Help Defend Video Games In The Supreme Court!

[Runey]

I don't give a sh*t, I'm 23, so I can buy whatever the f*ck I want.

 

Honestly, if it stops these dumb kids from buying them and acting all cool because they got it, go ahead and pass it.

Edited August 13, 2010 by Runey.

[darthYENIK]

I don't give a sh*t, I'm 23, so I can buy whatever the f*ck I want.

That's pretty much the attitude of anyone who can vote, and has any pull what so ever in affecting this law.

 

So to all you minors crying and moaning about rights, you're SOL until you turn 18.

[860]

Yeah.. What would RDR multiplayer had looked like without 12 year olds..

 

I am okay with this.

[Moonshield]

Less kids playing violent video games? Yes please.

Seriously. Get out and play "Commando" outside, f*ckheads. That's what I did when I was a kid.

[kevin2006rhs]

I don't give a sh*t, I'm 23, so I can buy whatever the f*ck I want.

That's pretty much the attitude of anyone who can vote, and has any pull what so ever in affecting this law.

 

So to all you minors crying and moaning about rights, you're SOL until you turn 18.

Eh...lower the M buying age to 16.

 

 

I mean Gamestop already cards most...well some...folks buying M games. Might as well lower it to 16.

[Minus the Boom]

As i said vote James Woods for Cali governor,he likes poker and booze and oh piece of candy http://i.ytimg.com/vi/itcVW1fEu3A/0.jpg

xDD no it should be chuck norris instead,, becoz time http://images3.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080312162143/uncyclopedia/images/d/dc/Chuck-norris-002.jpg doesn't stop him lol, he stop times

Haha, well played Gronf.

 

I know how it's cool to say that all kids on all games are bad of course, but imagine how you'd react back when you were a kid.

[Lithium]

I say pass the law. It's not going to affect me because I'm old enough to buy whatever. If it gets little cocky 10 year olds off of games like COD, then please pass it. If I hear one more kid talking sh*t I'm going to lose it! And either way, if their parents don't care then they will buy the games for their kids anyway. Of all people though, I couldn't see Arnold passing this video game ban sh*t...it doesn't seem like him, but I guess hanging out with all those politicians is getting to his head.

[AmyJones]

Hmm, i didnt have this trouble as a teenager. Mortal Kombat was disgusted which made my mom not want to help me buy it. But I told her i had to have it for snes because it was the competitors edition as stated on the box.

[Creed Bratton]

I endorse this law. I agree it's a stupid law but the alternative is worse! Don't tell me that you don't hate kids screaming in your ears while you're playing online shooters. As for PC gamers, majority of cheaters are kids.

 

James Woods is the man. If he ran for president I'd to to America to get a citizenship so I could vote for him. I don't know about you but a guy that's actually been in a GTA game would get my vote any day.

Edited August 13, 2010 by GTAvanja

[Slynke]

I, too, am one of the adults here, and while I don't disagree with the PURPOSE of the law, I do disagree with the legislation itself. I believe that the vagueness in which they are trying to regulate which games are restrict-able could get a bit socialistic, and as you can see, I'm very liberal. They are, in effect, taking the power AWAY from the ESRB, which could get out of hand later on down the line.

 

Would I like less 10 year olds talking sh*t on my games? Yes. Did I myself play these "violent" games as a kid, and talk the same sh*t, if not more? Yes. Should minors be allowed to buy games intended for a Mature audience, without their parents consent? Absolutely not. That's the beauty of the ESRB Rating system. Let's leave it to them, and not to big government.

[Mr. Scratch]

I first played GTA I when i was 6 years old,and im not violent #goes outside and kills dogs with a lawnmower#

[WF the Hobgoblin]

I too am in the "I'm old enough so i don't give sh*t" camp.

 

My main issue is that violent video games such as gta are always used as a scapegoat whenever a minor commits a violent crime. It's unlikely that it will make much difference but i hope that with the new law, the morons might realise that video games aren't just for kids and maybe the games industry won't get attacked so often.

 

Saying that, the uk's been pretty strict and clear with it's certifications for a while and yet it didn't stop Manhunt from being taken off the shelves.

[Girish]

Even if they do ban violent video games, what is to stop kids from getting their hands on it? Hell, getting your hands on a banned object is even more exciting than getting something that is easily available. It's only going to make the kids want these types of games even more than they do right now. And somebody must have already brought up the point of piracy. What I do not understand is how all these people who are against violent video games fail to see the above mentioned points. Banning something is never the solution.

[chigi333]

Even if they do ban violent video games, what is to stop kids from getting their hands on it? Hell, getting your hands on a banned object is even more exciting than getting something that is easily available. It's only going to make the kids want these types of games even more than they do right now. And somebody must have already brought up the point of piracy. What I do not understand is how all these people who are against violent video games fail to see the above mentioned points. Banning something is never the solution.

Why would they ban video games now? Now?

Why specifically now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, Girishb, do you have the most posts on this forum?"?

[Girish]

Even if they do ban violent video games, what is to stop kids from getting their hands on it? Hell, getting your hands on a banned object is even more exciting than getting something that is easily available. It's only going to make the kids want these types of games even more than they do right now. And somebody must have already brought up the point of piracy. What I do not understand is how all these people who are against violent video games fail to see the above mentioned points. Banning something is never the solution.

Why would they ban video games now? Now?

Why specifically now.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Also, Girishb, do you have the most posts on this forum?"?

Read the first post of this topic, mate.

 

And no, I don't have the most posts on this forum. That honour lies with Demarest, for now.

[Robinski]

Good. It'll keep all you whiny, squeaky-voiced kids off the games and also prevent you from going on to become Columbine copy-cats.

 

 

Robinski ignores the fact that he hasn't even bought an 18 rated game since his 18th birthday 3 months ago

[Mister Pink]

I, too, am one of the adults here, and while I don't disagree with the PURPOSE of the law, I do disagree with the legislation itself. I believe that the vagueness in which they are trying to regulate which games are restrict-able could get a bit socialistic, and as you can see, I'm very liberal. They are, in effect, taking the power AWAY from the ESRB, which could get out of hand later on down the line.

 

Would I like less 10 year olds talking sh*t on my games? Yes. Did I myself play these "violent" games as a kid, and talk the same sh*t, if not more? Yes. Should minors be allowed to buy games intended for a Mature audience, without their parents consent? Absolutely not. That's the beauty of the ESRB Rating system. Let's leave it to them, and not to big government.

Good points. You don't want your country/state turning in to a Nanny State

[Vextroid]

We have something like that here in Australia.

 

You have to be over 15 or if you are under 15 be with some one over 15 (ie Parents) to buy MA15+ games.

 

But the store clerks rarely enforce this and if they do just wait fro another clerk.

 

 

I support laws like this, though to a point. The government shouldn't be doing the jobs of parents judging and deciding and what Timmy can and cant buy/play.

 

They are violent games meant for older/mature people.

Minors shouldn't be able to (at least) purchase them. Whether they should play them is up to the parent/legal guardian.

 

Parents should educate them selves more on these sorts of things. Really looking at that big fat MATURE/M/MA/18+ rating and judge if there kids should be playing something like this.

[ryuclan]

Well no use trying to talk to them because they don't dictate what's right or wrong, only what's constitutional.

 

 

If anything in the constitution says the this type of law can not be made then they'll get rid of it, if there is no such thing (which there probably won't be) they'll let it go and kids in Cali will have to deal with it.

Edited August 14, 2010 by ryuclan

[DeeperRed]

Really see no problem in this at all. Its meant for a mature audience, it should be bought by someone of that age. It's the same England, though I have been purchasing 18 rated films and games since I was 15 since no one gives a f*ck in my area.

 

And think, when parents complain again we have the argument. Well you f*cking bought it for them you naive, moronic c*nt.

[ryuclan]

Really see no problem in this at all. Its meant for a mature audience, it should be bought by someone of that age. It's the same England, though I have been purchasing 18 rated films and games since I was 15 since no one gives a f*ck in my area.

 

And think, when parents complain again we have the argument. Well you f*cking bought it for them you naive, moronic c*nt.

I agree actually. Let the parents decide cause it's the parents that will bitch about. This way they have no valid argument and can only blame themselves. Maybe I'm saying this because I'm 20 and this doesn't effect me much, but honestly this is nothing new. It's been this way for ages. No sale of M rated games to those who should not be buying it. Also it says that it's fine if a parent buys it for the child. It literally says that. Arguing that game is art is not the way to go. What is and isn't art is completely up to speculation and dependent on the individual, but what is universal is that the parents should decide what's good or bad for their child. Whether they are right or wrong doesn't matter in this case cause the child isn't hurt either way besides maybe butthurt.

[K^2]

Did they ban people under 18 from playing violent games? No. Only the sale. Not an issue. This is the way it should work.

[gtaivpc]

It's in the US so I couldn't give a damn, but I believe that the overwhelming majority of the people who support this law just hadn't touched a GTA game until they were adults, either because it just didn't occur, or because their parents didn't let them. I bought GTA:SA myself when I was 12 years old and the only thing it did was to enrich my english vocabulary and expand my general knowledge (see something in the game, wikipedia the hell out of it etc. etc.), not to mention how I was so hooked with the story that I really didn't want to kill anybody when not in a mission, in fact I avoided killing civilians.

 

Just because you didn't play or weren't mature enough to play the game when you were at any age under 18 (that could be 17... most teens have already had sex and smoked weed by that time... most- not me thankfully for the weed part. Do you really think they can't handle it?) doesn't mean that the same applies to everyone. If it wasn't for +16 and +18 games I'd be a different person, much dumber and ignorant than I am now. There is a difference between a ''10 year old screaming on the mic'' and a teenager that wants to play a f*cking game, goddamnit.

Edited August 14, 2010 by gtaivpc

[ryuclan]

It's in the US so I couldn't give a damn, but I believe that the overwhelming majority of the people who support this law just hadn't touched a GTA game until they were adults, either because it just didn't occur, or because their parents didn't let them. I bought GTA:SA myself when I was 12 years old and the only thing it did was to enrich my english vocabulary and expand my general knowledge (see something in the game, wikipedia the hell out of it etc. etc.), not to mention how I was so hooked with the story that I really didn't want to kill anybody when not in a mission, in fact I avoided killing civilians.

 

Just because you didn't play or weren't mature enough to play the game when you were at any age under 18 (that could be 17... most teens have already had sex and smoked weed by that time... most- not me thankfully for the weed part. Do you really think they can't handle it?) doesn't mean that the same applies to everyone. If it wasn't for +16 and +18 games I'd be a different person, much dumber and ignorant than I am now. There is a difference between a ''10 year old screaming on the mic'' and a teenager that wants to play a f*cking game, goddamnit.

You're making assumptions. I am only 20 years old so clearly I've been playing GTA since before I could actually buy them. I've only bought one GTA game myself and that was GTA IV. You are right though because everyone is different and just because this kid can handle it doesn't mean that one can, but the actual purchasing of this material should be done by the parents of these individuals who know the tendencies of their kids and will have no reason to bitch about the game if their child in fact could not handle it.

[darthYENIK]

I've been playing GTA games since GTA2 came out, and I was 13 or 14 years old. I've been playing graphically violent games since Mortal Kombat first appeared in the Arcade, when I was 7 years old, and played Wolfenstein 3D, Doom, and Duke Nukem. I support this law, because my parents were good enough to know what I was playing. They let me play these games because they knew I had the mental capability to acknowledge the difference between fantasy and reality.

 

Fast forward to present day. My parents are now dealing with my little sister who is 9 years old, and because she doesn't always realize the difference between a game and real life, or a movie and real life, she doesn't get to play or watch violent or mature media, and I agree.

 

I'm just saying, not every kid has the emotional and mental stability to handle violent games the way they should be.

[ryuclan]

I think this also is in need due to a change of parenting over the years. I've noticed that children are getting a lot more rude and a lot more disrespectful. Maybe it's just the neighborhood I'm in but I honestly think the parents of today need to get more involved.

[CygnusX1]

Arnold Schwarzenegger, '80s action star and governor of California, has passed a law banning the sale of "violent" video games to anyone under the age of 18. This is more than just enforcing the ESRB ratings; this is banning all minors from buying all games that could be considered "violent".

 

 

Good. I'm staying with a friend right now, and I see his 10yr old watch WWE on cable and YouTube, then he runs to the mirror, poses, and jumps on people trying to wrestle. Then when he loses he gets all psycho and breaks things.

Kids should not have access to adult materials, end of story. Even if they don't get weird on it, it still messes up their little brains.

[CryptReaperDorian]

Jeez, WWE is all PG now, and it's been the exact same soap opera ever since they dropped the "F" about a decade ago (probably more like five years atleast if not a decade). No wonder I stopped watching it.

 

Anyways, why are they banning the sale for anybody under the age of 18? Rated M is the age of 17, and I'm just old enough to buy those. I was excited to be able to buy rated M games legally, and now it would suck if they made me unable to buy another one for another eight months. I mostly agree with the law, but it's kind of stupid compared to other things. It's funny when you can get a hunting permit in my state at the age of 12, and you can also get a license to drive at age 16. Some age things don't make sense. At age 18 you can put your life at risk by joining the army, but you can't even have a drink until you're 21. I'm sure a bullet would kill me, but a drink? I passed hunter safety at age 12, so I would only think I could be allowed to play a rated M game even before I was allowed to carry an actual gun.

[darthYENIK]

 

Kids should not have access to adult materials, end of story. Even if they don't get weird on it, it still messes up their little brains.

 

Not all kids are like that. Like I said, I've played violent video games since I was 7 or 8, and the only thing it's done is desensitize me to video game violence. Nothing really shocks me in video games, but I still don't like real life violence. I mean, every time someone wants to show me a video on Youtube, I dread it, fearing that it's going to be some faces of death crap. But I'll watch the most brutal video game violence and not even blink. There is a line that I know about, and have known about since I was a child, between reality and fantasy. Although there are exceptions that should not play these games, because they don't have knowledge of that line.

 

I do agree about the age being too high. I'd say make it 14-16, around there. Anybody who is under 18, and over 14 that claims video games inspired them to kill people, are lying (they usually all are).