Posted on 08/25/2006 8:44:27 PM PDT by SandRat
BATON ROUGE, La. -- A state law that would ban sales of violent video games to minors violates free speech rights and cannot be enforced, a judge ruled.
U.S. District Judge James Brady said the state had no right to bar distribution of materials simply because they show violent behavior. Brady issued an injunction, calling the law an "invasion of First Amendment rights" of producers, retailers and the minors who play the games.
----snip----
(Excerpt) Read more at tucson.cox.net ...
Brady, James J. Born 1944 in St. Louis, MO
Federal Judicial Service: Judge, U. S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana Nominated by William J. Clinton on July 14, 1999, to a seat vacated by John V. Parker; Confirmed by the Senate on May 24, 2000, and received commission on May 25, 2000.
Education: Southeastern Louisiana College, B.A., 1966
Louisiana State University Law School, J.D., 1969
Professional Career: Private practice, LA, 1969-2000 Board member, Louisiana Board of Tax Appeals, 1975-1980 Adjunct professor, Louisiana State University, 1985, 1987, 1990
Race or Ethnicity: White
Gender: Male
Nom'ed by Clinton... surprise, surprise.
I played violent videogames as a child *twitch* and I turned out *spasm* just fine.
One more "judge" to the impeachment block ...
In other words: "Hey parents! Do your ****ing jobs and stop looking to the State for a quick fix!"
Another freakin moron judge.
That is, the more violent games there are out there, the more violent criminals there will be.
Brady deflected the arguments by the state that video games should be treated differently from other forms of media because their interactive format can encourage violence.
"This argument has been rejected many times," Brady wrote, noting that other judges have ruled that movies and television also have interactive elements."
I've watched movies and television all my life and never have I "interacted" with a movie screen or television.
"Brady also rejected the state's argument that video games depicting extreme violence can be "psychologically harmful" to minors."
Having worked in the mental health field for the past 12 years I'd have to disagree with this Judge on this issue, and I wouldn't be alone in this. There is a plethora of studies which have confirmed the psychological harm extremely violent video games have on children.
I do have to agree, that parents must be the first and last line of protection for their children. Parents who are not paying attention to their children should face sanctions.
Well said. I am not willing to give up my freedoms for the "Nanny Staters."
I don't think anyone was asking *you* to give up any freedoms, unless you are so you that you have not attained your majority.
Minors' rights are limited in many areas by law. For instance, minors can't go to a gun shop and exercise the 2nd.
You make a convincing argument. However, how many times have you seen a strict restriction perverted into something it was never intended to be? Look at gun laws in San Francisco, and then get back to me.
Amen!
I don't think idiot gun laws like those you mention grew out of restrictions on minors' rights.
There are plenty of other areas where minors' rights are restricted. They can't enter into most contracts, for instance.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.