Posted on 01/17/2013 2:16:00 PM PST by SeekAndFind
During his media event yesterday to roll out his "comprehensive" plan to address gun violence, Barack Obama didn't mention the entertainment industry at all, despite hints from Joe Biden that films, television, and video games would all be on the table for discussion. Instead, another Democrat has picked up that issue in the House. Rep. Jim Matheson (D-UT) has introduced legislation that would require all retailers to prevent the sale of violent video games to minors:
Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) introduced a bill this week that would ban the sale of violent video games to minors.
The Supreme Court struck down a similar California law in 2011, ruling that the restriction violated the constitutional right to free speech.
Matheson's Video Games Ratings Enforcement Act, H.R. 287, would make it illegal for anyone to ship, distribute, sell or rent a video game that does not bear a label from the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB) on the age-appropriateness of the game.
The ESRB, an industry self-regulatory group, already assigns age-based labels to video games, ranging from “C” for early childhood, “E” for everyone, “T” for teen, “M” for mature, and “AO” for adults only, but the system is entirely voluntary.
While I’m pleased that we’re finally getting around to talking about the culture that glorifies mindless violence, this is yet another piece of window dressing. Passing laws enforcing ratings only makes government more expensive and does nothing to address the actual issue of violence glorification. If anything, it gives restricted games even more cachet than before. We will not solve the real underlying issues by passing legislation that infringes on either the First or Second Amendments, but by forcing the purveyors of violent entertainment to address market forces that should — if we can succeed in changing the culture — punish them through poor sales and bad reputations.
Besides, this has already been addressed once by the Supreme Court, as The Hill points out:
“Like the protected books, plays and movies that preceded them, video games communicate ideas — and even social messages,” Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the court’s opinion.
He said that California’s argument that it could restrict speech directed at children is “unprecedented and mistaken.”
“No doubt a state possesses legitimate power to protect children from harm … but that does not include a free-floating power to restrict the ideas to which children may be exposed,” Scalia wrote.
Exactly. The power of bad ideas can only be lessened by the expression of better ones. If we start going down a path of censorship, then what other ideas will get restricted as unacceptable for children? Maybe religion, free market economics, and so on. It’s up to parents to raise their children and teens and exercise some control on what comes into the house, whether that’s entertainment or anything else.
Joe Scarborough disagreed on today’s Morning Joe, mistakenly asserting that the Supreme Court hasn’t ruled on the First Amendment issues surrounding video game restrictions in a conversation with Tom Brokaw. However, at least Scarborough and Brokaw bothered talking about the culture of violence, something Obama couldn’t be bothered to do.
Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy
Government can’t solve every problem for us, and in a free society, we shouldn’t want it try, either.
They already have ratings.
They not only have ratings already, the ratings come with age restrictions to purchase. The M and A ratings are sold to 17 and 18 and over only.
Yup. M rated. And all realistic depictions of violence type games carry it.
All XBOX/PS3 games have ratings on the damn things. When I got Black Ops, it had ratings stickers on them.
They blame the children for playing them, but it’s the parents who are irresponsible enough to buy them for their children.
My parents monitored the video games I wanted and made sure it was age appropriate long before the ratings were added.
The ratings tell the teens which ones are “the good ones”.
I am surprised that they have Democrats in Utah....
Exactly.
If a parent determines their kid is mature enough to play it, they will buy for them it regardless. And if a parent does not pay attention to what their kid does, THAT is a problem no law will solve.
When people start holding parents responsible for what they do as parents, the ‘kid’ problem will largely be addressed and solved right along with it.
I played all sorts of these type games with my daughter as she grew up. And she grew up able to distinguish fantasy from reality because of it. People should give it a ‘shot’. It solves a few problems simultaneously.
Peckerhead in CT was 20 years old. What would have to do with him?
Peckerhead in CT was 20 years old. What would have to do with him?
Not a very good argument. The games already have ratings and purchase restrictions. We also have ratings and restricdtions for movies.
the problem is the eradication of the American family and morals.
All my babies daddy’s?
Homes without parents?
Somebody having eleven children with 5 different women and takes care of none of them? Then asking the court for leniency?
Nah, it is a moral breakdown in society egged on by socialists to destroy the fabric of a once great nation.
bobo
Hey, it’s a distraction from the real problems in D.C. these days. Don’t watch the hand behind the magician’s back.
The ratings and restrictions on video games and movies are both completely voluntary, industry-adopted standards, not enforced by the government. There is no law on the books that says they must rate them, or that it is illegal to sell material with any rating to someone of any age. The only laws that might apply are on the order of “contributing to the delinquency of a minor”, which aren’t related to the content, but the effect it might have.
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.