• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

1st amendment wins again: SCOTUS strikes down CA video game law

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
a777pilot said:
Freedom of speech and the free flow of ideas is a great thing and I applaud the Supreme Court in this decision, only then why is religion restricted? Is not the idea to freely allow ideas to reach our children. All ideas to include violent games and....gasp....maybe even religion?

I wonder who will take the bait?
Click to expand...

when xbox owners go around cutting the heads off ps3 owners you might have something😛
 
The line about violent imagery in fairy tales is bullshit. Just because a child reads something doesn't mean he understands it.
This brought back memories:

the evil queen in Snow White is forced to wear red hot slippers and dance until she is dead
Click to expand...

I remember putting that together as, "Magical red slippers that make her dance."

The innocent lack the frame of reference to grasp horrors, so you can't compare a book which allows them to misinterpret with a game that teaches them the meaning.


This ruling seems to lack context. They don't have a problem with minors being prohibited from voting. They don't have a problem with adults moderating minors. Yet when those adult voters decide to moderate en masse, suddenly the child has civil rights?

And I'd say we certainly have a history of protecting children from witnessing real gore. Teens wouldn't be fascinated with breaking the prohibition if it wasn't prohibited.
I do believe access to real gore should be protected from a certain age (14, maybe?) as it has value in learning about how the world really works. Faces of Death will teach you that guns really do kill people; 4chan will gleefully show you that speeding can turn you into a yellow and pink smear on the pavement, and watching a rider get run over by a dump truck teaches you about bike safety... but engaging in fake acts of graphic violence as pure entertainment doesn't teach you anything good. Triggering the sick glee at breaking society's prohibitions and letting out your inner sadist is not "speech."

I've played The Torture Game, but I can't say that I think it would be appropriate for my 4 year old cousin.
 
Last edited:
yea but the game teaches no meaning anymore than a cartoon teaches you that jumping off a cliff like willy coyote has no permanent harms😛

i mean if the kid is that young, a toddler tyke then it is the parents job anyways, a ps3 cost what? 500 dollars when it came out? you just don't find these things lying out on the street.
 
They made the right decision and I'm glad to see it wasn't a 5-4. 'Course if Alito and Roberts are already waffling this may come up again in the next few years and lead to a different result.
 
Balt said:
They made the right decision and I'm glad to see it wasn't a 5-4. 'Course if Alito and Roberts are already waffling this may come up again in the next few years and lead to a different result.
Click to expand...

I doubt it. The supreme court does not like to reverse previous decisions often because it creates hell in the legal system.
 
FallenHero said:
I doubt it. The supreme court does not like to reverse previous decisions often because it creates hell in the legal system.
Click to expand...

The radical 4 on the right, despite SAYING they have a high respect for not overturning previous rulings, have especially high rates of doing just that as I understand it.

But only when it comes to overturning the US history in interpreting the constitution to change it to their radical views - not overturning their own opinions. Though it's happened.
 
FallenHero said:
I doubt it. The supreme court does not like to reverse previous decisions often because it creates hell in the legal system.
Click to expand...

An outright reversal would be unusual, yes. There are many different ways of skirting a legal precedent, though. 😉
 
Good. It should be fairly obvious to all but those with blinders on that violent games/movies/books/music/whatever don't lead to violent people.
 
rudder said:
You cannot compare depictions of violence to depictions of sexual conduct. For instance, if my son watches a movie where someone is killed. It is easier for me to explain violence in terms of right and wrong. If there is a movie where a couple is going at it like rabbits... it is right... but it is wrong now. He along with most children are more apt to eventually participate in sexual conduct rather than violent conduct.
Click to expand...
Why are you letting your kids watch a movie with depictions of sexual conduct if you have a hard time to explain sex in terms of "right and wrong" and if you think he/she will eventually participate in sexual conduct?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top