AfterDawn: Tech news

New York Senate passes 'violent videogame' bill

Written by Andre Yoskowitz (Google+) @ 26 Jun 2008 14:47 User comments (20)

New York Senate passes 'violent videogame' bill A new bill has just passed in New York that will allow a governmental advisory council to "examine the potential impact of violent videogames" and now heads off to the Governor before it can become a law. It passed almost unanimously in the Senate by a 61-1 vote.
If Governor David Paterson signs the bill, then the law will go into effect September 1st, 2010. The legislation will require that all console systems be equipped with parental controls and that ESRB ratings must be displayed on packaging. These practices are already standard, but neither is by bound by law and are done voluntarily.

The advisory council will consist of 16 members and will get to make recommendations regarding the current ESRB rating system. They can also offer "a parent-teacher violence awareness program to identify and appropriately assist students who may have a propensity toward violence."

Senator Andrew Lanza added of the bill, "There is some confusion with respect to what this bill actually accomplishes... The word prohibition was talked about. I want to be clear. This bill does not prohibit the sale of any video to anyone."

"This simply says that every video game sold in the state of New York simply should have a rating consistent with what the ESRB does presently in a voluntary way... it does work. But the problem with 'voluntary' is that tomorrow someone can change their mind. Someone could decide tomorrow to no longer place ratings on these games. So this is not about prohibiting the sale, this is simply about providing information to parents."

Previous Next  

20 user comments

126.6.2008 15:08

Plays the imperial march. 0_o

226.6.2008 16:13

Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Plays the imperial march. 0_o
LOL... yeah, but TV, movies and music display ratings or parental warnings, so I don't have a problem with it. Besides, there "should" be a line drawn for games. It's pretty bad when a child can't go see a movie like Iron Man without parental supervision, but they can buy, rent and play GTA IV! LOL

326.6.2008 16:15

Quote:
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Plays the imperial march. 0_o
LOL... yeah, but TV, movies and music display ratings or parental warnings, so I don't have a problem with it. Besides, there "should" be a line drawn for games. It's pretty bad when a child can't go see a movie like Iron Man without parental supervision, but they can buy, rent and play GTA IV! LOL
The bill is complete crap and vague enough to be destroyed in court when they are sued.

426.6.2008 18:09

On top of that it maybe found unconstitutional, just because the outward appearance looks ok doesn't mean all the legal-language inside the document is.

526.6.2008 18:52
atomicxl
Inactive

Did you guys even read the article? LOL @ the imperial march. They are asking that games have ratings placed on the cover and parental controls on systems. We've had ratings on covers since the mid 90s. Parental Controls are on every console.

This is not big brother telling you to goto your viewing screens.

626.6.2008 19:07

Originally posted by atomicxl:
Did you guys even read the article?
LOL

I agree too.

I don't think this is such a big deal at all.

I still believe, however, that many problems kids have blurring reality with fantasy is a result of misguided parental supervision (or lack thereof)--and not video games, TV, and movies.

726.6.2008 20:36

As if the average soccer mom reads ratings anyway. I'd venture to say that most parents that are upset with video games don't even know ESRB ratings are prominently displayed on every package.

The ESRB has been around for what, 12+ years now? Let's face it, most parents are oblivious to these ratings, making them mandatory won't change a thing. Idiot parents are still going to buy their kids violent games and complain "they weren't warned" even though it says right on the back on the box what sort of content is in the game.

827.6.2008 0:19

This is really no big deal. We should be thankful that Sen. Tommy Kilby and his like didn't have hands in this, or we'd start to see a big push for video game censorship. The ratings system has been looking you in the face for years, people! So has parental control functionality on consoles. This is actually just a tool for parents to know what content a game has.

On a lighter note, I worked in the electronics dept. of a "Big Box" retailer. It always cracked me up when a parent brought a game (with tons of gore) and his/her 12-year old to me and asked "does this game have any nudity?" What has this world come to? It's OK for little Jimmy to disembowel people and rain shards of skull and brain all over himself, but not to see cartoon breasts? I always used to laugh!

927.6.2008 2:11
llongtheD
Inactive

It just seems like we're spinning our wheels. Politicians in America are worried about violent video games? Corporate America is funding lobbyists to keep politicians out of this kind of stuff.(sarcasm)

Maybe if we spent more on the actual EDUCATION of our children, and less on these "studies" we'd make some progress.

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 27 Jun 2008 @ 2:57

1027.6.2008 9:22

LOL @ Imperial March


I love how alot of people are going "have you read the article?" etc yes it may only contain meaningless restrictions on games now that we already really have but what about the future. The muppets in the senate obviously think we cant think for ourselves when decieding whether or not a game is suitable.

And whats even more annoying is if you americans start doing s**t like this no doubt someone in britain will think that its also a good idea.

llongtheD totally agree mate if only people used common sense like "lets just educate our children better" none of this would be a problem

This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 27 Jun 2008 @ 9:24

1127.6.2008 10:23

Aw well if it keeps more squeaky annoying little kids off the online part of the games that are rated mature its fine with me.

1227.6.2008 10:29

Quote:
Maybe if we spent more on the actual EDUCATION of our children, and less on these "studies" we'd make some progress.
This could help in someways but education is not the answer to violence in children. You can have a very well educated child who has made nothing but "A's" his entire life and goes to private school who still turns out violent b/c he lives in a broken house where he is not discipline as he should be or given the attention he or she needs. "Broken Homes?" result from 2 adults who are selfish putting their own happiness before there children. Children are our resposibility and didnot ask to be here. It was by our doing that they are here so take the resposibility to put them first and not use divorce in a selfish way out of a marriage. There are always exceptions when divorces are necessary but still most of the time it is just two adults who cant put their pride asside and get along with the other.


Quote:
I still believe, however, that many problems kids have blurring reality with fantasy is a result of misguided parental supervision (or lack thereof)--and not video games, TV, and movies
This hits the nail on the head. It is the parents fault the majority of the time. Education is not the answer. Working in the medical field i have meet a lot of well educated people. I have seen Medical Doctors who wouldnot have enough common sense to get out of the rain. RN's whose elevators dont quite go to the top floor. (No offense to nurses or doctors, this is just referring to certain individuals) Studies have been done to show that children who come from a broken home are more likely to end up incarcerated,or just plain unsuccessful in life not acheiving goals they may have dreamed of as a child. I dont agree with the reality show "SUPER NANNY" either. Those discipline methods are out of reality. I am not condoning child abuse b/c that is wrong. But more moms and dads need to use a good whooping when it is neccessary but only as a last resort. Many of us go to church and try our best to be good christian people but still will not lay a hand on your own child. You could go to jail for simple being in public and popping a child on his bottom. This is a society we live in that has cause a lot of out violent problems. The bible speaks against this. Spare the rod and ruin the child.
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 27 Jun 2008 @ 10:35

1327.6.2008 11:33

It's about parental control and rating label, so guys/gals, chill... The consoles already have this password thingy build-in, so there's nothing more to do for the game makers.

1427.6.2008 12:09

Hmmm.. Sounds like more like a way to get re-elected than something that will help people. Another example of wasting taxpayers time and money.

If the gaming industry already has these features and have for a while, why do we need a law? Answer: We don't. This is a move by a government offical to stay in office longer.

1527.6.2008 15:26
lynchGOP
Inactive

Quote:
Originally posted by ZippyDSM:
Plays the imperial march. 0_o
LOL... yeah, but TV, movies and music display ratings or parental warnings, so I don't have a problem with it. Besides, there "should" be a line drawn for games. It's pretty bad when a child can't go see a movie like Iron Man without parental supervision, but they can buy, rent and play GTA IV! LOL

This statement truly shows off your ignorance BUT THANKS for giving us all the heads up to your presence.

Comparing 'watching' Iron Man to 'playing' GTA IV..................are you high???

Can you say "apples to oranges"? One is watched with minimal "realistic" violence and swearing THE OTHER is interactively played with decisions made by the user, proactively I might add, with sex, killing of cops (love that though:) swearing up the ass, hookers, rape and the like.

Besides...........Iron Man is PG-13.


Good for them anyway. Having a rating on the box and parental controls are harmless and is just an extra feature for the parents who don't want their kids exposed to this.
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 27 Jun 2008 @ 15:32

1627.6.2008 17:04

Quote:
I might add, with sex, killing of cops (love that though:) swearing up the ass, hookers, rape and the like.

Correction, there is no "rape" in GTA.
This message has been edited since its posting. Latest edit was made on 27 Jun 2008 @ 17:04

1727.6.2008 17:19

Why make a bill that only does two things that are already being done? Granted those two things aren't currently required by law, but this doesn't fly with me. There must be more things included in the text of this bill. Besides, don't these guys have more important things with which to take up their time than videogames? These laws don't really change anything. Those parents who are interested enough in what their children play will continue to be, and those who aren't, won't.

1827.6.2008 17:42

i agree to this, but only if they start rating books and putting real ratings on music, not just a parental advisory. hell, let's make all these rating systems legally-binding too.

1928.6.2008 0:42

Last I checked, all my games are clearly labeled as to what age group they are intended for. It's the parents faults for not reading the label.

I just watched some woman buy her 7-8 year old son GTA: San Andreas in the local Wal Mart yesterday. She didn't even look at the box. Just got it from the case and bought it. It's ignorance like this that causes these problems.

Hell, I never even got to play Goldeneye on the N64 until I was 13. My parents controlled what games I played and didn't play. Now, at 18, I make my own decisions. I still don't like gratuitous violence in games. So, cannibalism in FEAR is fine, but I cringe when you leave a blood trail after running over a hooker in GTA.

Sure, violence exists in games, but the games are properly labelled. So, parents, do your fu(1<ing jobs and stop blaming the media for your violent, stupid, arrogant children. I got beat when I mouthed off and did bad stuff. Maybe other children should too.

2028.6.2008 12:17
llongtheD
Inactive

@lxhotboy

You misunderstood what I was saying. I wasn't saying educated children do not commit violent acts. I was saying the money would be better served going into the school system, rather than spending millions on having politicians debate and conduct studies on the matter. No matter how little money there is to go around for important things, there always seems to be enough money to conduct these ridiculous studies.

Comments have been disabled for this article.

News archive