Calif. Violent Game Bill Passes
The state approves a ban on selling violent games to minors.
by David Adams
September 9, 2005 - A long-contested California bill which would ban the sale of violent videogames to minors passed State Assembly late on Thursday, though the legislation awaits the signature of Gov. Schwarzenegger in order to become law. The legislation passed Assembly by a bipartisan 65-7 vote.
Assembly Bill 1179 makes game retailers liable for up to $1000 in fines for selling mature-themed games to minors, and requires that violent games be clearly labeled as such. The bill was authored by California Assemblyman Leland Yee, who has championed similar legislation for years now.
"Unlike movies where you passively watch violence, in a video game, you are the active participant and making decisions on who to stab, maim, burn or kill," said Yee in an official statement. "As a result, these games serve as learning tools that have a dramatic impact on our children."
Opposing the bill are representatives of the game industry, who believe that existing measures, such as the ESRB rating system, are already sufficient in keeping mature-themed games from young players.
Gov. Schwarzenegger now has 30 days to either sign or veto the bill.
After this happens were gonna blame teenage violence on music and take that away from them too...and it go on and on until parents look in the mirrors at themselves to see why theyre kids might be so violent.
All I care about this bill is that I live in California. This might mean I cant pick up my copy of SOCOM III since it is rated M. Man, that would be homo!
"Unlike movies where you passively watch violence, in a video game, you are the active participant and making decisions on who to stab, maim, burn or kill,"
W
T
F
And so we should ban racing games because it teaches us that you can crash into oncoming traffic and survive. We should also ban bugs bunny games, because elmer shoots you. That is ridiculous. Boo Arnold. You would think the last guy to ban violence would be Arnold. Breath, just get your mom to buy it.
All it means is that children under 17 can't walk into a store and buy KILL THE COMMIES IV: REVENGE OF THE N*GGAS or games like GTA: San Andreas, where you can download a patch that will allow to witness virtual sex.
All it means is that children under 17 can't walk into a store and buy KILL THE COMMIES IV: REVENGE OF THE N*GGAS or games like GTA: San Andreas, where you can download a patch that will allow to witness virtual sex.
A little off topic, but where can I find this patch? lol :P
All it means is that children under 17 can't walk into a store and buy KILL THE COMMIES IV: REVENGE OF THE N*GGAS or games like GTA: San Andreas, where you can download a patch that will allow to witness virtual sex.
A little off topic, but where can I find this patch? lol :P
Dude...why in God's name would you want that.
______________________
5' 10" 191lbs
Bench Press: 325lb MAX (02/01/10) No chest bounce. Competition rules.
All it means is that children under 17 can't walk into a store and buy KILL THE COMMIES IV: REVENGE OF THE N*GGAS or games like GTA: San Andreas, where you can download a patch that will allow to witness virtual sex.
A little off topic, but where can I find this patch? lol :P
Dude...why in God's name would you want that.
Dude, it was a joke....I dont actually want porn....
I thought it was an obvious joke too... eh, w/e
All it means is that children under 17 can't walk into a store and buy KILL THE COMMIES IV: REVENGE OF THE N*GGAS or games like GTA: San Andreas, where you can download a patch that will allow to witness virtual sex.
So what? It's a third party program, and the models are shit anyway :D I can not understand rating it a/o. Why don't they rate the mod a/o? And the mod is a breach of contract anyway, so how can they hold the company liable? It's all quite unfair really. Besides this:
worth the $20 third party accessory.
I believe rod blagojevich,[our governer] signed something like this or is trying to get something like this along with michigan and pennsylvania.
They shouldn't be playing anyway. One wouldn't leave a violent movie around for an 8 year old to watch so they don't have to deal with them. Well my mom might, but I knew movies were/are fake. I don't know why people act like video games are just for children, when it's obvious they're not(especially video games. You'd think they'd figure it out in the 80s but no...). Some claim parents don't have the time to look these things up, it's on the box of the game for christ's sake. Besides that, if the child wants to look at pornography it's not too hard. They could use google images for that matter :D Anyway, I don't blame rockstar. It was completely unnaccessible and it would have remained so had they not violated the EULA. And aside from that, parents who buy their children cheating accessories are fostering bad habits.
Since i am living in Europe, we dont have this problem of banning certain games. (yet!) But i have been following this around a bit. Somewhere in this post someone mentioned that it was Arnold signing off on this, thought that was a clever remark. Funny.
What it comes down to though, is that it has all to do with responsibility. That of parents, not allowing children to play certain games. That of teachers to educate the youngest of our children this , together with our parents. And it comes down to you and me. For example, i rather not play a game with underage children since i do not agree with them playing a game like socom. I mean, is it neccesary for a 10-year old to know how and what is fictional war like? Pick up a ball and play outside. Untill then. I refuse to play with players that i can obviously indentify as way too young.
I read a small article on cheatcc.com about this. http://forums.cheatcc.com/blogs/news.../09/48757.aspx
The third paragraph has a quote that says, "signing this commonsense legislation into law and giving parents a necessary tool to raise healthy kids," now, is it just me, or did that person say that parents need laws to tell them how to raise thier children?
______________________
DaKilla: "We don't have the manpower to censor everyone's opinions."
That's actually sad, but true. Apperantly parents do need to have them told what is good and what isn't. Since we all know that only on our game it has scores of children running around. So the rating isn't working as well as we would like it to.
I guess that most of them [kids] behave normally and some do not. But my view is that all of them do not belong on this game. What age would be appropiate? 13-14? Something like this? Or perhaps even older. As long as the distinction can be made by the player what is "real" and what isn't.
By the way, the last game the "trench-coat maffia" boys played before they went out on a killing spree in Colombine was bowling, so i doubt that i could make an all fitting argument against violent video games for all countries around the world. It depends on many factors. Social factores are as important as other ones.
I was so looking forward to that one It's about time the n*ggas had their revenge!!!
I don't get this though... is Cali just appending the fine? I thought that it was already illegal for mature or adult games to be sold to minors. If they are going to make it so that only kids under a certain age can buy certain rated games, it's gonna be tough to enforce I'd think since most kids don't have any real form of identification.
It's about time the n*ggas had their revenge!!! 
