NZ Censor Threatens To Jail Parents Who Buy Violent Video Games For Kids
from the shock-value dept
Tony Eaton points us to the rather disturbing news that New Zealand's "chief censor" (quite a title, there...), Bill Hastings, is interested in prosecuting parents who have bought their kids violent video games. Apparently parenting is no longer for parents, but for Bill Hastings to determine what is, and what is not appropriate:"There would certainly be some shock value to prosecuting a parent who gives their under-18 child access to a restricted game. It would send out a message that the enforcement agency means business."Based on the law, parents prosecuted could face $10,000 fines or be put in jail for three months. Which do you think would do more harm to a child? Playing GTA or having their parent dragged through a show trial, for "shock value," and dumped in jail for three months?
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
Filed Under: censor, jail, new zealand, parents, violent video games
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
Two sides to a coin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Two sides to a coin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Two sides to a coin
I hate to break this to you, but New Zealand is not part of the United States.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Two sides to a coin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Two sides to a coin
I hate to break this to you too, but New Zealand is not part of the United States.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Two sides to a coin
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Two sides to a coin
Mohandas Gandhi
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Two sides to a coin
This is an attempt to criminalize parenting decisions based on debunked studies and "think of the children" scaremongering. When I think of my future children, I want them to grow up in a world where I'm free to discuss games like Grand Theft Auto with them -- and show them the actual game to aid the discussion -- WITHOUT the government telling me that I could go to jail for doing so.
I would rather lose my life than lose my right to raise my children how I see fit.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Two sides to a coin
I suppose you would agree with all but the last line of post #30 then.
By the way, you already don't have that "right", so how do you plan to off yourself?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Two sides to a coin
Jail time.
Why can't a 17 year old have a glass of wine with dinner?
Because the law says no.
What is not clear from the article is whether it is illegal for a minor to use the violent video games in the first place before making it illegal to provide one to them.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Two sides to a coin
> wine with dinner?
In my state a 17-year-old can have a glass of wine with dinner. So long as it's in the presence of a parent of legal guardian, it's perfectly legal.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Not so screwed up, are we?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Not so screwed up, are we?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Reading Comprehension
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Reading Comprehension
I just waiting for my fleet to assemble.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
What anti-spanking activists don't understand is that a spanking is not designed to hurt a child, but to immediately correct them. Swat a toddler with a diaper, and they hardly feel it. But it works, because it immediately draws their attention to the fact that what they are doing is wrong. If you leave a mark on your child that lasts more than a couple minutes, it is child abuse. Spanking does not produce welts, bruising, etc. If it does, it has moved well beyond the realm of spanking, and should be prosecutable.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
I guess stun guns are OK then since they don't leave marks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And you justified it as long as it didn't leave marks, which is just plain stupid and wrong. As an example of how stupid and wrong it is, that same justification would apply to stun guns.
Give me a break and quit trying to create an argument where there isn't one.
I'll disagree with you if I want to, so get over it. Even if it makes you look bad.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Smack that biatch up!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And no, I didn't "justify" it as long as it didn't leave marks. It is already justified by several thousand years of parenting. It works, pure and simple, and it does not hurt the child. Once again, leaving a mark is not the only way to identify abuse; it was just one example. And once again, if you are spanking to hurt the child, you are doing it wrong, and you are a sick puppy.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Damn right I can, so you may as well quit trying to tell me what I can and can't write.
Just address the issue at hand instead of arguing against a straw man.
The issue was your ridiculous justification. Again, quit trying to tell me what I can and write. It won't work. You seem to have some real delusions of grandeur if you think you can dictate like that. Got it?
Since I never said anything about stun guns, you just exposed your own weaknesses in reading comprehension and debate. You just exposed your own because I said you did.
And no, I didn't "justify" it as long as it didn't leave marks.
"If you leave a mark on your child that lasts more than a couple minutes, it is child abuse. Spanking does not produce welts, bruising, etc."
Or was that a different hegemon13?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
That's a key difference between the US and the rest of the world. We're better marketers here. In the US the title would be "Chief Information Officer."
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Instead; I'll get him movies..
Hostel, SAW, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Braindead (That's made in NZ BTW), The Hills Have Eyes..
That's all ok, right?
Why is there a double standard between 'Hollywood' and Video Games?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re:
As for sex being enjoyable, it can also be used as a weapon and bring serious pain to people - rape anyone? Incest? The police and law system are in place to prevent anyone being able to practice violence openly to get to the point of enjoying it.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, I've heard about those "naked families", usually when the parents are arrested.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: Re: Re:
How about a 'Rape and Forced Abortion Sim "Game"'?
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/1510492/rapelay_rape_and_forced_abortion_sim.html
"The police and law system are in place to prevent anyone being able to practice violence openly to get to the point of enjoying it."
Like getting to the point of openly enjoying violence in a video game?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Government should never ever take the place of raising your own children.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Violence?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
um...
People who throw out these asinine concepts should get put on notice, 3 dumb ideas in 3 months and they are out. If it's an idea this dumb just fire them.
Granted i have no idea who would decide if or if not the idea is dumb, nor who would oversee that level of beuracracy (spelling) but you get the picture.
No system is perfect but this guy should think before he talks.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The State Crèche
This is a reminder that all children are to be relinquished to the State Crèche, as early as possible.
We understand that vestigial emotional attachments may make this difficult, and we encourage you to overcome them. This is in all our best interests. The education and indoctrination provided by the Crèche is our first and foremost defense against the anarchy and violence that masquerades under the names "democracy" and "capitalism" in the rest of the world. We must be vigilant!
By relieving the biological parents of the responsibility of rearing young, they may in turn devote their attention to more productive pursuits, enriching Our Great And Glorious Nation!
The exemplary educational facilities at the State Crèche will ensure that when our children reach adulthood, they will be perfectly prepared for occupation the State has chosen for them.
Those who fail to comply will attend mandatory reeducation sessions, and may have procreation privileges revoked.
_________________________
Ministry of Truth
People's Republic of New Zealand
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The State Crèche
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Oh and for all the "commie" idiots who seem to be in force tonight: grow up. Or, at least work out what it is you're protesting against here.
It's simple: NZ, like most of the rest of the world, has entertainment ratings systems that are mandatory and/or enforced by law. The US is the lucky country exempt from that. All this proposed NZ law is suggesting is that rather than simply attacking the people who sell games to underage kids, they should also go after the clueless parents who act as a loophole. As long as parents are willing to buy M rated games for their 8 year old kids, the ratings are meaningless.
This is the wrong way to educate those parents, but at least they don't have Jack Thompson (or whoever his successor is going to be) to contend with while they work out the best strategy...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We who have no children know best
Question: in this age of single parent families, who watches the children while mummy is in jail?
To my knowledge neither of these 'leaders' have children or know the basics of raising one.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Welcome to Modern Society
Basically, raising kids has now become the shared responsibility of a whole bunch of professionals. And like it or not, that includes the State.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Welcome to Modern Society
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Welcome to Modern Society
What you want is parents to be actively engaged with their children and actively parenting. The state stepping in constantly allows parents to never have to think for themselves, they just listen and do what they're told.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Wow, just wow.
The general erosion of a society's cultural mores begins first with odious and idiotic laws, many of which are hard if not impossible to enforce, then by the populace realizing there is legal "wiggle room" for a few laws, and finally the populace branching out to ignore whatever laws they don't like.
Unfortunately, democracies and republics tend to overreact to things, then rush out legislature that is ineffective and often hurts more than it helps because these politicians have to appear to be "doing something". The politician's syllogism very much applies here.
"We must do something.
This is something.
Therefore, we must do this!"
The problem here is not the individual in charge of enforcing these laws, it's the people who require their elected leaders to react prior to understanding the problem. It's also the politicians who believe they already know everything and are right about it, backed up by left-wing and right-wing extremists. It sounds like NZ needs a good Libertarian candidate.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
we have r13, r16 and r18. which are a Different Thing from M rated games. it is illegal to sell those items to someone under the listed age. this also applies to movies in all forms [and pornographic magazines and the like], incidentally. this means things that are refused classification in Australia often aren't here. [I've seen things with 'banned in Australia' as a big selling point label on the cover].
while the boundaries between G, PG, and M[most games worth playing end up as M] are often debatable, i have yet to come across anything with an R rating that didn't well deserve it.
for years, people have been jumping up and down about how violent video games are bad for kids etc. the usual response is 'well, then, parent, stop being an idiot and actually pay attention to what your kid is doing'. none the less, people keep trying to get the things banned.
i would actually say this is a step in the right direction. with this in place, it is the Parents responsibility to look after their kid, and if they break the law [which has been the law for a long time] they are punished accordingly.
now, admittedly, it's also been well proven that single parent families don't do so well. putting a parent in jail will tend to result in such a situation, at best. as a consequence i would hope jail time were only used for unrepentant repeat offenders.
on the Other hand, fines make perfect sense. employed properly, the point in a fine is NOT to punish someone after the fact, though it does that too. it is to discourage people from committing the infraction in the first place.
admittedly, like any law, it needs to be enforceable. if you can't enforce it, it's just one more level of decay in the system.
oh, and whoever brought up the anti smacking thing? yeah. one of the stupider moves our government has made in recent times.
stupid rubber stamp...
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Parents Prerogative
Yeah, it should totally be up to the parents to determine what is appropriate for their kids. If a parent wants to let their kids smoke or drink or do drugs or watch porn or play violent video games or even have sex with them, then that should be up to the parents and everybody else should just butt out.
Not even.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Parents Prerogative
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
it may actually be objectionable enough to be outright banned, but I'm not entirely sure on that one. [mostly because i can't remember the actual upper limit of the R ratings. frankly, i don't even touch R16 stuff in the first place anyway, so anything over that i really couldn't care less about.]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Never mind that you could go to the pharmacy, grab a crapload of over-the-counter DRUGS and take them through the self checkout without raising any red flags...
Sniffing glue is bad. Getting blitzed on benadryl is ok?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
"It's the law!!"
In the US, those postulates are laughable.
If you want a citizenry comprised of a wide variety of people possessing a wide variety of viewpoints (the much-lauded "diversity"), including viewpoints of which you disapprove, let parents paretn. If you want to produce a citizenry of interchangeble production/consumption units (good for the oligarchs and autocrats), let the State do it.
Remarkable how many people would choose the latter...presumably for others.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]