A bill that will most likely be found unconstitutional just passed the Illinois Senate:
The Illinois Senate voted overwhelmingly Thursday to approve a revamped version of Gov. Rod Blagojevich’s plan to ban the sale of violent and sexually explicit video games to minors.
But one lawmaker said the governor’s pet project actually could cost the state money.
The Senate approved the measure 52-5, and now a few changes made on the floor will need to be approved in the House before the bill goes to the governor’s desk.
Under Blagojevich’s plan, businesses and clerks caught selling violent or sexually explicit games to a person younger than 18 would be charged with a petty offense and fined $1,000. Retailers would be required to affix stickers labeled “18” to games depicting “dismemberment, decapitation, disfigurement, maiming, mutilation of body parts or rape.”
The industry’s Entertainment Software Ratings Board already labels games as A for adult, M for mature, T for teen and E for everyone, but those ratings aren’t legally binding. Under this bill, retailers would put the mandated stickers on games rated A or M that fall under the bill’s definition of violence.
Other than the rape, the dismemberment, maiming, mutilation and other stuff pretty accurately describes almost every video game I have bought in the past couple of years.
My gut instinct is to oppose this, but, this does not seem terribly onerous. Discuss.
*** Update ***
For whatever reason, the dismemberment/maiming bit reminded me of one of the best quotes in movie history. From Blazing Saddles:
Hedley Lamarr: Qualifications?
Applicant: Rape, murder, arson, and rape.
Hedley Lamarr: You said rape twice.
Applicant: I like rape.
RepubAnon
It does seem a somewhat vague standard as to whether or not a “T” game gets stickered or not. Then, too, what about the various online games at various Flash sites? Some of these involve stick figures getting into bar fights and selling cocaine. Are online sites offering free play subject to these same laws?
RepubAnon
OOPS- sorry about the double post, my web browser froze.
Kimmitt
I’m in the same place as you — this isn’t good law, but it seems pretty trivial.
Justin Faulkner
Banning the sale of violent video games *to minors* is pretty innocuous, but I would wager that more often than not it’s those kids’ parents (having money, of course) who actually purchase the game. I’m all for the Tipper Gore approach–parental information to empower decision-making–but I doubt this will make any huge difference.
On a side note, I’ve found that many of the culture war crowd, who advocate *outright* censorship (of TV, movies, games, etc) are often among the most hungry consumers of that material. These parents complain about violence in video games but then go right out and buy Grand Theft Auto for their kids! In other words, they can’t say no to their kids, so they want the government to say no for them. Take some freaking responsibility, I say!
Justin Faulkner
I want to clarify, just in case someone objects, that I know this sort of thing is not analogous to the “Tipper Gore approach.” I was just saying that I think that is a good way to go about protecting kids: providing tools that parents (legally in charge of their children’s safety and development) can make informed decisions.
Of course, the parents have to be willing to *make* those decisions.
wild bird
And chicago is run by that jerk faced mayor RICHARD DAILY who tried to sue the firearms companies to line his pockets and got his butt kicked too bad for the mayor of the windy city and he is the souce of all that wind mostly HAT AIR
AWJ
Contrary to what your teachers at Bible college may have taught you, punctuation isn’t a liberal plot against America. Really.