Mississippi Senator Introduces Video Game Rating Legislation
By Shawn on Sunday, July 27th, 2008 at 1:57 PM PST In Game Related Laws, Gamer Life
Sen. Roger Wicker (R-MS) has introduced a bill proposing video game legislation. Although the full text of the bill isn’t available at this time, here’s an excerpt to give you the gist of what Wicker is proposing.
…prohibit the distribution or sale of video games that do not have age-based content rating labels [and] prohibit the sale or rental of video games with adult content ratings to minors..
According to GamePolitics an unconfirmed source has stated that Wicker’s bill is the Senate version of the Video Games Rating Enforcement Act which Reps. Jim Matheson (D-UT) and Lee Terry (R-KS) introduced to the House earlier this year.
Once again it seems that the US government has blatantly ignored that there is a self imposed video game ratings system already in place. The US needs parents to wake up and actually start “parenting” their children instead of having government officials do it for them.
via GamePolitics
Quite frankly I don’t give a shit if the government wants to take charge of the video game rating system…as long as they don’t fuck it up.
Technically I don’t think parents should be allowed to buy mature rated games for their children, and I wouldn’t be against making this illegal.
I work at a day camp w/ 6-10 year old kids, and had quite a nice conversation about GTA4 w/ one of my 8 year olds the other day. To be honest, something needs to be done, and expecting American parents to “parent” has already been proven unsuccessful.
How would you stop parents from doing this Matt? Without banning the purchase all together.. cashiers can’t question a customer as to intent of purchase can they? Who is to say who the purchase is for, and as a parent of young children why should I be denied the ability to buy adult entertainment for myself or my spouse.
The last thing I want is the government MORE involved in my parenting choices and options.. its yet another step on the road to socialism, birth creche societies and “right thinking” mandates. Sure there are crappy parents out there, but how can you advocate a concept that would discourage the good ones as well?
I do expect American parents to parent.. not the American government.
I think simply making the purchasing of mature rated games for minors illegal would discourage most parents from doing so.
As for the government being more involved in your parenting choices…if you aren’t doing anything wrong, then you have nothing to worry about. This in no way would discourage the good parents, because good parents would understand that their children should not be playing MATURE rated games. Period.
The unrated games thing is pure crap, though. Unrated games are rarely AO caliber games, and M games are rare among those. The only person who suffers from this are indie developers.
Its easy to say if you’re doing nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about.. but who determines right and wrong? I allow some Mature games to be played by my children with supervision.. is that an illegal act? Is it something that could be punishable? I fear lawmakers and social dynamics becoming the decision makers on that count.
Then the rating system needs to be changed, doesn’t it Shawn?
A mature game is rated as such because it is deemed appropriate for people 17 an older. It doesn’t matter how mature your child is, with the current rating system they should not be playing the game.
And Shawn, lets not get into a debate about right and wrong. We aren’t in a philosophy class.
I agree right vs wrong is a tricky subject.. that wasn’t my point.. it’s that you have to balance freedom versus protection.. and what is the cut off point at which freedom is expendable in the interest of protecting the majority of children.
I’ve said the rating system was flawed in the past.. I still feel it is.. since its not as easy for parents to recognize its impact – I always thought adopting the MPAA rating system made more sense than the ESRB just because of the social value.
I disagree that an artificial label should determine my choice as a parent. It is a guideline of what I should consider when making that parenting decision. Criminalizing it won’t actually discourage my choice.. but it might make me angry about the government stepping on my individual rights as a parent to decide the philosophy and media impact I allow for my children.
Shawn said: “its yet another step on the road to socialism”
I find it totally hilarious that you say this, of all things, about a bill introduced by a hard core right wing Republican. If anything, its another step on the road to fascism.
I have a rating system I use that is much different from ESRB’s, and I find it more reliable, and I would trust it more for my children than a hard M rating. ESRB is so totally messed up, it’s easier to put solid numbers down and get an accurate result.
I still think Benjamin Franklin said it best:
“Any society that is willing to give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.”
Here-Ur: Go far enough Left and you end up Right.. Socialism and Fascism are not too different on some points:) I believe this is one of those points. Whether its for the good of society or the will of the government, the effect will be much the same wouldn’t you agree?
That’s why I think the artificial dividing lines we use to describe politicians are funny these days.. they all end up at the same place just with with different motivators. Its like the Roman Circus.. the society could stomach human inflicted cruelty because the politicians found a way to sell it to the masses as recreation and sport.
Sorry, this is devolving a bit.
First off…socialism and facism are as far away as you can get on the spectrum of political views…they have NOTHING in common with one another.
And Shawn, you call it an artificial label. Well why don’t we make it a real label? Why not make something concrete, something that is actually enforced. I don’t think that any American can, in their right mind, stand up and say that parents parenting their children is the best way to solve this issue. It just won’t happen. There are millions of parents who are completely unattentive to their children, and simply expecting them to do the job just isn’t going to work. This is like saying that drugs should all be legal, and we should just monitor ourselves because we KNOW its dangerous.
I don’t mind the security, but the liberty they’re taking isn’t theirs to take. Video games are art, and if they need to be rated, I demand that books and paintings be rated to be sold or shown to minors.
So you don’t want movies to be rated either? Your okay with children going and seeing porn?
As a whole I agree with you Matt, Socialism and Facism are on the opposite ends of the political spectrum, that was not necessarily my position… just that you can achieve the same ends with a very different starting point. Fascists seek to create authoritarian nationalistic policy.. The government says you can’t do this. Socialists put forth the concept of social welfare and manage society through those terms.
This is a good example of both because it uses a socially defined problem – access to violent games by minors – one that society feels is bad, not commerce or government – and moves the representatives to grandstand on the issue to create legal impact and regulations.
How do you enforce parental choice? How do you force someone to take responsibility for parenting decisions or a lack of those decisions? Criminalize sales to adults with intent to distribute them to minors then you have to find a way to prove intent.
This is one of the core questions we face in society.. how do we improve the core of the foundation – spawning future generations and indoctrinating them into our society? We struggle with that all the time because there is no way to maintain the basic liberty of society if you go to far toward fascist doctrine and governmental mandates.
We’re not talking about a simple commercial decision here, but a moral and ethical parenting decision. How do you regulate that? How do you create boundaries in society without impinging on individual rights?
Isn’t the lack of parental support and responsibility today one of our societies core problems? How does legislation effect a problem like that?
I want to make sure you understand I’m not trying to undermine your position here, I’m enjoying this lively debate. You and the other commentators discussing this article is great. I’m not working from the position that you’re wrong and I’m right or anything of the sort.. I’m trying to encourage consideration with my questions and retorts.
This is one reason I love writing for this site..
@Matt: re:
# erathoniel says:
July 27th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
I don’t mind the security, but the liberty they’re taking isn’t theirs to take. Video games are art, and if they need to be rated, I demand that books and paintings be rated to be sold or shown to minors.
# Matt says:
July 27th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
So you don’t want movies to be rated either? Your okay with children going and seeing porn?
—————
I think you’ve made a broad leap here, though I can’t speak for Eratoniel, I think he was referring to ratings and restrictions/criminalization of purchase for adults.. which is what the core of this problem was addressing.
We all (I hope) agree that minors freely gaining access to restricted material is bad.. this isn’t what the legislation is about – it’s about adults buying it and someone deciding the intent was to provide it to minors isn’t it?
In my view, i see parents allowing their children to play mature rated games as a type of neglect. I agree that some mature rated games are okay to be played by minors under supervision of their parents, and thats why I believe that the ESRB blatently fails at its designed purpose.
And as for the lack of parental support, that gets into a whole different realm of politics. I agree that legislation prosecuting parents for letting their children play mature rated games will not solve that core problem…but there is no quick fix for this, and I think it could easily be debated that there is no fix for the problems the US finds itself in today.
P.S…give me a job.
Shawn Sines says:
July 27th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
I think you’ve made a broad leap here, though I can’t speak for Eratoniel, I think he was referring to ratings and restrictions/criminalization of purchase for adults.. which is what the core of this problem was addressing.
We all (I hope) agree that minors freely gaining access to restricted material is bad.. this isn’t what the legislation is about – it’s about adults buying it and someone deciding the intent was to provide it to minors isn’t it?
___________
(I stole your layout)
I think that some video games should be considered as restricted content. What is the difference between some AO rated games and softcore porn movies?
I think you just crystallized the whole issue right there. The ESRB is inadequate as a rating system, but that doesn’t mean we need a government imposed system that will likely be just as flawed either.
Rating games is a hard thing to do, just like rating the content books, but harder than rating music or movies in many cases because they often deal in ideas and evolutionary concepts through their run. Books are long form entertainment, as are many games.
Why don’t we rate novels? Any of the later Anita Blake novels are indistinguishable from soft porn films (though far more descriptive) but a child can buy that book with no restriction. Is it because it does not have a visual component?
It raises the question of why we treat entertainment and information sources differently.. or is it because everyone watches movies and plays games and can immediately see the impact while few people (in relation) read novels and literature with the same veracity.
But Shawn, why are movie ratings legally enforced but video game ratings not?
Are movie ratings really legally enforced? I know there is a law on the books but… I’ve never seen anyone fined or arrested for allowing a minor into a rated R movie. I’ve seen the industry deny a sale to a minor but not the other way around.. and I think it has mostly to do with enforcement costs. Do we want cops enforcing that law over the one regarding murder?
A movie theater in my town got busted for allowing minors into it. So yes…movie ratings are legally enforced.
What I said was merely a statement that not all movies, books, or paintings go through an approval board, but are accessible to minors (with due sense, of course, authors of obscene material make it inaccessible to children if it’s bad enough), so it should not be illegal for games to be rated to be given to children. Sense is required, but ratings are not.
You’re all missing the point. The ratings system has to be able to sell AO games. As it is now, a game that was like Sin City with sex, violence, drugs, and adult themes, wouldn’t be able to be sold nearly anywhere. There are millions of people who would like to play it, yet because of that stupid fucking designation, AO vs. M (THE DIFFERENCE BEING 1 YEAR OF AGE… 17 vs 18..I shit you not) no retailers would dare sell it. It’s just like NC-17 movies.
And you people want even stricter rules on it?
There’s an easy solution… KILL LITTLE KIDS and prevent people from breeding. Little kids are freaks anyway.
Parents are protective, but you don’t realize you’re just a product of our biological imperative..to breed. The true humans among us, like me, know that that system is profoundly flawed, have risen above the urge to procreate, and realize that something needs to be done. I don’t care if the human race dies out, I hate little kids. It’s because of them that I can’t play AO-rated games (no one dares make them), play with my Fisher Price people (they made them chunky so dumb fucks couldn’t eat them) and watch porn at a nearby theater (well, screw that, I have the internet).
Tallyho.
Now resume your little discussion about all your fake socio-political bullshit.
Why does the government try to handle something they clearly dont understand.
Case and point : http://arstechnica.com/journals/thumbs.ars/2006/5/7/3874
Movie ratings are legally enforced, but it’s sporadic enforcement. I personally feel that to this point, the game industry has done a lot better job of self-policing itself than the movie industry does. Stores like Gamestop try to educate parents on the games they are buying their children, and I have heard several employees of the local store here tell parents hat they can return games within 30 days if they find the content in them objectionable.
On the flipside, you rarely see a Blockbuster clerk refuse to rent a high-school freshman a R-Rated movie. People just don’t think that way.
In the end, we need to keep the government out of the job of parenting. That’s the major problems with schools these days, is that government is overly involved in education. Parents should be responsible for what their children are watching, reading, and playing. If you aren’t, then you suck as a parent.
The main reason that video games are seeing the negative publicity they are now is because inadequate parents need someone to point the finger at besides themselves, and games are the convenient scapegoat. Until we escape this attitude, it’s going to continue.