Sign on Options
Theme:
To Dark

Games remain under fire in '06

  • By Curt Feldman, GameSpot
  • Posted Jan 6, 2006 5:50 pm PT

Rumblings in Missouri and Utah indicate government officials remain intent on regulating game sales to minors.

News blog GamePolitics.com is reporting that legislators from two states this week intend to initiate efforts to regulate the sale of certain video games to minors.

In Missouri, General Assembly House Minority Leader Jeff Harris (D-Columbia) says one of his top priorities for the year will be to introduce legislation that would prohibit the sale of "violent" or "explicit" video games to minors. And in Utah, US Representative Jim Matheson says he will work to make it a federal crime for a retailer to sell a mature- or adult-rated game to underage children.

"You know darn well" that in most cases "the 13-year-old is not being carded when he buys Grand Theft Auto 2," Matheson told the Deseret Morning News, a suburban Salt Lake City newspaper. It has been over five years since any GTA2 iteration has been released, but the Congressman may have been referring to the Grand Theft Auto series at large.

Matheson said a bill has been drafted by his office but not yet introduced into Congress. He added he will use the Entertainment Software Rating Board's current ratings as an enforcement guide. Matheson's office told the paper that he had yet to decide what penalties would be imposed for retailers who failed to check buyers' IDs.

In Missouri, the agenda of Harris appeared even less fleshed out. According to the Associated Press, the game-related legislation was one of numerous issues on the official's action plan for 2006, including those relating to natural disasters, sex offenders, and lobbyist disclosures.

While many government officials have attempted to impose regulations that would penalize the sale of adult-themed or violent games to minors, none of their measures have been fully imposed.

Last month, an Illinois law that attempted to define content and ratings for video games was struck down by US District Judge Matthew F. Kennelly. The federal judge said that two game laws, the Violent Video Games Law and the Sexually Explicit Video Games Law, were both unconstitutional.

154 Comments

  • nohabs

    Posted Jan 10, 2006 9:57 am GMT

    feel good legislation really sucks

  • thornpaw

    Posted Jan 10, 2006 9:12 am GMT

    The politians should just stay out of it. The parents need to get off their fat ***es and parent instead of expencing the government to do it.

  • cloudstrife75

    Posted Jan 10, 2006 8:03 am GMT

    amen brotha lol

  • underkillerjmk

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 8:12 pm GMT

    i 99.9% agree wit foxmcleod 64, but i dont think that violence in games is all that bad if the kid knows right from wrong he should be ok. having saifd that 90% of my games r well....not for my age group and yet im fine and a honor student actually

  • foxmcleod64

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 12:59 pm GMT

    This issue is an indication that the video game industry is moving more into the mainstream society. It is joining the ranks of other mediums such as motion pictures, print, and music. I find it to be an interesting topic of discussion and open to debate. All opinions and personal view points should be welcomed and encouraged even if those said beliefs are not congruent with our own.

    I am of the opinion that certain games may not be appropriate for our younger gamers, just as certain movies or songs are not intended for all audiences; howerever, I also believe that this is entirely a social issue and should not be legislated by our government. There are more pressing issues of state that require our elected offical's attention. Lawmakers should focus their attention on other solutions for crime prevention until there is indisputable proof of children being influenced by inappropriate material found in their chosen platform of entertainment.

    Responsibility of a child's influences and behaviors rest with said child's parents/guardians. They must take an active role in their lives and treat video games just as they treat TV shows or songs. If a parent allows their children to view Quentin Tarantino movies, then that is their choice and responsibility, but it is also the responsibility of the parent to know if this is having an impact on his/her child's social development.

  • blackmage0_15

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 12:51 pm GMT

    Everyone should move to Canada. I have no worries of this legislative kickback. Heck, our nation's leader just legalized pot. If anything, our country is going the opposite way. We will become the Amsterdam of America.

  • LuNcHbOx313

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 12:24 pm GMT

    yeah seriously stop trying already, If it hasnt worked yet its not going to.

  • fabulousbm13

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 11:19 am GMT

    they should let it go already. its complete bs

  • Cheshie

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 11:13 am GMT

    GTA 2? It's pathetic how these politicians have no idea what they're even talking about.

  • kaymax333

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    I was a little scared about the gov. thinking that they would be more harsh on the violent games but Im not a minor so Im okay if the gov. ID's kids I still have access to any game I want. But how its going to affect the game industry that I cannot say.

  • T_Magdi

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    C'mon, what about the cute games such as Alien Hominid? What? Alien hominid Includes Blood and Gore? I knew that! I knew that!

  • lilweightlifter

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    I'm right with AA7 on this one.

  • jonfigs

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    When was the last time someone was card when buying a movie??? I'm just wondering. Let them place restrictions on the games like movies, but from what I'm getting out of all this, it seems like they want to demonize the games and hurt the industry. This isn't just about the kids, it's about morality which should not be legislated.

  • wolfazor

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    they don't seem to understand that there are so many againgst them that we the gamers are no longer a minority and we will stick together...

  • Seraphim_24

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    And my brother is trying to convince me that if I paid more attention to Utah politics I'd side with the Democrats... Jim Matheson, Democrat... I voted for the other guy... Hmmm... Nope, I still side with the Republicans who have been far less active in trying to take away my personal choice in entertainment. And by the way, I live in Utah, and I make Gamestop and Game Peddler my hang out spots at the COttonwood Mall. BOTH retailers ALWAYS card for M-Rated games, as does Wal-Mart, Target, and Best Buy. I have been carded at all of these stores, and have seen 13 year olds told to bring a parent if they want the game, so Matheoson (like so many other liberals in congress) clearly doesn't know what he's talking about. Rest assured, this measure will pass in overly paranoid conservative Utah, (ironic since this is a liberal agenda) but will be defeated in court.

  • JestahFurry

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    Hmm...games are just types of movies? Unless I'm mistaken, movies are already regulated by age-restrictions. Why would it not make sense to take the same actions with games? "Interactive" would imply that they even have more of an impact than movies, which would suggest that perhaps these sales should be even more regulated than those of movie tickets? At least, it makes sense I would think.

  • chrisdojo

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    get rid of GTA (and gta clones)...... then go away.

  • cloudstrife75

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    just to clear a other issue... yes all the blood and gore in games is nesscessary... why? because it suits the environment that it is being used in. games for kids dont have it... it horror games and action games that have them... and movies r in no way any different. u see a horror movie... what do u expect? gore, blood, scaryness. what do u expect in a horror game? scary zombies with no detail to hide the "gore" ... oh wait! replace the zombies with killer bunnies! oh yes that'll work... pfff please! people need to realise that games are a type of movie.... an interactive movie...

  • cloudstrife75

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    why are politicians trying to play the parent role in all of this? do they think that current parents aren't sane enough to know whats good for their kids and what isnt? i have been on a game system since i was 3... 3!!!!! im 19 now and none of the games i have played have changed me for the worse and i have played truck loads of games... i have played the GTA when it first came out... i was young... i played resident evil when it first came out... and what r the effects? 0 criminal record, graduated high school with honours, basketball championship to my name and 2 hockey all-star games. oh and what else? studying high-tech engineering...wow violent games made me violent and wanting to run ppl over with my car and ruining other lives other then my own... pffff please! any kid that uses games as an excuse to get out of something they have done is, like DryvBy clearly stated : "...a weak-minded loser". politicians need to let parents govern their kids and let kids experience what is out there...enough said.

  • JestahFurry

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    They're not censoring anything at all. Unless you happen to be under the appropriate age, and in that regard I say it's good. The only people that seem to be complaining are the minors. Personally, I agree and think that children (yes, under 18 = child) Don't need to be playing explicity violent or sexual video games. The rating system's already in place. As far as the people saying the parents need to do a better job of making sure their kid doesn't play these games, well that's pretty much impossible. If a kid wants to, he/she will. It isn't that hard to hide a game. Lastly...is all that blood and gore really necessary? Wouldn't Halo be just as much fun without the blood spots all over? Of course, GTA would be just as violent with or without blood, and shouldn't be a game that anybody plays for enjoyment. Anyway, there you have it. Kids need to stop getting everything they want just because mommy and daddy want to make them happy, yes. But mommy and daddy could use some help in today's world.

  • Stephen361984

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    I thought it was life and let die. By that I mean games live on and their crusade against them dies

  • AceRampage

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    Why can't they just live and let live...

  • grifter_tm

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    The damn thing won't work and the bill is a complete waste of time and money. You try keeping kids from buying games, they'll just add it to their Christmas list. Santa's old enough to buy one, right? If Christmas doesn't work, they can get them on their birthdays. Each kid probably has at least one cool uncle who can't say no. Besides, how many people in the country can honestly claim that they weren't able to touch alcohol, cigarettes and porn before they turned 18?

    These days, the number of idiotic political nuts seem to be growing exponentially. Kinda like roaches.

  • sugreev2001

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    If this resolution gets passed in congress,then we should sign a petiton to ban soaps like Desperate Housewives etc.

  • YukoAsho

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 5:50 am GMT

    Cobb - Still, no such penalties exist for DVD sales. Since the arcade scene is pretty much dead, the only comparison one can make is to DVD sales. Again, it's just iditotic politicians trying to make a special standard for a medium they don't understand.

  • Yazu13

    Posted Jan 9, 2006 10:53 am GMT

    I hate it when politicians become tooo overzealous when it comes to videogame violence! Just let the parents decide what is right for their kid!

  • CobbMike

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:59 pm GMT

    I am forced to agree with davahsa. The congressman's and the State legislator's proposed bills aren't looking to create decency standards, or even to create fewer 'Mature' rated games. They are looking to create penalties for selling games rated 'Mature' to minors. In the case of the Congressman's comments, yeah, the 13 year old's parents were probably there at the time of purchase, but you need to consider who the cashier took the money from. And the congressman was probably not citing an accurate example; he was probably using a hyperbole to emphasize what he (and others in the nation) see as a serious problem. The proposed legislation is no different than movie theaters refusing to sell tickets for R rated movies to underage persons (which, btw, the theaters CAN get in trouble for, according to fed. law. I know; I used to work at a theater b4 it closed).

  • YukoAsho

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:54 pm GMT

    Unleaded - That's the point that bothers ME with these laws. In the United States, there is no regulation preventing the sale of R-rated DVDs or VHS tapes to minors. Indeed, movies have the option of being released unrated in this country, something that routinely happens here (both unrated versions of rated movies and straight to video films). However, politicians seem to believe that video games are somehow in need of special restrictions. I'm sorry, that's something I could never accept. As long as these laws single out video games, I'll never support them, and as long as the Democrats (who are in Hollywood's pocket) keep bringing it up, they'll always single out video games.

  • Raven7Claw

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:51 pm GMT

    Yeeeaahhhh... thats just gonna get blocked all the others. Get the hint people and think of something usefull for a change.

  • Shaigus

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:36 pm GMT

    I think making it ilegal to sell an M-rated game to people under 17 is fine, anything more than that maybe not so much, but still

  • king_kong27

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:10 pm GMT

    the goverment is going to loose money

  • Shadow_Spinner

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 7:24 pm GMT

    I dunno......But still has any 13 year old shot someone and said to the police and press "Grand Theft Auto made me do it." I mean we know how to distinguish a game and real life! Those idiots must think we're stupid.

  • daqua_99

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 6:22 pm GMT

    Ummmmm, really, what difference would it make if the restrictions were in place?

  • Fuuuuureakkkk

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 5:48 pm GMT

    One: GTA 2, yeah sure man and I punched Jesus

    Two: Just shut the ____ up

    Three: It is GTA: Democrats need Blo_____ NOW

    Four: not really more like 2 years *cough crap gba game cough*

    Five: Ya know people we need to club these people

    Six: Democrats are like roaches: once ya get them THEY NEVER GO AWAY

  • Kfoss

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 5:40 pm GMT

    HA HA yea you gotta love UTAH for trying this.....and i wonder why the 13 year old is not being carded..it wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that there parents are present ..and paying the $53 NAWWW its cause they can teleport them selves!!! they have magical powers!!! and bank accounts that can support gaming!! and parents who obviously are SOOO stupid that they wouldn’t notice GTA getting played on the television... BHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

    what a buch of hypocrites! .... yea we want to restrict game sales because every other state has tried and failed...but its OK to commit polygamy and ect. here in the good old Utah Hills!!... and don’t mind the fact that these actions are federally illegal and investigated by the FBI often ...because video games are more damaging!..*throws self off cliff* when will the insanity ever end!!!!!

  • Kfoss

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 5:38 pm GMT

    HA HA yea you gotta love UTAH for trying this.....and i wonder why the 13 year old is not being carded..it wouldn’t have anything to do with the fact that there parents are present ..and paying the $53 NAWWW its cause they can teleport them selves!!! they have magical powers!!! and bank accounts that can support gaming!! and parents who obviously are SOOO stupid that they wouldn’t notice GTA getting played on the television... BHA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

    what a buch of hypocrites! .... yea we want to restrict game sales because every other state has tried and failed...but its OK to commit polygamy and ect. here in the good old Utah Hills!!... and don’t mind the fact that these actions are federally illegal and investigated by the FBI often ...because video games are more damaging!..*throws self off cliff* when will the insanity ever EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEENNNNNNNNNDDDDDD!!!!!

  • DryvBy

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 5:38 pm GMT

    They should come out with a game where you burn politicians and lawyers alive. That'll show 'em

  • DryvBy

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 5:36 pm GMT

    It's not legal to tell someone what they can and cannot have. They need to step into banning movies before video games. I've never seen a person harmed in the making of a video game!! I've been playing games since Wolfenstein 3D first came out and I'm a normal, hard working jerk from Texas. I haven't killed anyone yet. My kids are gonna play what they want no matter how violent. If you're kid is a weak-minded loser who gets made fun of at school, don't let THAT kid play because he's messed up more from the abuse of school than the abuse of make believe stealing cars.

    Point is, kids are gonna kill if they really want to and a video game didn't help make that decision.

  • Unleaded_Fuel

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 4:45 pm GMT

    I guess most of you didn't read the article because it makes sense. Why should minors have access to R18+ or M15+ games when they can't get access to movies that have the same rating, such as Reservoir Dogs and similar movies without a parent/other person buying it for them. What makes games so different in terms of content? Because it is that video games look like a 'fantasy' world or anything, they still represent a form of violence that should be controlled in one way or another, otherwise the ratings don't mean ____ at all.

  • YukoAsho

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 3:54 pm GMT

    Meh, I don't know why anyone's getting worked up. Just watch as the judicial precedent piles up in huge stacks and the gaming industry grows its lobby. In 10 years, the game industry will be bribing politicians the way Hollywood does. And the reason pornography is regulated is because it is obscene, obscenity defined as being patently offensive, appealing SOLELY to purient interests, and possessing no social redeeming value, meaning that never conveys messages.

  • ZabuzaR

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 3:09 pm GMT

    This is very stupid at least US District Judge Matthew F. Kennelly stated that it is
    unconstitutional. The government are making a big deal over nothing! Start putting your minds to more serious issues like crime and such! Even if it does pass in every state its not going to prevent minors to get thier hands on it! I mean I see 13 year old people who smoke Pot!

  • spr4yp4int

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:09 pm GMT

    so freaking lost.
    Really... If a parent doesn't want his/her kid playing GTA, it is their own responsibility, just like with movies.

  • NaturalBornGamR

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:09 pm GMT

    GTA 2 and the GTA 2 london add on are very deep threats to our children and should be stopped immediatley! FOR SHAME! what morons!... they don't even know about the games they are speaking of!

  • djangorawks

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:09 pm GMT

    They want to ban 'sexually explicit' games?
    Theres really only 2 games that i can think of that would be banned
    : GTA, and
    that one bmx game.
    So what the f*** is the big deal, you
    d*** politicians

  • SuCuBuS_04

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:09 pm GMT

    I live in the UK so i wouldn't no how truely frustratin it must b 4 ppl in the US, but i thing the politiceans who want 2 put this bill thru, shld 1st show the US public the evidence they have to support the claim that video games make ppl 'evil', plus if little kids r buyin these games, i blame the irresponsible parents 4 not stoppin the child get the 'evil' copy of GTA san andreas, which may contain an 'evil' sex scene, but running down innocent pedestreans is ok in the states apparently.

  • Swords_Rose_86

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:09 pm GMT

    Your welcome, Gaara79. I thought it was a good article too.

    Something to point out, everybody saying that if selling M-Rated games to minors is unconstitutional, than so is selling them alcohol, cigarettes, and porn, wrap your minds around this:

    Cigarettes and Alcohol can't convey messages. They're just products, you use them, and that's it. No message. Videogames can convey a message..not all of them do, but they can, and that's what puts them under the umbrella of the 1st Ammendment.

    I'll concede on the issue of pornography, though. Oh, and before anybody says anything along the lines of "you're just some twelve year old GTA fan" I'd like to point out that the last two letters on my s/n happen to name my birthyear.

  • microsoft4life

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:09 pm GMT

    "You know darn well" that in most cases "the 13-year-old is not being carded when he buys Grand Theft Auto 2," that just shows you how ignorant they are to video games, get the game right next time.

  • XENOmorph00010

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:09 pm GMT

    Who cars what GTA is rated, next thing you know they're going to ban racing games and their inspire gamers to be "illegal drivers".

  • gameplayer2105

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:09 pm GMT

    wasnt GTA2 rated T(for playstation)???? these people need to check their sources

  • gameplayer2105

    Posted Jan 8, 2006 8:09 pm GMT

    [This message was deleted at the request of the original poster]

Subscribe to GameSpot's YouTube Channel

Hot Stories

Newsmakers

Featured Stories

Submit News

Got tips? Send them in!