|
|
 |
|
|
Pages: 1
No ID, no game?
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)
Posted by: Tweaker
A bill introduced in Congress last week would make it a federal crime to sell or rent violent video games to minors.
US Representative Joe Baca, D-California, introduced a bill in Congress last week that would make it a federal crime to sell or rent violent video games to minors. The Protect Children from Video Game Sex and Violence Act of 2002 would apply to games that feature decapitation, amputation, killing of humans with lethal weapons or through hand-to-hand combat, rape, carjackings, aggravated assault, and other violent felonies. Twenty-one other representatives cosponsored the bill, which was referred to the House Judiciary Committee.
That list would place a slew of popular titles out of the reach of teenagers, some of the biggest consumers of the games. The top-selling video game in 2001, according to research firm NPD Group, was Grand Theft Auto III, in which players steal and wreck cars, commit contract killings, and carry out other crimes. It has been banned in Australia.
Violators of the act would be subject to fines of up to $1,000 for a first offense and up to $5,000, plus 90 days in jail, for multiple offenses.
Well again here we are, music, gamming you name it something always comes up concerning the violence or language in products that are marketed towards kids.
I'll admit some of these games are a little much for the younger ones, but what about television (cable), talk about violence. I can remember back when I was a young brat and loved to play cowboys and Indians or GI Joe.
We would shoot at each other and have a ball, of course there was no blood but we knew it was for fun. We never took the barrel of a pistol and crack it over someone's head! Anyway, these kids are going to find a way to play these games no matter what we do to stop them. It all comes down to parenting, education starts in the home.
Source: Gamespot
Posted by: Tecil
 Quote:
|
It all comes down to parenting, education starts in the home.
|
Exactly... I'd agree with Tweak, its up to the parents to regulate the childs viewing, playing habits.
I was never regulated in what I played or listened to when I was younger. My parents never really cared, But now that I'm a father, I'll be tacking an active interest in what my son plays, watches, or listens to. He's only 2 now, but in a couple years I'll have to regulate it more. Right now we only let him watch certain cartoons, and always put him to bed if we're going to watch a movie. Unless it's G rated. 
I have a bunch of different game consoles and all my PC games. I don't play them if he is around, or if I do its a game that is non-violent. That means no Mortal Kombat. 
Posted by: Swilo
Next time I'm hanging around the game isle and some little kid wants a game, I'll buy it with his money and give it to him, then write to congress and laugh in their face.
Posted by: TotalRecall
<start rant> Games may put me on edge, but I never feel the need to react violenty. I don't understand it. I've never felt such a way, even when playing the most violent of games at young ages.
It makes me incredibly angry that people think in such a way that dictates the removal of content and freedom to protect. This isn't an answer. The answer is a rational and reasonable educated view on the subject. If you have a stupid person playing a game or watching television, they are going to follow like sheep. I suppose that brings it all back to the parents.
I'm also tired of seeing government step in and take action as if we are their "kids." Thousands of laws are just stupidity barriers.
There should be a "minor competency" test at the age of 13 / 14, which regulates these conditions. <end rant>
Posted by: Null Actor
Video games are the sole cause of violence in this day and age. This assertion can be proven by the fact that there was absolutely no violence whatsoever before videogames.
Posted by: TotalRecall
Yeah. I mean, they had Doom during World War II, right?
Posted by: taco_fox
Quote:
Subject: Re: game violence ..long, RANTing Reply
From: Immune to Player Damage
Host: -
Date: Thu Nov 22 20:25:01
My humble submission,
Video games are not the real threat to our children. Video games make no attempt to train children to accept game-violence as real violence effecting real people. Games don't "LIE" to the people who play them.
The real tragedy is that the people who deny their children access to violent video-games, are often oblivious to what is being done to their child's mind as they sit in front of a steady stream of good-old, healthy, commercial-television.
...actually, public television is starting to become corrupted as well. I sh*t-you-not, when I tell you that "Elmo" uses AOL now.
When a parent decides what music their child isn't allowed to listen to, does it include bands that are tactical products of corporate or government projects?
If a parent guides a child's ability to understand the balance of things, in general, and the properties of things, in detail, it creates a system for healthy reasoning. If a parent believes their child is unable to seperate fiction from reality, video-game violence from real violence, then they had better re-think letting them watch Bugs Bunny.
Kids aren't unable to cope with complex and graphic subjects, they don't need to be sheltered, they need to be shown the answers to "what goes where, what does what and why?"
One 10 yr old knows if he plays with any of his daddy's knives, he will get a spanking, while another 10 yr old knows how to hold a knife properly, use it safely, pass it to sombody else safely, protect it from rusting, sharpen it, and not to let his friends use it without parental approval. Which of these two kids are knives a greater danger to?
If (when) a child is fascinated by something dangerous, they will attempt to complete their understanding on their own. In martial arts, a student with an incomplete education is considered a potential hazzard to himself and others.
Here:
A screwdriver is:
A) A tool?
B) A weapon?
C) Or both A and B?
If a child choses A or B, then the parent has some more work to do.
The only kids who may be in danger from exposure to video-game violence, are those who either A) have the desire to hurt or abuse others in "real-life"...Or B)have no ability to associate the feelings of pain or discomfort of others with their own feelings. Deciding to control such children through deprivation is like trying to mop-up a flooded bathroom while the faucet is still running.
None of these views are presented with righteous authority, but they do come from the results of my own personal history of success and failure.
|
Found that on a forum a while ago. I thought it was well written.
Posted by: TotalRecall
That would be my signature if it wasn't so long.
|
|
|
|
|
