Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 34

Thread: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

  1. #11
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:06 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

    Re: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    DVD's cost $20, video games cost $40-60. I really don't see how kids would be able to afford one but not the other, or how kids would be able to sneak one around but not the other.

    The point is that this is in no way some heavy handed authoritarian policy limiting free speech.
    When talking about movies I meant about the child actually going to the theater, not buying a DVD

    A parent has the ability to determine what a child watches in their own home, not so much at a movie theater. I dont mind the government helping to supervise childern when the parent can not, but when the parent has the ability to do the job, the government should not
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  2. #12
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:06 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

    Re: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Further, this also includes video game rentals, which is a much lower cost. Also, you guys are assuming new and current. I can get some video games for as low as 5 bucks that are not current, but can include M rating.
    And the kid will have to take the game home where the parent could see what game the kid is playing correct?
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  3. #13
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:38 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,344
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    And the kid will have to take the game home where the parent could see what game the kid is playing correct?
    Not necessarily.

    Don't get me wrong, I don't support the law, and am fundamentally divided on whether it is a good idea or not, but I can see the arguments for it.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  4. #14
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:06 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

    Re: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    Not necessarily.

    Don't get me wrong, I don't support the law, and am fundamentally divided on whether it is a good idea or not, but I can see the arguments for it.
    I see the arguements for it as well.

    But assuming the parent/s do any sort of parenting this should not be an issue, they should know what games their childern are playing in their own home. They can not control what their childern do outside of the home, but certainly can inside it

    Which means the law should be useless, and I dont like additional useless laws
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  5. #15
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:38 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,344
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    I see the arguements for it as well.

    But assuming the parent/s do any sort of parenting this should not be an issue, they should know what games their childern are playing in their own home. They can not control what their childern do outside of the home, but certainly can inside it

    Which means the law should be useless, and I dont like additional useless laws
    The bolded part contradicts your last sentence.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  6. #16
    Sage
    Lord Tammerlain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:06 PM
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    10,432

    Re: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

    Quote Originally Posted by Redress View Post
    The bolded part contradicts your last sentence.
    Not really

    Most video games that are mature in nature need to be played on consoles and a tv. The kids may be able to buy the game, but taking it home and playing it is another story.


    Going to a movie at the theater you dont take the movie home to watch it on the big screen tv in the rec room, where mommy can walk in and see what you are watching and take it away. A parent should not have a difficult time knowing what games their childern are playing at home or what movies they watch at home, they will have a difficult time knowing what movie they saw at the theater
    Happy Hanukkah Cheerfull Kwanzaa
    Happy Christmas Merry New Year Festivus for the rest of us

  7. #17
    Liberal Fascist For Life!


    Redress's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Georgia
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:38 AM
    Lean
    Very Liberal
    Posts
    93,344
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Not really

    Most video games that are mature in nature need to be played on consoles and a tv. The kids may be able to buy the game, but taking it home and playing it is another story.


    Going to a movie at the theater you dont take the movie home to watch it on the big screen tv in the rec room, where mommy can walk in and see what you are watching and take it away. A parent should not have a difficult time knowing what games their childern are playing at home or what movies they watch at home, they will have a difficult time knowing what movie they saw at the theater
    I had a friend when I was a kid whose parents where gone alot. I went over there to watch R rated videotapes and other things my parents would not approve of. They do not have to bring it home to access a rented video game.
    We became a great nation not because we are a nation of cynics. We became a great nation because we are a nation of believers - Lindsey Graham

    Quote Originally Posted by Fiddytree View Post
    Uh oh Megyn...your vagina witchcraft is about ready to be exposed.

  8. #18
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

    Re: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Tammerlain View Post
    Not really

    Most video games that are mature in nature need to be played on consoles and a tv. The kids may be able to buy the game, but taking it home and playing it is another story.


    Going to a movie at the theater you dont take the movie home to watch it on the big screen tv in the rec room, where mommy can walk in and see what you are watching and take it away. A parent should not have a difficult time knowing what games their childern are playing at home or what movies they watch at home, they will have a difficult time knowing what movie they saw at the theater
    I just don't think that this really plays out the way you're describing it. Most kids play video games on the same TV they would watch a movie on. If the parents are going to catch them doing one, they can catch them doing the other. Moreover, if the game in question is a video game, the kid will probably be playing it on the computer, which is equally easy to keep from the parents.
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  9. #19
    Student
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    98053
    Last Seen
    04-19-15 @ 03:17 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    264

    Re: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

    Quote Originally Posted by Deuce View Post
    Ahhh the good ol' Cocoon Mother lobby, the folks who think children MUST be protected at all costs from swear words, violence, and boobs, until they turn 18. Because if little jimmy hears the word ****, his poor little brain will just explode for some reason. Also, boobs will scar him for life. Somehow. Violence? Surely little Jimmy can't tell the difference between fake and real, if we let him play Mortal Kombat he might shoot fireballs out of his hands and tear someones head off, bringing the spinal cord with it.
    Children are impressionable. They are wired at birth to be impressionable. That is how they are able to assimilate information and learn. This literal open mindedness is an important part of our genetic makeup. If you give a gun to a child and have some father figure tell them that they are supposed to kill someone, they will do it without any sense of regret.

    Some people never are able to grow up and learn to differentiate between reality and fiction. However, we arbitrarily decide that 18 is going to be the magic age of majority (although you still presumed not to be able to handle alcohol -- go figure).

    I don't see that kids will be harmed by being prevented from buying violent games, especially one that reward gratuitous violence. It isn't really a violation of their rights because they don't have the same rights as adults -- never have had them, probably never will have them. The rights of children are defined by what harms them not by what they want to do.

    It is already accepted that it is OK to prevent kids from going to an R-rated movie without their parents or to an X-rated movie at all. It is OK to prevent them from buying pornographic material. They will not be harmed by not being able to buy it.

    I personally find a lot of stuff that has gratuitous violence to be more obscene than any T&A that I've seen.

    I hope that my view that this is not something that children are equipped to decide on their own is not a reflection of my personal biases.

  10. #20
    Outer space potato man

    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 11:29 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    51,849

    Re: Supreme Court to hear violent video game case

    Quote Originally Posted by zip98053 View Post
    Children are impressionable. They are wired at birth to be impressionable. That is how they are able to assimilate information and learn. This literal open mindedness is an important part of our genetic makeup. If you give a gun to a child and have some father figure tell them that they are supposed to kill someone, they will do it without any sense of regret.

    Some people never are able to grow up and learn to differentiate between reality and fiction. However, we arbitrarily decide that 18 is going to be the magic age of majority (although you still presumed not to be able to handle alcohol -- go figure).

    I don't see that kids will be harmed by being prevented from buying violent games, especially one that reward gratuitous violence. It isn't really a violation of their rights because they don't have the same rights as adults -- never have had them, probably never will have them. The rights of children are defined by what harms them not by what they want to do.

    It is already accepted that it is OK to prevent kids from going to an R-rated movie without their parents or to an X-rated movie at all. It is OK to prevent them from buying pornographic material. They will not be harmed by not being able to buy it.

    I personally find a lot of stuff that has gratuitous violence to be more obscene than any T&A that I've seen.

    I hope that my view that this is not something that children are equipped to decide on their own is not a reflection of my personal biases.
    I've played games of gratuitous violence since a very young age. I have killed precisely zero people and committed precisely zero felonies.

    And "it doesn't harm them not to buy it" is not a reason to ban something. Otherwise, why not ban everything that might be remotely harmful? It doesn't hurt adults to not be able to buy alcohol or cigarettes, let's ban them! It doesn't hurt kids to not be able to buy candy, let's ban selling candy to kids! It doesn't hurt people to not be able to buy guns, let's ban all guns!
    Last edited by Deuce; 10-31-10 at 11:57 PM.
    He touched her over her bra and underpants, she says, and guided her hand to touch him over his underwear
    Quote Originally Posted by Lutherf View Post
    We’ll say what? Something like “nothing happened” ... Yeah, we might say something like that.

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •