There is no California video games ban in effect yet, but video game law could change based on the current case before the Supreme Court. We've brought you the oral arguments, the Supreme Court transcripts and our opinions in Adam's post from D.C. and his Soapbox, but there's always more, folks.
Our own sharply-dressed Sess took to the steps to chat with California state Senator Leland Yee, who believes that more oversight is needed when it comes to policing video games. Senator Yee also feels that the framework is set for even more fundamental change that he sees as required to protect children from violent video games, but we'll let him spill the beans himself in this interview:
For more on this issue, be sure to check out Video Games on Trial at g4tv.com/gamesontrial!
Comments are Closed
Comments
Displaying 81–100 of 110
41234566
Solidsnake19901
This senator is a jackass. And doesn't know that ADULTS love video games. Not only this but games take ARTISTS to make the world and character design in it so this is in fact ART.
Korzo
The biggest contradiction in this case is the idea that we can tell what crosses the line between violence and "deviant" violence based on common sense. If the developers, publishers, retailers, and consumers all have the common sense to know where that line is then they should all have enough common sense to know that violence, no matter how excessive, should not be acted out in society. They're claiming that we know what you can do in Postal 2 or GTA can cross that line but, when we played these games we forget that its wrong to be violent toward others.
As far as being vague as to what constitutes "deviant" violence, the fact that killing was on the list, and not some extreme form of killing but killing in general, is the broadest act of violence you could throw on the list. There's games E-M that have killing, Mario jumps and stomps on turtles till they turn to dust (and coins. Wonderful, shiny coins) for god's sake. Just because there's no blood or gore or because Mario isn't laughing manically while he does it (although he does sound pretty cheerful when he does) doesn't change the fact that its killing.
This is where common sense comes back into play. I obviously know Mario isn't on trial here (yet...), or any game with mild forms of killing for that matter, but this is a law, and laws need to be specific toward what they are trying to regulate. Nebraska made this mistake by setting the age limit at 18 on their states Safe Haven law when it first passed. Sure common sense said this is meant for people who can't handle a child after its born and or whatever reason one had, but kids of all ages were being dropped off on hospital doorsteps because they didn't specify that the law was meant for infants.
Not only am I against this law as a gamer, I'm against it as someone who fights for free speech and the constitution, and quite simply someone who knows when a poorly written law is trying to get passed. But even if this was a well written law it still goes against everything the American constitution tries to protect (but given cops don't seem to take to kindly to the First Amendment out in Washington D.C. who knows if anyone else does). Sanity, can we restore it now, please
Peatore
Correlation doesn't equal cause and effect.
http://www.loleegreen.com/wp -content/uploads/2009/03/pirat es_and_ghg.gif
Korzo
The biggest contradiction in this case is the idea that we can tell what crosses the line between violence and "deviant" violence based on common sense. If the developers, publishers, retailers, and consumers all have the common sense to know where that line is then they should all have enough common sense to know that violence, no matter how excessive, should not be acted out in society. They're claiming that we know what you can do in Postal 2 or GTA can cross that line but, when we played these games we forget that its wrong to be violent toward others.
As far as being vague as to what constitutes "deviant" violence, the fact that killing was on the list, and not some extreme form of killing but killing in general, is the broadest act of violence you could throw on the list. There's games E-M that have killing, Mario jumps and stomps on turtles till they turn to dust (and coins. Wonderful, shiny coins) for god's sake. Just because there's no blood or gore or because Mario isn't laughing manically while he does it (although he does sound pretty cheerful when he does) doesn't change the fact that its killing.
This is where common sense comes back into play. I obviously know Mario isn't on trial here (yet...), or any game with mild forms of killing for that matter, but this is a law, and laws need to be specific toward what they are trying to regulate. Nebraska made this mistake by setting the age limit at 18 on their states Safe Haven law when it first passed. Sure common sense said this is meant for people who can't handle a child after its born and or whatever reason one had, but kids of all ages were being dropped off on hospital doorsteps because they didn't specify that the law was meant for infants.
Not only am I against this law as a gamer, I'm against it as someone who fights for free speech and the constitution, and quite simply someone who knows when a poorly written law is trying to get passed. But even if this was a well written law it still goes against everything the American constitution tries to protect (but given cops don't seem to take to kindly to the First Amendment out in Washington D.C. who knows if anyone else does). Sanity, can we restore it now, please
Lord_Wake
All I can say is my hat is off to you Adam Sessler. There is no way I would have been able to keep a straight face and my cool after Yee compared the risk to child harm from video games to smoking. Hahaha!!
Again, great professional interview. Very impressed.
firefist
Sucker punch him Adam....come on!
boredx
If this law were to pass which it won't because It's to obscure so they will probably have to rewrite it if it ever was to pass. So if a different version of this law were to pass it's not going to prevent kids from getting games illegally it will just add another use to their fake id's that they already use for ciggerrates and/or beer.
zimmy91
Cause and effect? Wow, what do you mean cause and effect. I have played video games my entire life. My mom damn well made sure I didn't play rated teen games till she felt i was ready for them. But, even then i remember playing goldeneye at my friends house before she let me play rated teen games. It didn't change who i was or my attitude. I played Halo combat evolved when I was 10 years old. I didn't become some psychotic killer. I played counter-strike when I was 13. I didn't go around and shoot up school's. I played GTA when I was 14, and i didn't go around in the street shooting people. I played Gears of War when I was 15, and i didn't run around with chainsaws cutting people up! If what this man says is true I should be the most violent person on the damn planet. I am now 18, and as I sit and watch this stuff with my friends. We laugh at how stupid this " research " is, and the fact that parents that are to scared of what there own children's choices might be from something as simple as playing a game fall for this absolute crap. Tell me, were your parents one of the stupid people who thought pokemon was a danger because of the "devils work" it held. Because " It taught kids to become pokemon masters. People who channel magic through monsters and cards." Please, that was bull *&^^ then and the same goes for this " research".
ThePr0digalS0n
i really enjoyed this video because adam sessler was so professorial instead of being a jerk and saying no ur wrong. I dont agree with what lee says but the way adam acting during this interview is why im studying English and communications studies to be a journalist in the video game industry!
sampsell243
This is pointless, kids will just have thiers parents go buy them like they always have...
JustTheBeginning
How you resisted punching this douch is beyond me Sessler.
TheFeedMack
at least give me a chance to prove my maturity with a test or something im 16 which is still considered a minor but im aloud to drive if this law passes i get to drive with someone 18 or over of course but not buy a vidogame but on the other hand im not able to buy m games anyway,like Yee is saying ,something yee doesnt realize is the internet and thats how kids get these games but i still would wish too receive a test on maturity to gain access to all games of age or not
theantigzus
i forgot to add that as a previous manager for Gamestop you would be surprised at the amount of parents that dont care about violent video games. We were required to tell every parent buying rated M sometimes even T games for their child not only the rating but the reasons why it was rated this, and that majority of the time the parents would just cut you off with an irritated look and just tell you they didnt care, they just wanted to shut their idiot kids up. So see its not the vidoe game industry that is the problem they do as much as they can to prevent the sale to minors its the parents.
BoydofZINJ
KIDS, Adults, fellow gamers. IF YOU DONT VOTE (and you are of age) then OTHER people get to enforce laws and put people into office that you dont like. If you do not like laws or politicians that place (non voteable laws) in place, vote them down. And ... for pity sake.... vote for people that support the interests that you have!
Arnold is just mad that all of his VIDEO GAMES were crummy! Afterall, a murdering cyborg is not outlawable in this bill, right?
Angelicsin87
Ha, cause beating peoples heads in with shovels in GTA is far more worse then watching it in a movie. Either way you're just watching a person beat someones head in, not actually doing it. The reality is just beating a button so an image can simulate a beating to another image. "Oh god, what is wrong with kids these days!?"
Socrates'sMind
Sorry but I just don't buy what Yee is trying to sell. I don't think you should pass a law without doing the proper research on it. It looks as if Yee didn't do his homework to me. I don't think he is looking at the far reaching consequences this will have. He is just to focused on the short term.
Jayson619
The Justice should ask Arnie; (if he's gonna come forward) and ask him this:
'HAVE YOU EVER THOUGHT ABOUT IT WHEN YOU PLAY AS A MURDERING CYBORG IN THE FIRST TERMINATOR FILM?'
'IT MAY BE A BAD INFLUENCE TO AWARD POINTS TO KIDS FOR KILLING COPS IN VIDEO-GAMES, BUT BEFORE THIS, IN THE FIRST TERMINATOR FILM, YOU ALREADY DONE THAT IN ONE SCENE AND KILLED OVER 18 POLICE OFFICERS; DON'T TELL ME YOU DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THAT!'
theantigzus
So i find it extremely stupid that right now this is going on in california, especially since on the ballot today we are voting on prop 19 to legalize Marijuana. Does this make sense to anyone? How are you fighting to put a ban video games and make the sales of video games to minors a felony, when if prop 19 passes it would make access to marijuana a lot more easy to everyone including under age children. Again as i posted previously i really dont see why violent video games are such a big deal, isnt the bigger issue with kids playing these games really the lazy parents that dont do their job as parents?
Angelicsin87
So why don't they just ask the ESRB to add "Ultra Violent" to their ratings. As if the ratings "Blood" and "Gore" weren't enough. The ESRB even has a "Intense Violence" rating. These ratings you won't find on a rated E game so WTF is the problem? Idiots...
E-Xane
Make it a crime to sell to minors today. Make it a crime for an adult to buy it for a child tomorrow. Make it illegal for a child to even play the game (as in, regulated as much as alcohol) on thursday. then boom. Saturday its illegal to play the game at all.
You know... preventing kids from playing violent videogames does not prevent violence in the world...
I recently was in a traffic accident that should have killed me. My truck hit a slick spot on the road, (literally, the road was slippery even under my shoes) then the truck hydroplaned, spun around,flipped into the air, slammed into a light post backwards, while air born, and came down on the roof of the vehicle, crushing a good portion of the cab. The engine was still running, through all this. and cars are known to explode if the engine is left running while capsized.
Can i say that a life time of playing games where quick responses and reaction time, ignoring in game scores, is the difference between life and death, had any effect in my surviving that accident? No i can not. Can i say that playing games where making use of what tools you have available to you, even if they dont look immediately useful, to survive, aided me in getting out? No, i cannot. .
But i did react immediately, first thing i did, as i felt the vehicle leave the road, was to relax my body completely, i knew i would hurt my self more if i tried to brace for the impact, then after the vehicle came to rest, i turned off the engine, then i located my shoe which had somehow came off my foot while i was bouncing around the cab (i believe my seat belt failed as i do not remember taking it off), i knew i would need it because broken glass was everywhere.
Then i found something to wrap my hands in and began to search for a sharp pointed object to shatter the windshield with. Due to the angle the vehicle was laying i had to break out one of the door windows and jump about 6 feet.. i didnt really stop to think about rather i would injure my self, i just knew i had to clear the vehicle.. At this point a couple had stopped and were running over. I told them in a slow flat tone "i know i am bleeding, i am in shock and cannot feel anything, i need you to look over my body slowly and see if i have any serious external injuries."
Can i say playing "violent" video games, or watching "violent" movies prepared me for a situation that may likely have killed me if i hadn't done alot of thinking on my feet? No... But I certainly didn't just pull it out of the aether either..
Displaying 81–100 of 110
41234566