U.S. Supreme Court Allows Video Games To Kill Our Children

Parents shocked at Supreme Court's hateful decision to allow our children to be murdered by the video game industry

“When an industry trade group files a federal lawsuit to defend a child’s constitutional rights, the alarm bells should be deafening. It is hard to imagine a more cynical proposition. Sadly, today’s ruling proves the United States Supreme Court heard the video game industry loud and clear, but turned a deaf ear to concerned parents. The Court has provided children with a Constitutionally-protected end-run on parental authority.

“This ruling replaces the authority of parents with the economic interests of the video game industry. With no fear of any consequence for violating the video game industry’s own age restriction guidelines, retailers can now openly, brazenly sell games with unspeakable violence and adult content even to the youngest of children.

“The carefully-worded California statute would not have interfered in any way with the rights of the creators of adult games or the adults who wish to buy them; and in fact, it would not interfere with parents who wanted to purchase such a game for their children. Rather, the measure only would have prevented an unaccompanied minor child from buying or renting the product.

“Countless independent studies confirm what most parents instinctively know to be true: repeated exposure to violent video games has a harmful and long-term effect on children. Despite these troubling findings, video game manufacturers have fought tooth and nail for the ‘right’ to line their pockets at the expense of America’s children. Today, the Supreme Court sided with them and against parents.

“We call on the Entertainment Merchants Association to redouble its efforts for increased enforcement of the industry’s age-based vending restrictions. The Federal Trade Commission and the PTC’s own ‘Secret Shopper’ campaigns have routinely demonstrated an abysmal failure rate for video game retailers to uphold the industry’s own age-based restrictions. With the exception of GameStop, many in the video game industry appear to be either unwilling or unable to prevent the sale of M-rated games to kids. Now with no threat of consequence for failure, we are concerned that the self-regulatory efforts will be violated in even greater numbers than they already are. We will be monitoring this very closely.

“The Parents Television Council is proud of its unwavering support for California State Senator Leland Yee’s leadership and legislative efforts to protect children. We will continue to use all the resources within our power to call out unscrupulous retailers. If the federal courts won’t stand for parents, then we hope the court of public opinion will.”

Patriot vows to continue to stand up against Corporate America's murderous rampage

“Unfortunately, the majority of the Supreme Court once again put the interests of corporate America before the interests of our children,” said the law’s author, Senator Leland Yee (D-San Francisco). “As a result of their decision, Wal-Mart and the video game industry will continue to make billions of dollars at the expense of our kids’ mental health and the safety of our community. It is simply wrong that the video game industry can be allowed to put their profit margins over the rights of parents and the well-being of children.”

Yee also praised Justice Stephen Breyer, one of the more liberal justices on the Court and a San Francisco resident, who wrote the dissenting opinion.

“Justice Breyer, in his dissenting opinion, clearly understood the need to protect our children from the harmful effects of excessively violent video games and to give parents a tool in raising healthy kids,” said Yee.

Parents beg for help to save their children from the violence

“I looked over my son’s shoulder as he played a game with young girls being struck by a shovel as they beg for mercy … then the player can pour gasoline over them, set them on fire and pee on them,” says Gladys Stone, a single mom with a 14-year-old son. “That’s disgusting. I would love to have a law that I could point to and say, ‘Sorry Zeke, it’s against the law,’ ” she says.
...
Several parents highlight incongruities in the government’s position. Justice Stephen Breyer noted one in his dissent: “What sense does it make to forbid selling to a 13-year-old boy a magazine with … a nude woman, while protecting a sale … of an interactive video game in which he actively, but virtually, binds and gags the woman, then tortures and kills her?”

Sam Singer, who runs his own public relations firm in San Francisco, says, “It's ironic that the government can put warning labels on cigarettes and ban their sales to minors, but it cannot do the same with overtly violent and dangerous video games.”

How much will crime rise now that violent video games are allowed?

"That's like the tobacco industry saying there is no harm coming from smoking," said Tim Winter, president of the parents Television Council, which got the now-overturned ban on the books. "It is absolutely rubbish. There are more than 3,000 studies who have documented a relationship between a child's intake of violent media and their behavior."

Some parents were in favor of the ban.

"To me, there's a lot of violence in those games, so I would really like to take them out of the markets," Agoura Hills resident Karla Chismar said.

Elementary school principal Susan Rubinstein said parents should avoid exposing their children to such games since kids tend to imitate things they see.

THE VIOLENCE! It's already started!

Flash

So in a nutshell, the people most up in arms about the welfare of children when it comes to violent video games are the kind of folks who are too stupid, ignorant and incompetent to be parents and shouldn't be reproducing. Isn't irony wonderful?

The quote about the tobacco industry claiming that no harm can come from smoking might be the best of the lot. Perfect example of how the lies and misinformation are actually coming from these clowns, not the people they crusade against.

If I was a parent, I wouldn't be too worried. First of all, don't parents have authority over their children? Don't they get to decide whether or not they buy games like GTA or MK? Second of all, if you consider yourself a good parent, your influence on your children should be greater than that of a violent video game, and therefore you children won't be mass murderers.

I know I'm not a parent and likely don't understand the worries of a parent, but imo, this subject is something that a good parent really shouldn't be stressing over. Video game companies are doing their job, releasing games out on the market to make money. They have no influence whatsoever on who buys or plays them. And yet, they get blamed for this?

If I was a parent, I wouldn't be too worried. First of all, don't parents have authority over their children? Don't they get to decide whether or not they buy games like GTA or MK?

Nope. See, there's all this advertising and stuff that brainwashes the innocent children into thinking they want McDonald's and Mortal Kombat. And then they whine and whine about it and complain to their parents and cry and throw fits. So parents are then forced to purchase these evil products for children which turn them fat and violent. Since they're fat they'll get bullied and then shoot up the school because they saw it in Halo.

And even if somehow the kids were able to avoid this, like if their parents were actual good parents and didn't allow them to watch T.V. or leave the house (except to go to school) so they wouldn't be tempted by advertising. But all the other children out there, with their unfit parents are allowing them this stuff and they'll do things like talk about how good Chicken McNuggets are and how fun it was to shoot all the hookers in Gears of War and even these well raised kids are tempted to play the video games. And they might go over to a friends house to do homework and the kid might have Mass Effect sitting out on the table and then that good kid is corrupted and begins to turn to violence and sexual activity.

In the end, the only way to protect children and empower parents is to ban these horrible games. And once it's illegal the kids will never get their hands on them. Just like drugs and alcohol.

What game is that where you pee on the young girls?

R Kelly's Music Maker on the wii?

Conkers Bad Fur Day is the only game i've played where you pee on people.

It's about what the parents perceive is happening on the screen that's important. Not what may actually be allowed in the game itself. Thus why in GTA III you could pimp hookers, then rape them and kill them while blowing up school buses full of children and flying planes into the twin towers.

Even Justice Breyer's quoted (but not cited) game doesn't exist. And not a single one of the games Alito cites in his concurrence are retail games, they're mods, small online indie releases, Japan-only or Custer's Revenge. His staff found a "most evil video games ever" list on the internet and then found articles about five of the worst games from it.

Seriously.

I'm not making this up. It's in the footnotes.

13
For a sample of violent video games, see Wilson, The 10 Most
Violent Video Games of All Time, PCMag.com (Feb. 10, 2011),
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2817,2379959,00.asp. To see brief
video excerpts from violent games, see Chomik, Top 10: Most Violent
Video Games, AskMen.com, http://www.askmen.com/top_10/videogame/
top-10-most-violent-video-games.html; Sayed, 15 Most Violent Video
Games That Made You Puke, Gamingbolt (May 2, 2010), http://
gamingbolt.com/15-most-violent-video-games-that-made-you-puke

14 Webley, “School Shooter” Video Game to Reenact Columbine, Vir-
ginia Tech Killings, Time (Apr. 20, 2011), http://newsfeed.time.com/
2011/04/20/school-shooter-video-game-reenacts-columbine-virginia-techkillings. After a Web site that made School Shooter available for
download removed it in response to mounting criticism, the developer
stated that it may make the game available on its own Web site. Inside
the Sick Site of a School Shooter Mod (Mar. 26, 2011), http://ssnat.com.
15
Lah, “RapeLay” Video Game Goes Viral Amid Outrage, CNN
(Mar. 30, 2010), http://articles.cnn.com/2010-03-30/world/japan.video.
game.rape_1_game-teenage-girl-japanese-government?_s=PM:WORLD.
16
Graham, Custer May be Shot Down Again in a Battle of the Sexes
Over X-Rated Video Games, People, Nov. 15, 1982, pp. 110, 115.
17
Scheeres, Games Elevate Hate to Next Level, Wired (Feb. 20,
2002), http://www.wired.com/culture/lifesty.../2002/02/50523.
18
Thompson, A View to a Kill: JFK Reloaded is Just Plain Creepy,
Slate (Nov. 22, 2004), http://www.slate.com/id/2110034.

Thankfully 60+% of the population supports doing the right thing and protecting families by banning video games. Unlike these elitist liberal judicial activists like Scalia.

If there's one thing the government should be doing it's protecting children from evil.

The Constitution is not a suicide pact.

Conkers Bad Fur Day is the only game i've played where you pee on people.

As Axel said, parents have the authority over their children. They are the people who buy the games for them...

And that's the point of these laws, they protect the parents rights. Or did you ignore all the facts in the OP?

Yeah, I read but very quickly So, what happened with the ESRB?

They still exist. They're self-regulation, like movie ratings.

Maybe I should explain that since everyone else here doesn't come from a nation that has some minor semblance of sanity left, our movie ratings and tv ratings and game ratings. These aren't set by the government, nor enforced by the government. Movie theaters, GameStop and Wal-Mart enforce ratings by corporate decree. Almost nobody else does. And the latter is actually pretty lax on DVDs. Movie theaters are, depending on their employees. If you work at those places and sell to someone under 17, you don't go to jail or get fined, you might get fired or maybe nothing happens if nobody complains.

Yes, this is the violent Darwinian hellscape America faces everyday.

Seen the Futurama episode where Fry goes to L.A.? It's like that. Only worse.

And with a thousand times more Pauly Shore.

I think a game company should develop a game called good samaritan. You can help old people cross the street and do chores for your neighbors. Volunteer for a shelter or other community service and get achievements for doing non violent, helpful things.

But, for sandbox style, you can help old people cross the street right into oncoming traffic or sell drugs at a narcotics anonymous meeting.

You should always get a choice. Like breaking into someones house, and then cleaning it, or cut down an entire flower bed when you mow your neighbors lawn. Offer to walk your neighbors dog, right to the pound.

If I was a parent, I wouldn't be too worried. First of all, don't parents have authority over their children? Don't they get to decide whether or not they buy games like GTA or MK?

Nope. See, there's all this advertising and stuff that brainwashes the innocent children into thinking they want McDonald's and Mortal Kombat. And then they whine and whine about it and complain to their parents and cry and throw fits. So parents are then forced to purchase these evil products for children which turn them fat and violent. Since they're fat they'll get bullied and then shoot up the school because they saw it in Halo.

Which is my point of saying this:

Second of all, if you consider yourself a good parent, your influence on your children should be greater than that of a violent video game, and therefore you children won't be mass murderers.

A parent has to understand that it's all on them to educate their children on what's right and what's wrong. If they allow their child to play those games hours upon hours, then there's something the parent is doing wrong letting them do so, and they go and blame the devs of the game if their child turns out a 'mass murderer'. If a parent allows a video game to influence and teach their children more than they themselves teach them, then isn't the parent obviously the one responsible?

But parents can't do that, and no parents aren't responsible because they're overwhelmed by the corporate assault on their children forcing them to buy and allow their children to do anything the corporate interests want. It's all right there from Assemblyman Lee and PTC. Can't argue with these facts.

One wonders what could be accomplished if these people focused their attention and energy into something worthwhile, rather than making stuff up to crusade against video games.

Well, it seems reasonable, Andrew. Many kids are easily influenced into do things that seem "cool". It's getting worse. What if you had a child and he begged the hell out of you to buy a rated M game? You would probably buy the game for him. Well, maybe you wouldn't, but let's just say you DID buy him the game. Then weeks later, he starts to speak with profanity and starts to think that violence is "cool". That's a problem right there. Plus, the fact that obesity comes in with video game addiction (not every kid but it still affects their health in some way). But, IMHO, this is very important just as exercise is important.

Also, if you're a parent that actually disciplines their child and makes them have respect, then maybe it wouldn't be as bad. But, then again, the majority of up and coming parents of the next generation aren't very fond of that, specifically in America.

In all seriousness though, what proof is there that things are "getting worse"?

Well, it seems reasonable, Andrew. Many kids are easily influenced into do things that seem "cool". It's getting worse. What if you had a child and he begged the hell out of you to buy a rated M game? You would probably buy the game for him. Well, maybe you wouldn't, but let's just say you DID buy him the game. Then weeks later, he starts to speak with profanity and starts to think that violence is "cool". That's a problem right there.

god forbid parents actually talk to their kids about issues/ideas/themes in the games and discuss the "good" and "bad" parts of the game and teach them "right" from "wrong".

Well I agree with you Qballer but not everyone is like that. You know this situation wouldn't be as bad if parents actually tried to be parents to stop their children from playing these games.

Andrew, here in the eastern coast in America it's pretty bad and disappointing. I don't about Australia but here dam I see elementary kids as young as 7 doing some pretty insane stuff everyday. Its frustrating to me personally when a 10 year old is cussing nonstop and their actions too
But that's my view on it because during my time I didn't learn to cuss or think about violence heavily till I got to middle school. That's why it's getting worse because during my time I learned all this crap in middle school, and nowt I see kids now learning it in elementary school at young ages. Imagine 10 years from now, man what a awful way of developing a generation here in the USA. But this is what I think is wrong, I don't know what's going on in Australia but here it's bad and will get worse if we don't make a change.

This is a music article but it shows an example of why our future generations are getting worse.
http://thatsenuff.com/index.php/2011/04 ... rtin-pt-2/

Another one
http://mobile.associatedcontent.com/art ... tting.html

One more(I think this is the best one, it's balanced and not biased)
http://www.helium.com/items/917126-our- ... r-or-worse

Last edited by x-uNdErRaTeD-z on Thu Jun 30, 2011 3:19 pm, edited 1 time in total.

What change should be made? What's the solution?

Beatings.

What change should be made? What's the solution?

I have an idea.

American families need to implement more of the older generation because they are wiser and more experienced. We need to take out our own grandparents from nursing homes let them help us raise our children.

Our school system needs to work harder to educate kids better and more. If it's more money then why not.

I suggest that more communities/recreational places open up in small cities and help educate our children.

We need parents to step up and be there for their children and teach them the right ways and be examples to them. And help them when they need help. They need to discipline their children in some way and have open relationships with them.

We might need to implement more religious places such as churches with schools or whatever to help show our children values and morals from their books. You might not have a religion but if your child can have a better behavior after attending these places, its worth it.

We need more positive role models in our society. Music industry, television, radio, internet, and sports...we need more because it's not very well right now.

Aren't you simply saying "everyone should be better people"? Well, great, how do you do that? That's what I asked. What should be done?

I mean what if parents don't step up? If families continue to move towards single-parent and high-divorce rates? What if parents don't know what "the right ways" are and are incapable of helping their children?

How can you create more positive role models? How do you even define it? How do you "implement more religious places"?

"Everyone should be better" is a fantasy, not a solution.

Andrew, here in the eastern coast in America it's pretty bad and disappointing. I don't about Australia but here dam I see elementary kids as young as 7 doing some pretty insane stuff everyday. Its frustrating to me personally when a 10 year old is cussing nonstop and their actions too
But that's my view on it because during my time I didn't learn to cuss or think about violence heavily till I got to middle school. That's why it's getting worse because during my time I learned all this crap in middle school, and nowt I see kids now learning it in elementary school at young ages. Imagine 10 years from now, man what a awful way of developing a generation here in the USA. But this is what I think is wrong, I don't know what's going on in Australia but here it's bad and will get worse if we don't make a change.

Here's the thing though. The numbers don't back up the idea that things are getting worse. Even as the video game industry has become bigger and more violent games are on the market, crime and notably homicide (since first person shooters and sandbox games like GTA supposedly turn us into killers) has decreased. Surely, if video games - and for that matter, movies, television shows and other media - were turning people violent, then those numbers would be increasing or at the very least remain the same as a new generation of criminals is created. Instead, those crimes continue to be in decline.

It's easy to cluck our tongues at the current generation; after all, we've been doing it for centuries now. But we're kidding ourselves if we paint bygone years as entirely wholesome and free of what we perceive to be the scourges of today's youth. Profanity has been around for centuries. Being too stubborn to listen to people with more experience is part of youth, something we all have to outgrow. And there have always been people who have spurned our common concepts of morality and committed crimes to suit their purpose. We're talking human nature here, something that would exist with or without video games.

While I understand not everyone has the same position when it comes to profanity, I don't see it as very big deal. Far too much emphasis continues to be placed upon words that have arbitrarily deemed taboo. However, since those words have come to be considered offensive, it's fair enough that some people don't like them. But then that comes down to individual values that people want to instill in their children, through the old "We don't use that language" and "Those are bad words" speeches and appropriate punishments. If parents are too weak willed to teach their children otherwise, it isn't the fault of video game developers, Hollywood directors or anyone else.

Violence should be the greater concern and I agree that it's a reasonable issue to worry about; I would disagree that the people quoted in the original post are making particularly reasonable or logical arguments on the matter, considering they're making half of it up or referring to unofficial game modifications rather than what's actually on sale in the first place. But we have ratings boards. We have parents who are supposedly concerned enough about these matters to raise a stink, yet when it comes to taking responsibility for their children, they want to pass the buck.

And again, where is the evidence that these games are creating criminals? As noted, crime rates are in decline and links between criminal acts and video games is spotty at best. Out of the millions of people who play violent video games, how many go on to commit murder or assault? And how many of those have social and/or psychological problems that have nothing to do with playing video games? Mark David Chapman claimed he was inspired to shoot John Lennon after reading Catcher in the Rye. People who aren't quite right in the head will point to anything as justification for their actions and find their inspiration anywhere. They too are passing the buck.

There have always been little kids who have hurt small animals, people who have hurt and manipulated others because it allows them to get what they want or they simply get a kick out it, people who are amoral and sociopaths. These traits aren't created by video games; they can't be, because we've seen it throughout recorded history. Perhaps they serve as a trigger for some troubled individuals, but then so do movies, television shows, plays, poetry, books, even religious texts...to be blunt, nutjobs will find an excuse to do the things that they do, invent meaning that isn't there. That doesn't mean we should ban those things or join in blaming them, when the other 99.9% of us can separate fiction from reality and temper our actions with morality.

The idea that our morality can be shaped and altered by video games is unproven, at least when we talk of well-adjusted people who know right from wrong and fact from fiction. Penn & Teller put the notion to the test when they took a kid who played violent video games to a firing range, with the result being that the kid found the experience of firing a real gun quite upsetting (and couldn't hit an oversized target, so so much for video games training people to be effective killers). Admittedly that's not a huge sample size to test out the theory, but then neither is the amount of people who supposedly committed crime because they played video games. And not to harp on the point but again, if video games are training kids to be effective, cold-blooded killers, wouldn't the homicide rate reflect that?

Concern about the content of video games is not unreasonable. Parents not wanting their kids exposed to certain things is not unreasonable. What I feel is unreasonable in the arguments put forth by the people quoted in the original post is that they are relying on misinformation, twisted information and even flat out lies to make their case. Rather than take responsibility for their kids and enforce their own rules and ethics, they aim to force their way of thinking, their beliefs and sense of morality, onto society at large. There's no "live and let live" in that, like petulant children they want it their way and that's that, no two ways about it. That's not a reasonable solution or compromise.