X

Sessler's Soapbox: Video Games in the Supreme Court

Posted: May 4, 2010
Sessler's Soapbox: Video Games in the Supreme Court
http://www.g4tv.com/videos/45748/sesslers-soapbox-video-games-in-the-supreme-court/
http://images.g4tv.com/ImageDb3/234442_LGST/sesslers-5-4-10.jpg
Video_45748
Adam discusses the supreme court case where the justices will decide if video games are a protected form of free speech.

Comments are Closed

  • RockieOllie

    Oh no! No more Pokemon since they apparently support c-ckfighting. (why can't i say it...)

    Posted: May 5, 2010 2:41 PM
    RockieOllie
  • Jamdown

    I totally agree with what your saying Adam, but once kids put down the video games and start reading, then people are just going to start saying that it's the literature that is corupting children. people want to have to have something to blame for how others are acting. I mean, some times the things i do are just impulses and im not thinking, I know many people includeing my self that play violent video games and are only 15 or 16 years old and there not crazy people that go around thinking that they can go out and shoot someone and have it be ok. oh yea, i noticed something after watching your video, im alowd to go out and buy a book like the catcher and the rye or the Odyssey (which has sex violence and other contriversial scenes)and have it be ok, were if I go to the video game store im not allowd to buy call of duty...What!?!?!

    Posted: May 5, 2010 2:34 PM
    Jamdown
  • chaplain827

    Not to add to the noise but the idea that the Supreme Court is more "Right" leaning (which I think is debatable anyway) would mean that they want less government intervention. Sure there are Republicans who want to restrict all "sinful" things but the idea of conservatism is personal individual rights and LESS government not more. Your left leaning thoughts are actually pro government control whether it be in healthcare or redistribution of wealth.

    I'll abstain from leaving my thoughts on your absurd assumption that by allowing people to make judgement means they will naturally be racist and alienate a race.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 2:25 PM
    chaplain827
  • that_blk_guy

    @ Bigbie

    u are right on the money!!!!!

    we need that law in Florida

    Posted: May 5, 2010 2:19 PM
    that_blk_guy
  • learnedfist

    Why must politics constantly (and often gratuitously) be injected into G4's coverage of video games? I remember the good old days when X-Play was pretty damn funny; it was lighthearted and focused on *wait for it* gaming and gamer culture. Over the past few years, something has happened. It's almost as if Adam has begun to take himself a bit too seriously, and everything must be tied into his view of current events and politics. I used to be a big fan of Adam's when he stuck a little more closely to the topic of gaming, which (unlike law or politics) is his field of expertise. Now, I find him a bit like a cranky old uncle that ruins Thanksgiving by picking a political fight with Grandpa rather than just enjoying the turkey.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 2:14 PM
    learnedfist
  • magic1264

    You say that we shouldn't have completely free and open borders because of the possibility of a criminal element that would be allowed to move amongst that population, yet that is exactly what we have with our Cananadan crippled friends to the north. There are no such thing as minute men roaming the Canadian border, no worry of a "large Canadian" population taking over our country. Yet I'm sure there are druggies, rapists, and murderers born every day amongst the Canadian population.

    The criminal element will always exist, and different steps need to be taken to combat it, but in no way does it have anything to do with immigration policy.

    Additionally, the right to exist in this country and being a U.S. citizen are two completely different things. (Citizenship is like this catch-22, we see it as something that is coveted and must be earned, yet we will bestow it to anyone lucky enough to merely be born within our country's borders.) But that is besides the point, people who want to be here should be able to be here, and not have to go through the long and arduous green card application process, or the long and dangerous journey from the middle of nowhere.

    The decisions that influence the world around us are ours, and ours alone. Just because we have a model of government that that requires representation, doesn't mean the onus of making good decisions rests solely on that representation.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 1:54 PM
    magic1264
  • FuzzofPekinopolis

    To: Magic 1264

    Their is a right way to have people enter our country. If they must cross through the desert, climb mountains and ford rivers to get here then the system is broken. If that does not change then all hope is lost no matter what our opinions are. Even if we wanted too, we could never deport all the illegals from this country. So that is just a stupid idea that needs to be forgotten.

    You are fundamentally flawed if you think that our borders should be wide open with no restrictions to anyone. I wish that we all lived in a utopia but we don't and without law there is anarchy.

    Also I think that you would find allot more open minded people in the Southwestern states if every day when they woke up a couple dozen more illegals were not in there town.

    You said that it's not the politicians, but you also said that we need to find a way to make illegal immigrants legal. Who the heck do you think makes those decisions.

    I will go back to one more point then I am done with this topic.

    The United States of America with all it's power and might can not take on an open border policy where all who entered would be immediately granted U.S. citizenship. I know it is estimated that the amount of undocumented Latinos in this country right now is in the millions. How would we ever be able deal with this at the border and have all accounted for and documented. The tap never has to be shut off but eventually it would have to be slowed down.

    From what you are saying I gather. You think that we need open borders, free to come and go as you please, documentation does not matter, what type of people be them murderers, rapists, drug runners, terrorists, does not matter. Most of them would be average people but some of them would be bad but that's O.K. the less I know about my neighbor the better right?

    Posted: May 5, 2010 1:26 PM
    FuzzofPekinopolis
  • JUWI911

    Did anybody else notice how many times the person playing God of War 3 died???

    Posted: May 5, 2010 12:58 PM
    JUWI911
  • magic1264

    @ FuzzofPekinopolis

    The Arizona law isn't an example of we, the people, needing better representation in our government. I think politicians do a very good job at representing the interests of their constituency (at least the loudest). The law is a reflection of how a controlling interest of the population of Arizona, and other South Western states, and probably most of America, see immigrants coming from Mexico; and it isn't as good buddy friends. The discourse needs to change from how to keep "illegal immigrants" out of the country and to "what can we do to make illegal immigration legal?"

    Its many peoples issue that illegal immigrants are a problem because they are inherently breaking the law, but those very same people are against any sort of amnesty program, or just abolishing the terrible immigration laws altogether. And trust me, not all of those people are social/economic discipline smart, so what other motivation could they possibly have to want Mexicans out of our country?

    Agreeing to disagree is a policy I am normally against, but my goal here isn't to "win" any sort of argument, it is merely my goal to try to push an environment of disequilibrium, and hopefully people will begin to question exactly why they think the way they think about a law that is just so awfully constructed, and will only serve to cause discomfort (at the very least) amongst the proud, valuable Mexican population we have living in the United States.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 12:42 PM
    magic1264
  • Atavax

    a couple things i would like to address..

    one thing is Adam showed a little concern because the court is more right wing that it used to be... but these violent videogames are not being based in the Alabama's, Georgia's, ect. they're passed in the California's, the Chicago's, the Michigan's... it seems like if anything the right leaning court bodes good for videogame rights in this case... i doubt the gun loving right is going to disqualify violence from counting as speech...

    as for this Arizona thing... i admittedly dont know all the details. but my understanding is they're making it illegal not to have a form of identification on you in public and that police can ask to see it. and that this is to try to find illegal immigrants so that they can be deported. and that Adam's concern is its violation of the 4th amendment that protects against the unreasonable searches and seizures...

    i'm not sure i could see asking for ID as a search or seizure... you arent frisking the person, you are asking them to hand you their ID... and you are confiscating their ID, you are merely inspecting it.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 12:25 PM
    Atavax
  • magic1264

    @ Jmare

    1. Just because profiling is based on reasonable logic, one can't ignore the negative impacts massive policies that require the use of racial profiling have on the population upon it is targeted; the most prominent example, before this Arizona law, being rise in anti-muslim crimes commited post 9-11.

    2. You got that backwards, trying to close our borders are the greatest human rights violations I can think of. It is the basic principle of being a human being to exist wherever the hell I please, as long as I'm not infringing on the rights of any other human being.

    Additionally, you think that the people who actually make the dangerous decision to come to the United States wouldn't rather just stay at with their friends, family, community in Mexico? jobs/wages/opportunities just don't materialize because you work really hard; the fact of the matter is that Mexico, as well as a plethora of other south of the border countries, need several acts of god in order to even begin to approach the quality of life one can earn by having a low-class job in America.

    They come here because they NEED to come here, they have no other choice. Even if they did have the choice, it still shouldn't be our policy to try to forcibly remove them. It should be our policy to treat them as we would any other person living in the United States.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 12:24 PM
    magic1264
  • FuzzofPekinopolis

    And that is why I do not agree with it. I never said that i did. You must then realize that we need good immigration reform. The system doesn't work the way it is right now obviously. Profiling of any kind will not get us anywhere. The Federal Government is supposed to be responsible for the borders with other countries but they are not doing their job.

    I guess we will have to agree to disagree on whether people crossing the border of another sovereign country without proper documentation is illegal/legal. You already know where I stand.

    I do not live in the Southwestern states so I can only make judgments based on information that I can find. But if it is as bad as you claim and the people are crossing our borders because of fear or the need to eat or anything else. Then why has there been no cry from the International Community for relief aid or charities to contribute to the cause.

    Third world countries in Africa and Eurasia who have had mass migrations in the recent past and have dealt with it better than us. The Government is to blame, we need better politicians.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 11:57 AM
    FuzzofPekinopolis
  • kapassikey

    i hope Pheonix Wright is the defence in this case. it'd be so fitting

    Posted: May 5, 2010 11:53 AM
  • jmare

    I've come to realize some things in this debate about Arizona:

    1. People don't realize that profiling works and it is called racial profiling by people who don't like the facts profiling is based on. For example, if you were to look for an illegal alien in a Southwestern state, would you look for a white guy, a black guy, or a Latino guy? You would look for the Latino guy because 99 times out of 100, that is who you are looking for. Now what if you were looking for a terrorist? Would you look for a Christian, a Buddhist, or a Muslim? You would look for a Muslim because 99 times out of 100, that's who you're looking for. What if you were looking for a serial killer? Would you look for a white man, a black man, or a woman? You'd look for a white man because statistically they are the ones who are serial killers.

    Now there are exceptions to every rule but, in general, the rules are rules for a reason.

    And 2:

    The United States allowing an open flow of illegal aliens into this country is the greatest human rights violation I can think of. As it stands now, these people flee horrible conditions in order to undertake a dangerous journey, that many die during the course of, in order to be exploited as cheap labor in a country that does not truly want them here. All this does is continue a viscous cycle of violence and exploitation both here and the countries of origin.

    Now suppose that America closed it's borders and vigorously deported those that entered illegally. With no other option, those people who once would have fled their home countries, would be forced to enact change in their own countries thereby increasing the quality of life for themselves in their own country.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 11:51 AM
    jmare
  • magic1264

    You're right, I did profile you there, and it must suck doesn't it? I do apologize for it, but try to remember that feeling as it applies to someone who gets pulled over just for being of a non-white decent, asked to provide proof that they are legal here, and if they don't, they get hauled off to jail, regardless if they are a legal citizen or not.

    But no, it was not my intent to make you out like a KKK skin head racist, it was merely my intent to point out that you are just a ill-informed person. When you consider illegal immigrants as merely trespassers and law breakers, it suggests that something crucial is missing from your world view, something that will allow you to take in consideration the human costs of passing RIDICULOUSLY dumb legislation like Arizona Bill 1070.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 11:08 AM
    magic1264
  • FuzzofPekinopolis

    Magic 1264

    Go screw yourself!!!!!

    You are trying to make me look like an uptight racist KKK flag burning son of a bitch and I am having no part of it.

    My Great Aunt is African American, my Second Cousins who I grew up with are Philippino American. I don't have a racist bone in my body.

    I believe your profiling me as a white anglo dark skin hating racist.

    You would be wrong and can go screw yourself you white hater. Racism works both ways.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 10:59 AM
    FuzzofPekinopolis
  • magic1264

    And what exactly are the negative economic implications? "Drain" of social institutions? The human cost of poverty? Or is it just that they drop property values by making your quaint, middle of nowhere town a little less scenic because, everyday, some "brown" people have to walk miles upon miles to work? It doesn't matter where these people exist, its the fact they exist. I mean, it is almost one of the founding principles of our country, that if your old home can't deal with you, or you can't deal with your old home, America is the place to be.

    It should be our responsibility, and our privilege, as people, let alone Americans, to take in anyone seeking our help and do everything in our power to see to it that they get that help.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 10:45 AM
    magic1264
  • jhoe45

    Should 5 year olds play gears of war. I would argue no. MY evidence: I saw a kid on the playground (around 8) trying to pretend curb stomp another kid. Children are impressionable. Until you are in your mid20's you are still very impressionable. I think making parents buy the game until their kids are 18 is just fine.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 10:40 AM
    jhoe45
  • BlueCrow24

    The possible rulings on the supreme court worry me. I feel like our representative democracy only represents so long as you're an aging white religious person with no interests outside of work. Gamers have absolutely no representation anywhere in any of the branches of the U.S. government, the most we can hope for is that the disconnect from our leaders, especially those in the judiciary branch, isn't so great that they'll pass rulings or legislation undermining our basic freedoms. If the passing of the infamous law in Arizona is any hint, then I'd say worry. Or move to Canada.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 10:28 AM
    BlueCrow24
  • FuzzofPekinopolis

    I find it so hard to believe that some people in this country are so stupid they cannot see what the implications of unrestricted borders and broken immigration laws will do to our country.

    Posted: May 5, 2010 10:05 AM
    FuzzofPekinopolis
AdChoices