Is It Lawful to Make ESRB Ratings Legally Bound?
tentmaster
2013/01/17 23:00:00
|
|
|||||
|
69 votes
|
|
25% | |||
|
206 votes
|
|
75% | |||
A new bill was passed off to Congress on the 15th of January that could make video game ratings legally binding. According to the bill, any rentals or sales of games rated AO (Adults Only) or M (Mature) to kids under 17 would have legal ramifications, with penalties of more than $5,000. Will this be a high-scoring win for America, or will it be game over for the bill?
Read More: http://www.gamespot.com/news/new-bill-would-make-e...
Top Opinion
-
Scarlett Jasmine 2013/01/18 01:07:23Game over! This bill has no chance!
+7Well luckily my family knows I'm not a psychopath, so since I'm still 10 months shy of being 17 they buy these video games for me at places where they are strick on the No-Kids-Under-17 rule. I don't believe these kids should have to pay 5,000+. They're buying a video game, not drugs!
Your mom: RATED E FOR EVERYONE.
That is all.
Even if it gets passed, it's not going to achieve anything worthwhile.
Let me tell you straight away, it doesn't work. I don't know a single young boy that hasn't gotten his hands on the game he wanted. Usually it's going to be the parents buying it anyway, or an older brother or sister, or a friend etc.
If sales are reduced due to an AO rating game makers dumb down the content to fit in the everyone category to make sure they have more sales.
The same thing happens for films.
Another issue is the rating board, they are retarded.
Smoking pot is illegal but I do it anyway.
STOP IT.
Violent kids are drawn to violent media, as are non-violent kids. But seriously, if someone would DO THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS, THERE WOULD BE NO ARGUMENT.
If you took all of the documented murders from 2011, versus the amount of copies sold of Black Ops 2 in the first two months of its release, assumed every copy was only bound to one person, you would find that there is about a .1% correlation of people that own a violent video game, versus the amount of people that go out and kill. That's not even taking the fact that one's in a 2 months span while the other is over the course of a year.
I have the math. I studied this. I wrote a giant thesis paper on this. I've typed up articles about this. I've argued this a million times.
There. Is. No. Correlation. Not in the way that's accused. How about we blame the Bible for the murders committed because "God told them to" and "The Bible says to"? That seems logical, right? There's more of a correlation THERE than there is to video game related murders.
"But that's intolerant"
Exactly.
These people that support this have ab...
STOP IT.
Violent kids are drawn to violent media, as are non-violent kids. But seriously, if someone would DO THE STATISTICAL ANALYSIS, THERE WOULD BE NO ARGUMENT.
If you took all of the documented murders from 2011, versus the amount of copies sold of Black Ops 2 in the first two months of its release, assumed every copy was only bound to one person, you would find that there is about a .1% correlation of people that own a violent video game, versus the amount of people that go out and kill. That's not even taking the fact that one's in a 2 months span while the other is over the course of a year.
I have the math. I studied this. I wrote a giant thesis paper on this. I've typed up articles about this. I've argued this a million times.
There. Is. No. Correlation. Not in the way that's accused. How about we blame the Bible for the murders committed because "God told them to" and "The Bible says to"? That seems logical, right? There's more of a correlation THERE than there is to video game related murders.
"But that's intolerant"
Exactly.
These people that support this have absolutely no clue what the differences between cause and effect are.
Now shut up, read a book, do some research, and leave people alone. Video games aren't drugs. Stop treating them like it.
You're comparing a device that can directly kill a human being if it's pointed at them and fired, with pieces of software that, at the very worst, will cause a computer to overload from running too much.
You DO realize how stupid that sounds, right?
Maybe you should do a tiiiny bit of research before grouping people that don't agree with you into an unrelated group?
Yes, the idea of taking guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens is terrible. But the logic doesn't transfer. That's like saying "Because there are people that say God told them to kill someone, the Bible should be blamed for violence" (Which has a better correlation than violence in media, by the way.)
I agree, but disagree with you, if that makes any sense.
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out - because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the communists
and I did not speak out - because I was not a communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out - because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me -
and by then there was no one left to speak out for me.
The German anti-Nazi activist,
Pastor Martin Niemöller
But, I never said you called me a socialist. But calling everyone that thinks there should be some kind of regulation on guns a socialist is a little over the top. If there were other correlations between them and socialists, I'd understand the statement.