Judge Understands The Constitution; Issues Injunction On Video Game Ban
from the you-were-expecting-something-different? dept
Almost everyone familiar with the law will tell you that the various new state laws to ban the sale of certain video games to children violates the First Amendment. It's not like this hasn't been tested before. Similar laws have been thrown out for that very reason. But, why would politicians trying to score points let things like the Constitution stop them? Judges, on the other hand, are supposed to uphold things like the First Amendment, so it's no surprise that a judge has issued an injunction in Michigan, keeping that state's law from going into effect, while also noting that the state has almost no chance of winning its case.
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Hmm...
However the problem is that a lot (not all) parents lack clues on video games.
A lot either just don't let their kids play at all or rely on media to tell them exactly what games not to let their kids play, while letting them play any other game under sun.
I've seen a kid play games a lot more violent and profound than Vice City. But can't play the Vice City.
It's just a disconnect that is getting better since a lot of the original gamers that still are having kids and still understand what is going on in different games.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Well ....
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well ....
I mean, if they let their kids read some adult magazines, it's not magazine's publisher fault. Same thing with video games. This kind of behavior eases the pain for the parents, but don't solve the real problem.
People has to start to recognize that their choices affects their surrondings. Of course it's impossible to watch what kids are doing 24/7, but if they have proper education, the parents don't have to worry (much) about their kids behaviours.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Well ....
Video games are rated, and that rating is clearly labelled on the game box in front and back. Parents don't need the decision taken out of their hands, they need to be educated on the tools they can use to make informed decisions.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Rights
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Rights
How hard is it to check up on little johnny's games...ie take an interest in what their doing and at the same time semi-monitor whats going on...allows the child to perceive freedom and flexibility in their lives while at the same time allowing parents to become more involved...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Government vs Responsible Parents
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Government vs Responsible Parents
But the point is if the parent doesn't make themselves aware of the tools they have what's the point?
All games have ratings now that tell you who its for and why it is rated that way. But parents aren't even aware of that. The kid picks a game and the parent says... hmm i haven't heard of this on the news... it must be ok.
Not the way to deal w/ the situation.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
No Subject Given
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
What is the big deal?
It's crap. Keep the M-rated games out of the kids hands and morons like Jack Thompson have no ammunition.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What is the big deal?
With movies, it's a voluntary system -- not the law.
That's where the problem comes in. The government can't step in and make a law about this.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What is the big deal?
With movies, it's a voluntary system -- not the law.
That's where the problem comes in. The government can't step in and make a law about this.
The movie rating system is voluntary ONLY because it's working. The "voluntary" game rating system is not working. Preventing the sale of games to minors is what the law is trying to do. Just as with movies, if you don't care if your child plays the game, you are free to buy it for him. Just make sure none of his friends play it without their parents permition and all is fine. This law will help those parents that are trying by not allowing their children to go behind their back and buy the game.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What is the big deal?
They still exist because people are too apathetic and selfish to change them. Not government's fault.
We have said we want controls on what our children have access to, and that has been handed down. Whether these rules came from wisdom, fear, or ignorance, means nothing. The government doesn't do anything that nobody wants if it isn't necessary - to do so would cost it its life. People may hate taxes, but they're necessary to maintain the society we, at some point, said we wanted.
Same with games - clearly parents want controls on what their kids have access to. If this is a black and white matter of parenting, we might as well allow kids access to firearms, cocaine, cigarettes, military service, and banned books. We don't, because we have decided we have certain activities that are inappropriate for children and thus restrict them.
Anything that gets restrictions placed on it is considered harmful (by someone in some way) - we all differ here as well. I would personally remove the "harmful" status from marijuana, books, and film, and completely ban (not just minors, but to all) tobacco, alcohol, and firearms.
You can be damned sure that not one person who reads this will agree with me 100%, but if enough people did, we could force it into law. Would you be happy? No. Would I? Yes. About this. But then your majority would get their way on something that pisses me off, and round and round we go.
Can you honestly say that you think kids should be allowed to buy a pack of smokes, because damn it, you're a good parent and when you see him with a Marlboro between his lips you can "talk to him" and the problem will go away?
I doubt it. People of any age or largely stupid animals that need to be controlled (that's why religion still persists, isn't it?).
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What is the big deal?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Perfectly clear?
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Is the argument that it is in their religion to play video games? I don't get it...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: What is the big deal?
“Why is ok to limit the sale of pornography or keep children out of "R" movies but it's not ok to keep children from buying games that rated Mature?”
It is not OK to limit the sale of porn, or to keep children out of R rated movies, but the well meaning nannies of the country demand it. It hurts our children, and it hurts our adults, but they demand it none the less. What we need are fewer nannies.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This game business is pissing me off!
I for onw was upset when Sega forced the hand of the Gov't to impose ratings in the first place. However, due to content of current games, I now understand. There are some game stores and rental shops that will not sell the M-rated games to minors already. It is the parents' responsibility. Just like it's their responsibility to raise their children instead of leaving it up to the school systems.
I agree with the previous posts that mention that parents need to take a more active roll. Kids will still get away with buying and playing Mature video games some way or another. It is the parents' responsibility to know what their kids are doing. Take the game away.
Porn/Adult magazines are behind the counter and covered due to the cover's content. There are no naked women on the cover of video games. Kids can't just pick it up and flip through images of porn, like one could with the magazines, if thery were placed in the open. Magazines, and games are two different arguments and cannot be compared.
Anyway, again, as parents, we should KNOW what are kids are doing. Just because he/she doesn't have the game doesn't mean that their friend doesn't.
Whatever happened for people taking responsibility? That's why you are called a PARENT and they are CHILDREN!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]