing should be bleeped on tv or in music, kids should be able to have free access to prono. Corporations have far more threatening power than the government, and we should fear corporations to govern us, and act in the way we prohibit our government.

I call BS on the whole thing! Seems today, people are so afraid that the music their kids listen to, the tv that their kids watch, the movies, the games, etc, are sooooo bad that somehow, they'll have a negative effect, thus, the kids will turn into some nutjob. Funny though....I grew up watching Freddy, Jason and Michael running around, hacking people up, violently I may add, as well as watching the Coyote take fall after fall, explosion after explosion, while chasing the roadrunner, and to date, I've yet to terrorize my neighborhood with a knife, re-enacting my fav. horror badguys, nor did I think that I could hold explosives, and all that'll happen is some birds flying around my head. LOL.

IMO, it all comes down to the way you're raised. Gasp....yes, God forbid a parent teaches their child that what they see isn't real. LOL.

And if parents aren't up to speed on the current stuff, then shame on them.

 

[Sensei Payne]

IMO, it all comes down to the way you're raised. Gasp....yes, God forbid a parent teaches their child that what they see isn't real. LOL.

And if parents aren't up to speed on the current stuff, then shame on them.

Agreed, although educational shows should be prevalent more than mindless show like "adventure time" and "Spongebob"

When I was a kid I enjoyed the history channel as much as I do today. Although, back in the day, History channel was more about History than "Modern Marvels" and "Pawn Stars"...but none the less..good. I introduced my 16 year old sister to the history channel the other day..and shes hooked...can't wait till she see mythbusters.

 

[granfire]

Christians find obscenity more objectionable than violence.

Bwahahahahahaha

(and that's when kids can get violence but find boobies icky....up to a certain age, of course)


Is Tipper Gore on the lose again?


What it boils down to again is being a parent.

I had a similar discussion with my sister-in-law a while back. She rolled her eyes at her boys playing 'grand theft auto' and I asked her why she let it happen...or rather why she bought the game.
Well she had not bought it, but felt so helpless about it (she's a ditz, so let's not go there) when I remarked that there would be no way there would be a game in my house I didn't approve of.

In the aftermath I had to have a talk with my kid why I didn't like that game and why he wasn't supposed to play it...

But as parent, you are not supposed to be the kid's best buddy, but the guiding light.

but then again, the state assembly is not supposed to force their ideas on the people.

 

[Sensei Payne]

Bwahahahahahaha

(and that's when kids can get violence but find boobies icky....up to a certain age, of course)

What it boils down to again is being a parent.

But as parent, you are not supposed to be the kid's best buddy, but the guiding light.

but then again, the state assembly is not supposed to force their ideas on the people.

Since when was violence not obscene?

I think its just easier for parents to explain violence to there kids than it is to explain sex to them.

The Parents being so uptight already is where the lack of communication happens...Mommy and Daddy don't talk about it, so neither should you, and since the sexual revolution and the dawn of the internet, its coming closer to the forefront now more than ever...and its beeding over into our games. Which I think is a good thing..since the games were made of people my age...but for parents..it makes there job a little harder...IMO minors should have parents permission to buy a game thats rated to be for adults/mature.

 

[granfire]

Since when was violence not obscene?

I think its just easier for parents to explain violence to there kids than it is to explain sex to them.

The Parents being so uptight already is where the lack of communication happens...Mommy and Daddy don't talk about it, so neither should you, and since the sexual revolution and the dawn of the internet, its coming closer to the forefront now more than ever...and its beeding over into our games. Which I think is a good thing..since the games were made of people my age...but for parents..it makes there job a little harder...IMO minors should have parents permission to buy a game thats rated to be for adults/mature.

ah, uhm..

Actually violence is more obscene...
kids can 'get' violence, but up to a certain age (puberty) nekked people don't do anything for them
Sexuality is a matter of life, violence, we can get through life with minimal exposure to it.

(but I blame it on this puritan vibe in the country...having fun 'doing it' is BAD, but bullying your wife is ok - rule of thumb meant you could beat your wife with sticks as long as they were not wider than your thumb...)

however, that's not something one can regulate, neither by law nor protest. It's something that is.

But generally speaking the attempt to pass laws like that have the base problem at the core: Parent not wanting to do their job, or unwilling to accept that you can't pack the little one in a bubble and spoon feed the facts of life to it.
Morals and such should develop through communication as to why such things are not good.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Nevermind the issue of how the hell this law would be enforced in the first place. If parents have young kids, are the parents themselves not allowed to purchase the games period? Have them in the house?

This is a free speech issue, plain and simple. I would also like to point out the difference between imposing a rating system that puts parents on notice of the content of a game/movie and a flat-out proscriptive law saying "kids can't play these".

Anything else I could add has already been posted. Glad the Court found as it did.

 

[Sensei Payne]

Nevermind the issue of how the hell this law would be enforced in the first place. If parents have young kids, are the parents themselves not allowed to purchase the games period? Have them in the house?

The same way as a rather R movie, thats all they can do.

For most things, making them illegal or legal, the system on how to regulate them are already enacted today with other systems.

 

[MJS]

Agreed, although educational shows should be prevalent more than mindless show like "adventure time" and "Spongebob"

When I was a kid I enjoyed the history channel as much as I do today. Although, back in the day, History channel was more about History than "Modern Marvels" and "Pawn Stars"...but none the less..good. I introduced my 16 year old sister to the history channel the other day..and shes hooked...can't wait till she see mythbusters.

Agreed. IMO, some of the educational shows today, well, they suck. I got more out of Sesame Street, than I think anyone would get out of spongebob.

 

[granfire]

Agreed. IMO, some of the educational shows today, well, they suck. I got more out of Sesame Street, than I think anyone would get out of spongebob.

LOL, Spongebob does not claim to be educational...

But there used to be shows that were fun to watch and did teach something.

(I am glad tho somebody else hates Adventure Time....)