Jump to content

Give Me Liberty Or Give Me Death


Falloutdude
 Share

Recommended Posts

Ok this totally pisses me off. What he hell is wrong with enjoying video games that involve violence? More importantly, why is it any of your god damn business?!?!

 

My biggest question is, why in the hell would you allow any government organization to take away freedom of expression in any way!?!? Even if you don't agree with it, or don't like it, it's not your place to censor!! If adults want to look at something or play something or watch something, it's their choice., You don't have to like it, you don't have to agree, but i do believe that you have to let them have their liberty and they should grant you the same respect

 

It bewilders me how people go on and on about civil rights, but when someone tells them something they don't like, they just throw freedom out the window.

 

Yes there is a chance that some crazy bastard will emulate a video game or violent TV show, but should we take away the rights of the majority because something bad might happen? Should we ban sports because someone might get hurt? Should we censor political protest because it might cause a revolution and people getting hurt?

 

My opinion is FUCK NO

 

Shit now i'm afraid they're gonna ban violent or "bad" video games....fuck that shit....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

AlphaToOmega is right but as someone who grew up on video games (violent ones included), I agree with you.

 

Hell, my best friend and I had a fascination with all things sanguinary before MK, Doom and GTA even existed (8 years old and we had the "official" school Violence Club).

 

Free expression is free expression and, as Lenny Bruce so aptly put it, "Take away the right to say 'fuck' and you take away the right to say 'fuck the government'."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dunno about the US but here in Germany those who want to ban "killer games" (and many other things too) are almost always conservatives who don't know or understand what they're talking about and are afraid of what they don't know. Let's face it, what happened when TV was introduced? When rock music first came up? Et cetera, ad nauseam. Always the same. "It's new", to them, means "it could be dangerous" and leads to "let's not risk anything and ban it". :banghead:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This should make you feel better, Dude.

 

http://www.montrealgazette.com/story_print.html?id=5012158&sponsor=

 

WASHINGTON- The government cannot ban the sale or rental of violent video games to minors as this would violate free-speech rights, the U.S. Supreme Court said Monday in its first ruling in a video game case.

 

By a 7-2 vote, the high court struck down a California law, which also imposed strict video game labeling requirements, as unconstitutional. It said video games, like books, plays and movies, deserve free-speech protection.

 

The ruling was a victory for video game publishers, distributors and sellers, including the Entertainment Software Association. Its members include Disney Interactive Studios, Electronic Arts, Microsoft Corp and Sony Computer Entertainment America.

 

The trade association hailed the ruling as a “historic and complete win” for free-speech rights and “the creative freedom of artists and storytellers everywhere.”

 

“Today, the Supreme Court affirmed what we have always known - that free speech protections apply every bit as much to video games as they do to other forms of creative expression like books, movies and music,” said Michael Gallagher, the association’s president.

 

The law, adopted in 2005, has never taken effect because of the legal challenge.

 

It defines a violent video game as one that depicts “killing, maiming, dismembering or sexually assaulting an image of a human being.” Retailers who sell or rent a violent video game to a minor could be fined as much as $1,000.

 

The U.S. video game industry makes about $10.5 billion in annual sales. More than two-thirds of U.S. households include at least one person who plays video games, according to industry statistics.

 

Six other states have adopted similar laws, and all had previously been struck down in court.

 

The Supreme Court’s majority opinion, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, said there was no tradition in the United States of restricting children’s access to depictions of violence.

 

He cited a number of books for children that depict violence.

 

“Grimm’s Fairy Tales, for example, are grim indeed. As her just desserts for trying to poison Snow White, the wicked queen is made to dance in red hot slippers ‘til she fell dead on the floor,”’ Scalia said.

 

“In truth, the California Act is the latest in a long series of failed attempts to censor violent entertainment for minors,” he said in summarizing part of the ruling from the bench on the last day of the court’s 2010-11 term.

 

“Before video games came cheap novels depicting crime ... motion pictures, comic books, television and music lyrics - all of which were blamed by some for juvenile delinquency,” he said.

 

The ruling marked the first time the Supreme Court has considered whether violent video games sold to children can be treated the same as sexually explicit material.

 

Scalia agreed with opponents of the law who said parents, not government, should decide what games their children can buy and play.

 

He rejected the argument by California lawmakers who cited several studies that suggested violent video games can be linked to aggressive and anti-social behavior in children.

 

Justices Clarence Thomas and Stephen Breyer dissented, and Parents Television Council president Tim Winter denounced the decision.

 

“This ruling replaces the authority of parents with the economic interests of the video game industry,” he said, adding: “Retailers can now openly, brazenly sell games with unspeakable violence and adult content even to the youngest of children.”

 

But John Riccitello, CEO of Electronic Arts, a major video game publisher, said, “Everybody wins on this decision - the court has affirmed the constitutional rights of game developers; adults keep the right to decide what’s appropriate in their houses; and store owners can sell games without fear of criminal prosecution,” he said.

 

The Supreme Court case is Brown v. Entertainment Merchants Association, No. 08-1448.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dunno about the US but here in Germany those who want to ban "killer games" (and many other things too) are almost always conservatives who don't know or understand what they're talking about and are afraid of what they don't know. Let's face it, what happened when TV was introduced? When rock music first came up? Et cetera, ad nauseam. Always the same. "It's new", to them, means "it could be dangerous" and leads to "let's not risk anything and ban it". :banghead:

 

It's pretty much the same here in the U.S. The Conservative want to protect children from all things bad (mostly sex and violence) but they have no problem taking their kids to special gun ranges (where even flame throwers and bombs can be shot) or letting them see a segment of Family Guy where evil Stewie cuts off the tail of Brian and stuffs the severed tail down Stewie's throat. They really are the most conflicted bunch out there.

 

This is not to say the at the liberals don't rail against media portrayal of violence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know it's protected, but some people don't care. They would be willing to take away that right just because freedom is risky, i think that's a slippery slope, and one i don't wish to even begin to tread

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Guidelines.