It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Banned Video Games: Why Did it Have to be MY State!?

page: 1
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Veteran state Rep. Lou Lang, an attorney, believes the Illinois General Assembly this year approved at least two proposals that are unconstitutional.

One measure, an initiative of Gov. Rod Blagojevich, is designed to prevent children from buying violent and sexually explicit video games.

Source: www.sj-r.com...


Now this is just stupid. I think that whether or not a child can play a certain video game should be up to the parent. Parents are too irresponsible these days, their children are still children, and they have to do what they're told until they are adults, which includes the types of games they play, shows they watch, ect.




posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 01:02 PM
link   
It should definately be the parents choice to whether or not their child can have the game. If you're going to ban it in one place, ban it everywhere, or just not at all.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 01:03 PM
link   
I'm completely with you on this one. It seems that televisions and PS2's have become the modern nanny. If you catch your child playing a game that you don't think they should've been playing, then you should've been paying more attention to what they were doing in the first place. Should children be playing these games? Not in my opinion, but my opinion shouldn't matter to someone else in raising their children. I think it's a shame we feel a need to have laws like this on the books to take care of stuff that parents should be taking care of anyways. If you don't have time to pay attention to what your children are doing then you shouldn't have had them in the first place.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 01:30 PM
link   
This seems like overkill to me. Don't you have the same game rating system in the US as we do in Canada?

I remember when GTA-Vice City came out, you had to either bring a parent with you to buy the game or produce ID showing you were 18+. Wouldn't it just make more sense to enforce the existing controls instead of writing new laws?

[edit on 19-7-2005 by Duzey]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 01:38 PM
link   
Agreed, MCory1. I see in the near future bans on certain sights on the Internet and certain TV shows and stations will be shut down because they're not suitable for children.

[tongue in cheek]It's family values, doncha know? What's wrong with you - are you a preevert? Why do adults even need these sexually explicit games, anyway? Games used to be fun! You don't need 'em! But don't touch my gun! [/tongue in cheek]

Why do the kids have the games? How much do these things cost? Where are they getting the money? WTF is going on that parent's aren't taking the responsibility for breeding? Ack!



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 01:52 PM
link   


It's family values, doncha know? What's wrong with you - are you a preevert? Why do adults even need these sexually explicit games, anyway? Games used to be fun! You don't need 'em! But don't touch my gun!


Imagine that, family values coming from the democratic party!



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 02:00 PM
link   
They're not banning the games, they're just restricting the sales to adults. So if the parents want to buy the video games for their children, they can...so this does leave it up the parents, doesn't it?



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 02:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by djohnsto77
They're not banning the games, they're just restricting the sales to adults. So if the parents want to buy the video games for their children, they can...so this does leave it up the parents, doesn't it?


Very true, but if the parents were keeping up with their kids then why would this be an issue in the first place? I don't know, maybe I'm a special case, but my parents made very clear the things that were good for me to partake of and what things they didn't want me to have any part of. If I had a copy of GTA when I was 10, I'd have been grounded until I was old enough to retire and my PS2 would've been taking up space in a pawn shop. Simple as that. No legislation needed--it's just good parenting.

Aside from that, it still won't solve the problem of the kids getting a hold of it, it'll just make it a little more difficult--and possibly even a little more exciting to get that game. Think about it, in spite of all the laws to the contrary, how many teenagers are smoking and drinking? Never stopped me, that's for sure. So I had to find an adult to buy me a 12 pack or smokes. Instead of that 12 pack costing 5 bucks, I had to tack on an extra buck or two to get a friend's brother to do it. Big deal. Thankfully my parents took the time to talk to me about drinking and taught me how to be responsible in doing it--they knew all the laws in the world aren't going to keep a kid from doing stupid stuff like that.

Same applies here. You want that new game that costs $60, but you can't talk your parents into getting it? No biggie. Throw another $10 in it and you get someone to get it for you. Parent's are now eliminated from the equation. Still doesn't solve the problem, just another waste of ink and paper. What makes me sick is that parents want the government to raise their children, they want to pawn the responsibilities of protecting their kids off on someone else so they can get back to running their soccer-mom-SUVs-and-lattes-don't-be-the-normal-kid-I-was-go-to-therapy-and-find-your-inner-child lifestyle without having to worry about having to do anything with that new tax write off that they thought would be a great little toy for five years and then it'd be smart enough to do everything they'd expect it to do. And when that doesn't work out, my God! Hillary was right--it takes a village to raise a kid, not a parent, this isn't what I was getting myself into, let everyone else do the work for me. It's crap, pardon my French, but crap it is. It shouldn't have ever been an issue to begin with.

EDIT:
Sorry about the rant, but this principle I'm complaining about is something that's bugged me for a while. Here's an old blog I'm no longer maintaining where I have an even longer rant if you want to get the whole point I'm trying to make with this. The language gets fairly strong (no T&C on MSN Spaces), so you might want to keep that in mind if you check it out. And if this link is inappropriate, let me know; I'll re-edit and remove it.

[edit on 7/19/2005 by MCory1]



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 03:15 PM
link   
I think they should be banned from making, and marketing these games. That way parents would not have to worry about it.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by groingrinder
I think they should be banned from making, and marketing these games. That way parents would not have to worry about it.


And what about the rest of the responsible adult population that enjoys playing these games? We should have this facet of our lives taken away because some people don't want to worry about what their kids might play when they aren't around? Isn't that roughly like banning cars so kids won't go out joyriding?

Yes, I believe these games can lead impressionable youth down some pretty bad paths, but taking them out of circulation is not the answer. I'm not even going to plead constitutionality here--it's all about communication and education. Why not just let kids know that these games are strictly that: games, and they're meant for older people--adults in particular, or at least people mature enough to realize that they don't represent the way life should be handled. What happened to trying to take the time to explain to kids the difference between right and wrong? Why does the government need a hand in that?



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Considering these games were meant for adult audiences, I see nothing wrong with it. All it's doing is preventing the sale of these adult games to minors. Basically the same as restricting cigarettes. After all - an adult can buy the game for a minor, much in the same way an adult may buy cigarettes for a minor.

Yes, I agree that the parents should be more responsible. However, since some of them aren't, this had to happen.

I fail to see how it does anything bad for anyone, seriously. If you are able to buy the game, good for you. If you're underage, then sorry, but it's restricted; considering your parents aren't here to buy it.

If they were present at time of purchase, there'd be no problem.



posted on Jul, 19 2005 @ 06:05 PM
link   
I grew up playing every single violent video game I could find. Why? Because they were the best ones made !



Seriously though, im not sure how anyone could handle the situation and make everyone happy.

I was asked to show ID once at a walmart. When I was 20.
I was not pleased.

I guess having the parents purchase the game does kind of solve the problem, but what happens when the parents deprive the children of games and they resort to other "activities" when they could have been using free time to play a harmless game.



posted on Jul, 20 2005 @ 09:53 AM
link   
Parents wouldn't have to worry about this if they would STOP BUYING THEIR KIDS VIDEO GAMES EVERY TIME THEY ASK. It's ridiculous, every day I have to go to Walmart (
) there's some obnoxious little kid saying "Mommy, Mommy, can I have this game?" The mom says "*sigh* Yes, dear." Happens every day. And lots of the time it's the same kid (it's a really small town). The parents don't even check what game it is. If they'd do that and quit buying games left and right, there would be less suprise when their kid is sitting in their bedroom shooting down a policeman on their PS2/Gamecube/Xbox, and their kids would learn that they don't always get what they want.

[edit on 7/20/05 by ShreddedIce]



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 01:34 AM
link   
I read an article today about how Grand Theft Auto San Andreas will now carry an "Adults Only" rating because of recently revealed sex content hidden in the game.

Yea, hidden as in, removed from the final release of the game, but code not removed.

LAME. Dont go looking for trouble !


BTW if you have the pc version and want to see what im talking about, its called the "hot coffee" mod.




posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 01:56 AM
link   
I personally do not care for the government to take over the role of parenting either. Apparently though, there are some parents who wish to have it so.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 02:01 AM
link   
Keep the damn government out of my damn video games! Don't they have more important things to focus on?

As a game developer, it is up to the parents to monitor what their kids play. It is THEIR responsibility, not that of mine, as a developer to regulate what is included in a game. The retail establishments that sell games better start enforcing the ERSB ratings, because it gets old to see a consumer fire off a lawsuit when their kids going out and kills someone because they claim a video game made them do it.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 02:24 AM
link   
Parent laziness is mindboggling.

Is there anything that today's parents have not found a way to blame on someone else.

Think of this for a moment:

Parents are annoyed that their children may encounter a sexual scene in a computer game that features people brutally murdering each other.

So decapitating people with chainsaws and throwing molotov cocktails at police cars is fun, but throw in a nude woman and we've crossed into a forbidden realm here.

You know what... someone needs to slap a warning label on the foreheads of any parent that doesn't understand this and it should say "Beware, idiot parent, don't expect much from my kids."

What sort of parent buys that game to begin with?? Merry Christmas Junior, good luck shooting everyone?

If the lazy parents of the 21st century would stop focusing on how to do the least work possible bringing up kids, maybe they'd realize for a minute that young minds are impressionable and as a RESPONSIBLE parent maybe turn the damn channel when a violent movie is on, or take away that violent game.

But NO!! The government should do that for them so they can sit on their well rested bottoms and hope for the best.

These government initiatives will do nothing. The more the government forbids something the greater lengths a child will go to get it. It'll become the great forbidden GTA that everyone must try.

The intervention must come from the home, not legislators seeking a good reelection issue.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 03:57 AM
link   
hhahahahahahahahhaha sorry



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 04:26 AM
link   
I guess being involved in gaming and the gaming industry, I am a bit more aware of what is out there. As a prospective parent (January), my wife and I seem to have differing views on computer gaming and the Internet when it comes to our child. My wife is an avid gamer as well, but she does not believe kids should be "hanging out on the Internet, gaming and in chatrooms." I feel differently and that there are good things that can come out of the afforementioned in moderation. Kids now grow up with the Internet, something I did not have as a kid (until I was in my late teens).

Hell, I can remember, "back in the day" playing a text based x-rated adventure (precursor to Leisure Suit Larry) while my dad was hanging out behind me. To be completely honest, I had no F'ing idea what a prophylactic was (LOL)! But today, games are considerable different. It's about killing, guns, drugs, gangs, abusing women, sex, war, terrorism, everything that is wrong in society.

But parents today, dont know any difference when it comes to games. They buy what their child asks for (usually). I guess its rather apparent that some are not involved in what their children are playing or doing when it comes to things like this.



posted on Jul, 21 2005 @ 09:50 AM
link   

But parents today, dont know any difference when it comes to games. They buy what their child asks for (usually). I guess its rather apparent that some are not involved in what their children are playing or doing when it comes to things like this.


You're absolutely right!

The parents are so far removed from their children's lives that they have no idea what they do all day.

To me, I would rather be a parent who is involved in their lives. Not overly restrictive, not invasive, but involved. Know what it is they're doing, and if something isn't right, ACTIVELY attempt to correct it. Not rely on someone else to do so.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join