Supreme Court Strikes Down Video Game Ban

[Rezident]

Hear hear for common sense:

http://www.crunchgear.com/2011/06/2...cannot-ban-the-sale-of-video-games-to-minors/

 

[shortylickens]

HOWEVER, individual businesses can ban the sale of any product to a minor. Thats been held up in many, many courts over the years. Institutionalized ageism is legal, its just that the actual government may or may not be able to practice it in some cases.
And you better believe if a particular store feels pressure from local parents they will do it. I certainly see this happening with Walmart and other large chains.

 

[Texashiker]

I certainly see this happening with Walmart and other large chains.

After Sam Walton died, family values were thrown out the door in favor of profits. I remember back in the mid-1980s when Sam Walton banned the sale of heavy metal groups like Ozzy and Iron Maiden. After Sam died, the stores started selling those albums again.

Most large companies will not take a political stance on anything, they get caught in the middle and lose business from one side or the other.

As for video games, those choices should be left up to the parents and the local communities, and not the state or federal government.

 

[skace]

After Sam Walton died, family values were thrown out the door in favor of profits. I remember back in the mid-1980s when Sam Walton banned the sale of heavy metal groups like Ozzy and Iron Maiden. After Sam died, the stores started selling those albums again.

Most large companies will not take a political stance on anything, they get caught in the middle and lose business from one side or the other.

As for video games, those choices should be left up to the parents and the local communities, and not the state or federal government.

Ozzy and Iron Maiden? Never should have been banned.

 

[shortylickens]

After Sam Walton died, family values were thrown out the door in favor of profits. I remember back in the mid-1980s when Sam Walton banned the sale of heavy metal groups like Ozzy and Iron Maiden. After Sam died, the stores started selling those albums again.

Most large companies will not take a political stance on anything, they get caught in the middle and lose business from one side or the other.

As for video games, those choices should be left up to the parents and the local communities, and not the state or federal government.

I agree they should be, but in reality they will be made by angry parents trying desperately to control the world around them. If they cant force their government, they will force their local businesses.
I wouldnt be surprised if theres a large parent organization which routinely harasses corporate Walmart.

 

[Texashiker]

Ozzy and Iron Maiden?

Yep, it was around 1983, 1984, 1985,,, somewhere in there. I went into the local wal-mart to get either an Ozzy or a Judas Priest album. The problem was I could not find it. When I asked the lady behind the counter when they might receive the album, she told me that Sam Walton had banned the sale of heavy metal groups. I went back and looked at the selection, and sure enough, all of the metal groups had been removed. I had to go to a music store at a local mall to buy the album.

I see this video game ban as the same thing we went through in the 1980s with heavy metal music.

Violent games have been a part of our culture since Doom, and their not going away. All it is, is a form of censorship. A minority group is trying to push its will upon the majority.

I am glad the supreme court took action on the matter. Now maybe those special interest groups will go away.

 

[Tom]

Bad decision. First Amendment rights of minors are subject to adult authority, which includes actions taken by government.

They should have thrown the California law out for being too vague or far reaching, but not have ruled out a more well thought out restriction.

This has nothing to do with censorship, it's about raising kids.

 

[Texashiker]

This has nothing to do with censorship, it's about raising kids.

That responsibility falls to the parents, and not the government.

If the government starts censoring stuff for kids, whats next, telling kids they can not go to church, or buy a bible? How about comic books, will those be banned next? Would bugs bunny and the road runner be banned from TV?

Maybe the discovery channel would have to ban all programs about war, because it depicts acts of violence?

Maybe banning kids from hunting or fishing because it teaches the kids animal cruelty?

 

[Tom]

That responsibility falls to the parents, and not the government.

Not true. Government is just the collective will of citizens. We've decided as a society that porn is not acceptable for children. Or liquor, cigs, sex.

Access to those things isn't left up to parents.

This case hinged on one BS thing. The argument presented by video game makers is that it's ok to restrict kid's access to sexual obscenity because there are "community standards" established for that; but that there are no such "community standards" for violence.

Which is BS because with regard to sexual content, the court decided what the "community standards" are, and they could do the same thing for violence if they wanted. It's BS to say one is ok and the other isn't.

The "community" doesn't want kids simulating rape and burning people to death anymore than they want them watching explicit sex.

 

[Texashiker]

Not true. Government is just the collective will of citizens. We've decided as a society that porn is not acceptable for children. Or liquor, beer, sex.

Access to those things isn't left up to parents.

Liquor, beer and sex are not protected rights - for anyone, much less children. Your trying to compare protected rights, and something that is not protected.

As a parent, I decide what video games are brought into my house.

My kids have their own steam accounts that I buy their games through. Its not the governments job to get involved.

 

[Tom]

Liquor, beer and sex are not protected rights - for anyone, much less children. Your trying to compare protected rights, and something that is not protected.

As a parent, I decide what video games are brought into my house.

My kids have their own steam accounts that I buy their games through. Its not the governments job to get involved.

Nothing in the California law would have changed that. You could buy any game you wanted for your kids, the only restriction was on kids buying them on their own.

In the real world, you and I know that lots of kid's do whatever they want as far as video games and the internet in general are concerned. Either because their parents don't understand how to control access for technical reasons, or have no idea what kind of content games have. Lots of people have no idea that somebody would call something where you rape people, a game.

 

[apoppin]

I agree they should be, but in reality they will be made by angry parents trying desperately to control the world around them. If they cant force their government, they will force their local businesses.
I wouldnt be surprised if theres a large parent organization which routinely harasses corporate Walmart.

You mean brain-dead parents who abdicate their own responsibility for bringing up their own children?

The Supreme Court put the issue back right where it belongs - on the parents.

 

[wuliheron]

After Sam Walton died, family values were thrown out the door in favor of profits.

They were never family values to begin with. They were the values of the immoral minority who still obsessively try to force their personal agenda on everyone else despite the fact they have lost just about every battle they've ever fought. Claiming it is merely corporations giving in to profits is nothing less then the continuing screams of denial from a bunch of hate mongering idiots unwilling to face the fact nobody supports them.

 

[Schadenfroh]

Good, glad that the violence issue has been resolved. Now, when can I start smoking in World of Warcraft? Or will allowing our children to smoke in video games cause them to grow up to smoke?

 

[Liet]

You mean brain-dead parents who abdicate their own responsibility for bringing up their own children?

The Supreme Court put the issue back right where it belongs - on the parents.

Spot on, and all that needs to be said.

Parents do parenting; not the government.

 

[paperfist]

After Sam Walton died, family values were thrown out the door in favor of profits. I remember back in the mid-1980s when Sam Walton banned the sale of heavy metal groups like Ozzy and Iron Maiden. After Sam died, the stores started selling those albums again.

Most large companies will not take a political stance on anything, they get caught in the middle and lose business from one side or the other.

As for video games, those choices should be left up to the parents and the local communities, and not the state or federal government.

Yet they still sell only bleeped out versions of CDs with 'dirty' language.

 

[AyashiKaibutsu]

Lots of people have no idea that somebody would call something where you rape people, a game.

Custer's revenge is the height of art good sir.

 

[SMOGZINN]

This case hinged on one BS thing. The argument presented by video game makers is that it's ok to restrict kid's access to sexual obscenity because there are "community standards" established for that; but that there are no such "community standards" for violence.

Which is BS because with regard to sexual content, the court decided what the "community standards" are, and they could do the same thing for violence if they wanted. It's BS to say one is ok and the other isn't.

The courts don't set the standards, the community does, the courts only rule on whether the community has upheld those standards. No community has upheld the standards they want to place on the video game industries. Part of the problem here is that the community wants to set one standard for video games and another for everything else.

The "community" doesn't want kids simulating rape and burning people to death anymore than they want them watching explicit sex.

No, they just want them watching it on TV and movies, reading about it in books, and seeing it acted out on stage. Hell, look at the current crop of cartoons, some of them are frighteningly violent even by my standards, and I’m not talking about Adult Swim or Fox primetime, I’m talking about early morning.

The other problem with this case is that we are talking about actual government censorship. SCOTUS has stated that porn is not protected because it is not attempting to transmit ideas, while this ruling explicitly states that SCOTUS finds that video games are in fact more like a book then porn is like a movie. This leaves us open to several interpretations, including that there might be a ‘porn’ classification for video games that would not be protected as speech. But, I would guess that it would fall into the same problem realm that porn is in, ‘I can’t define it but I know it when I see it.’

 

[Liet]

I would also like to know what "community standards" games are being held to, and who the fuck is the authority which decides what they are? I don't remember being asked about this on the census. Do you?

I'd also like to know where California gets off in proclaiming that the "community standards" are the ones every parent should be legally forced to raise their children by.

 

[Arglebargle]

Puritanism: The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy. HL Mencken

There was precious little evidence to support their 'anti game violence' pretensions. It was more knee jerk 'For the Children!' blather. Whenever I hear that it makes me want to check my wallet. And my copy of the Constitution. Next to terrorism in the modern world, it is the easiest emotional hook to abuse.

 

[wuliheron]

The people bitching the loudest are in the deepest denial. The highest rates of homicide, abortion, and STDs are in the Bible belt. Meanwhile teen crime is at an all time low.

 

[Tom]

I would also like to know what "community standards" games are being held to, and who the fuck is the authority which decides what they are? I don't remember being asked about this on the census. Do you?

I'd also like to know where California gets off in proclaiming that the "community standards" are the ones every parent should be legally forced to raise their children by.

Nobody asked you individually about selling to porn to kids either. But the court decided that a community, acting through local or state government, can set standards for porn and if it can be sold to kids.

Which is what the California law did, but with regards to violence instead of sex, and only in restricitng sales to minors, not it's production.

The grounds for the majoroty opinion in this case are BS, because the court says it can't find a reason to allow community standards with regards to violence, but it could as far as sex. But the Constitution doesn't say that. They made up the authority with regards to porn, they could make up the authority with regards to violence. Doing one and not the other is illogical and based on their personal biases, not proper conduct on their part.

And the California law doesn't censor video games at all, it just restricted sales of some games to adults. The law didn't prevent parents from buying any game for their kids, just that kids couldn't buy them.

And that law maybe was too broad, but they could have thrown it out on that grounds, and a better law could have been written.

This ruling might mean for example that some sicko could post videos of puppies being tortured on Youtube, and Youtube would not be allowed to restrict viewing of that to adults, but have to let children view it too, without any restrictions or warnings.

This ruling takes away parental rights to have a say in what their children are exposed to.

 

[zoiks]

Now I can look forward to the new carmageddon.

 

[RPD]

I was pleasantly surprised to hear the court ruling made sense. If I want to buy my kid the latest GTA, then I should be able to. It's up to me to raise my kid, not the government.

 

[wuliheron]

This ruling takes away parental rights to have a say in what their children are exposed to.

What a load of crap. We've got everything from V chips in TVs to computer programs to limit your kids access. Curb your own damn kid and stop insisting society do everything for you.