California Video Game Labeling Laws: Should the rating be law or a suggestion?

Question Entertainment

California Video Game Labeling Laws: Should the rating be law or a suggestion?

by Mr. T Posted February 20, 2009 22:14:25

23 answers
Read all 25 comments
+5 raves

The US appeals court has ruled that California's law that restricts sales and rentals of violent video games to minors is unconstitutional. The appeals court also ruled that making labeling requirements mandatory is too restrictive and is a violation of the first amendment. This means that violent video games like the Grand Theft Auto series would not have to have "18+" labels, and any minor would be able to purchase or rent the video game.

Many feel that the labeling requirement is just another way the state government gets to force their opinion as law. Some defend the labeling requirement, saying that violent video games can cause psychological harm or cause kids to want to be violent, but no such evidence has been court approved.

Should the rating labels that come on video games stop minors from buying violent video games, or should it just be considered a suggestion to parents?

Answers
Results
Recommend This

Top Comment

+3 Adam February 21, 2009 00:26:23

Answered: California's video game rating labels should be the law. Minors can't buy violent games.
I play video games quite extensively, I consider myself a gamer with good working knowledge of the Psychology and Politics behind i,, and i know that the accusation of video games causing violence is complete BS. However, kids should not play GTA games, in the same way that they shouldn't listen to the most violent of gangsta rap, or watch the new Friday the 13th. For some reason, parents get up in arms about video game violence, and yet somehow, there kids still manage to find $300 for a system, $60 for a game, get the whole business set up with internet and everything, and then find the time to play it without the parents noticing. Somehow, I think that the parent have a hand in helping there kids play these games, and aren't exactly innocent victims of an evil media industry. Yeah, make it illegal for kids to buy MA titles. It will do very little in terms of preventing kids from playing violent games, but parents will have to stop whining, and actually use parenting when they realize that the problem lies in the fact that they don't draw the connecting between there kids playing an inappropriate game, and them buying a box in the store for there child with big letters that say, "Diablo" on it, with a picture of Satan covered in blood on the front. Parents, its really not that hard. I realize that the technology is big and scary and boring for you, but pay attention to what your kid is doing of 5 bloody minutes and your not going to have a problem.
View thread

Sort By

Most Raves
Least Raves
Oldest
Newest

text size

Comments

+1
poet4justice February 23, 2009 06:29:33

Answered: California's video game rating labels should be the law. Minors can't buy violent games.
my opinion is the same as the comments
+1
Petpeve February 23, 2009 00:27:19

Answered: California's video game labeling laws should be considered a suggestion to parents.
Come on, I know parent's who do read the labels and parent's who don't. When it comes to the final decision, it's rarely the parent who decides it. Let's face it, most minors can't afford to purchase these games and it's the parent's who do it for them. From another angle, most households have varying ages from teenagers to toddlers. What is appropriate for the older children is normally watched by the younger ones while the games are being played. It's happened in my house unintentionally, but it happened. I still say the responsibility falls 100% on the parent's in how they educate their children from birth until they die.
+1
duke nukem February 22, 2009 22:33:26

Answered: California's video game labeling laws should be considered a suggestion to parents.
not all movies have to be rated. why should all videogames. parents are supposed to use labels as a suggestion for what to buy.
BJ February 22, 2009 18:28:08

Answered: California's video game rating labels should be the law. Minors can't buy violent games.
Unconstitutional? Then bands on sale of cigs, porn and alcohol to children should be too, right? I mean we are supposed to protect children from harm.
fisherman February 21, 2009 21:34:32

Answered: Violent video games, like Grand Theft Auto, should be...
should be used as therapy..after taking it in the ass at the work place..driving a grueling commute every day..listening to your significant other bitching...your kids whining...YOU NEED TO VENT..and i cant think of a better way than killing computer generated adversaries
if you go out and beat the crap out of someone after playing a video game , you would more than likely do it anyway.
as far as your kids playing violent games...well that's an individual parenting decision .
when i bought my x box 360 there was a pre packaged game that involved the player swimming around as a fish eating other fish and growing in size as you progressed....is this not violent behavoir ?
slashes February 21, 2009 17:54:10

Answered: Violent video games, like Grand Theft Auto, should be...
That's rediculous. It's the parent's responsibility to monitor what their kids are doing.
Katharina February 21, 2009 14:52:41

Answered: Violent video games, like Grand Theft Auto, should be...
rated. It is good, so people who would like to watch them may know what to expect. For children under age they should be forbidden even when an adult is watching with them.
Howard Beale II February 21, 2009 06:08:50

Answered: California's video game labeling laws should be considered a suggestion to parents.
To make a long story short, I believe parents should be able to make the decisions for their own kids. Just like the V-chip for televisions, and the OFF-switch for Internet (and televisions), if the parents don't want their kids to access certain types of stuff, let the parents grant or deny permission for their own kids. I know it sounds pretty simplistic, but that is only because it IS simplistic. Let the parents make the decisions for their own kids.

Labeling should be required, and parents who do not agree with this or that or the other can deny permission for their kids to access this stuff. How much simpler could it get.

You know what really pisses me off, it is that there are certain groups who are trying to deny access to ALL people, regardless of age, because they do not want their own children to have access to said material. Well, if we were to carry this out in extreme, I would have to deny their access to the consumption of beef, because I do not want my kids to eat beef. Now, does that sound fair or reasonable to you? (Please do not misconstrue my comment to mean that I advocate a ban on all beef. I am simply saying that my own decision to not eat beef should not be taken to the extreme that nobody should eat beef.)
let's vote already February 21, 2009 05:07:39

Answered: California's video game rating labels should be the law. Minors can't buy violent games.
Games are rated, that's the law. Whether or not they're followed is a different story, up to parents to enforce.
John February 21, 2009 04:39:27

Answered: Violent video games, like Grand Theft Auto, should be...
parents do parenting- the end

When government leaders wear jump suits like NASCAR drivers with sponcers on them we will be able to see why they "feel so strong" about issues. Every time we get an agency worth their salt the governmet gets into them and screws them up and sends us the bill!
pkeyrich February 21, 2009 04:24:18

Answered: Violent video games, like Grand Theft Auto, should be...
treated the same as renting videos or making purchases at the supermarket or corner store. Certainly, adult videos cannot be rented or purchased by minors. Cigarettes, alcohol, and certain drugs cannot be purchased by minors either. Minors do not have full rights until they are on their own - over 18 or emancipated. Their parents are responsible for them, and we cannot rely on the community to "raise" our children. Each child's parents have different methods, so the law should be the common sense general standard. Parents can get the games for their own kids. Kids should not be allowed to buy/rent on their own, for mature content.
Serraphim February 21, 2009 02:50:37

Answered: Violent video games, like Grand Theft Auto, should be...
not enough options... however... 'Congress shall pass no Law...." however... this does NOT restrict STATES from passing laws.. that is what State Rights are all about.. unfortunately they often forget that....
Spanky February 21, 2009 01:20:29

Answered: California's video game labeling laws should be considered a suggestion to parents.
I don't play many video games (and none like this), but it should still be the responsibility of the parents to regulate what their children watch & play.
THFAN February 21, 2009 01:15:55

Answered: California's video game labeling laws should be considered a suggestion to parents.
As a parent, I think the video game labeling should be a suggestion, but not just in California. It should be for the whole country. I keep up with my kids well enough that I know what they are playing. Hell, I play the games with them. We rent or buy the games together. I don't have little kids anymore though. When they were younger, I allowed them to play the games I approved. I do the same now, but am a little more liberal with what they play or are allowed to watch on TV. I mean they are teenagers now and I can't protect them from the big, bad world forever. I completely agree that it is up to the parents to keep up with their kids. If you tell them no, they are just gonna play it at a friend's house or borrow it and not tell you. You might know what goes on in your house, but you don't know what goes on at someone else's. Just an opinion.
+3
Adam February 21, 2009 00:26:23

Answered: California's video game rating labels should be the law. Minors can't buy violent games.
I play video games quite extensively, I consider myself a gamer with good working knowledge of the Psychology and Politics behind i,, and i know that the accusation of video games causing violence is complete BS. However, kids should not play GTA games, in the same way that they shouldn't listen to the most violent of gangsta rap, or watch the new Friday the 13th. For some reason, parents get up in arms about video game violence, and yet somehow, there kids still manage to find $300 for a system, $60 for a game, get the whole business set up with internet and everything, and then find the time to play it without the parents noticing. Somehow, I think that the parent have a hand in helping there kids play these games, and aren't exactly innocent victims of an evil media industry. Yeah, make it illegal for kids to buy MA titles. It will do very little in terms of preventing kids from playing violent games, but parents will have to stop whining, and actually use parenting when they realize that the problem lies in the fact that they don't draw the connecting between there kids playing an inappropriate game, and them buying a box in the store for there child with big letters that say, "Diablo" on it, with a picture of Satan covered in blood on the front. Parents, its really not that hard. I realize that the technology is big and scary and boring for you, but pay attention to what your kid is doing of 5 bloody minutes and your not going to have a problem.
Serraphim to Adam February 21, 2009 03:06:16

'I play video games quite extensively, I consider myself a gamer with good working knowledge of the Psychology and Politics behind i,, and i know that the accusation of video games causing violence is complete BS. '

you have lost all credibility with this statement......... too many studies demonstrate the connection between violent/abusive video games/movies, and counter-sociological behaviour..... I did not bother to read the rest...perhaps it was good, but when you start with a disproven antithesis, there is not much point.
Adam to Serraphim February 21, 2009 05:39:04

You lose credibility when you say prove, for one. Ive read the studies, and they fail Psych 101. Correlation does not equal causation, and I am quite confident that you cannot name a single study that provides credible evidence that Video Game violence translates causally into real life violence.
fisherman to Adam February 21, 2009 20:57:14

i picked up my copy of DIABLO at walmart ...i was asked by the checkout girl to show proof of age ......at the time i was fifty five (hungover and looked every bit of seventy five) . i jokingly told her that i was buying it for my wife who was with me at the time and is two years younger than i am.....and i will be damned if she wasn't asked to produce her I.D. this was in 2002 in illinios....so whats the problem ?
+4 / -1
Chris is a RETARDED GAY February 20, 2009 22:52:22

Answered: California's video game rating labels should be the law. Minors can't buy violent games.
If movies and magazines can be rated XXX, I think that games should also be allowed to be rated XXX.
I disagree with the Courts ruling regarding rating games.
Parents are still free to buy XXX movies to share with their six-year-old child, but the their six-year-old child should not be allowed to make the decision to purchase an XXX on their own.
I feel the same standard can apply to games.
Have you seen the recent news about the game where you score more points as you molest and rape more girls?
Is this the sort of game that we want 12-year-olds to buy without parental consent?
+1
Serraphim to Chris i... February 21, 2009 03:06:14

You're right....

I think the parents should be shown some 'tough love' by their community, but is is still their right to guide their children... if it becomes a case of abuse--psychological--then the rules change....
dexter February 20, 2009 22:48:21

Answered: California's video game labeling laws should be considered a suggestion to parents.
awareness for what kids are doing can't be replaced by a law, outside the store, they will get it if they want it.
+2
NeoDraxis February 20, 2009 22:25:27

Answered: California's video game labeling laws should be considered a suggestion to parents.
It goes down to good parenting.
+2
AmericanVirus February 20, 2009 22:24:32

Answered: California's video game labeling laws should be considered a suggestion to parents.
If the parents don't want the kids to play the games, let it be up to them.
Playing such games has not made me a violent person, I'm far from violent. They may have desensitized me to certain gruesome things, but that doesn't mean I can't decide from what is right and wrong.

The way I see it, anyone that goes on a killing rampage, has more problems than the fact that they were allowed to play a game that was violent. Something like that is much more psychological.
+2
me February 20, 2009 22:23:32

Answered: California's video game labeling laws should be considered a suggestion to parents.
I think if games are violent it should be on the label so that parents can decide if they want to buy these for their children. As far as kids renting them, parents have a responsiblilty to see what their kids are doing. Unfortunately what's violent to me may not be to some other more "liberal" person,
Adam to me February 21, 2009 00:33:48

There is, and there almost always has been, well defined labels for age-appropriateness. Here is the cover to a game released over a decade ago.

That, "M" is pretty obvious, and ratings have only gotten simpler over time. Even back in 97, what even remotely competent parent would think that this game is appropriate for a young child? Even if you ignored the rating entirely, what do parents think is contained in a game called, "Manhunt" or, "Diablo".

		California's video game rating labels should be the law. Minors can't buy violent games.
		California's video game labeling laws should be considered a suggestion to parents.
		Violent video games, like Grand Theft Auto, should be...