It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
WASHINGTON—The Supreme Court ruled Monday that a California law banning the sale of violent videogames to minors is unconstitutional.
The court, in a 7-2 vote, said the law violated First Amendment free-speech protections. "Even where the protection of children is the object, the constitutional limits on governmental action apply," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in an 18-page opinion, which was joined by four other justices.
Disgust is not a valid basis for restricting expression.
Originally posted by bigfatfurrytexan
reply to post by BlackStar99
Yes it is. It is a ridiculous theory. Like all theories in psychology, it seeks to paint the human psyche with a broad brush.
I grew up watching faces of death while eating pizza and spaghetti, trying to out gross my friends. We were real dorks. I have been exposed to some pretty gory stuff in my life. And, after all of that, I am more repulsed by violence and death than i ever could have believed I could be.
Desensitized? Far from it. I am hypersensitive to it. Not that I cannot be around an injured person who is bleeding from a cut finger. But I have no desire to see real death or gore, and am repulsed by the thought.
Originally posted by filosophia
they need violent video games, it is the military training of the 21st century. They are just using the freedom of expression as a cover, they won't use that same argument when it comes to censoring the web over "disgusting material" i.e. the truth.
Justice Breyer's dissent criticized that divergence, saying it didn't make sense to ban the sale of a magazine showing a nude woman to 13-year-olds while allowing them to buy video games in which they commit virtual violence against women.