Violence in Video Games :Debate:

Fallen · 10-27-2005, 05:25 AM

Thats right, I hope this to be a very serious topic for, I think this is a very serious subject.

I had finished watching a special report on G4TV on this subject. It had showed what many of done to try and stop from teenagers/kids from obtaining video games that are clearly restricted to them. (i.e. Mature 17+ Violence). It showed the people against video games opinions and those who just think its non-sense to blame it all on video games.

Sometime in either 1999 or 2000, there were two students who had shot up their high-school. Up to 30+ students/teachers were either wounded or killed. Many had accused this incident on the violent game known as "Doom". But which they fail to realize is that yes I'm sure it did have a small part in their wrong-doing, but they were also very alienated in their school. (i.e. Emo's/Goths/Nerds).

One incident dealing with a young boy who had stole a gun from a police officer, and then shot him and another officer. When brought to court the young boy had clearly stated "Life is a video game... You have to die sometime." And then people out and, thats right, blame video games. I believe in this incident, at such a young age video games can influence a human's personality. But you also have to wonder, where was the parent? Video games nowaday cost up to $50, I doubt little Billy saved up enough lunch money to buy it. Parents are clearly going out and buying these video games for them, and when something goes wrong they blame video games. Many think that there should be more strict process when buying video games, but seeing how the video game industry is so large and there are many copies of different games that they can't just slap another sticker explaining violence to all of them.

Which also brings me to the next topic, why are only people targetting video games? Movies, T.V., Literature, etc.. All of these also have influences on people. A man and a women were discussing video games, and literature. And the man had said "Books are just the same, I mean should it be right for a young boy to just go up and buy American Psycho, which contains very descriptive and detailed nudity and the violence of which took place." And the woman had just responded "Yes".

Yees, one of those who are against video games, had also. I have to admit a very compelling argument about the difference of video games and movies/literature. One had asked and he responded that "In video games you have to press a button to destory/maim/kill an individual." Which I believe is what makes video games more influencial <(sp?) then literatures/movies.

I am kinda at a fair balance when dealing with the topic that whether or not we should include movies/literature in with the violence in video games. But as for video games being the main reason for people shooting up people in their school, its just ridiculous.

What are your views?

Belphegor · 10-27-2005, 05:31 AM

My views stand with one basic point.

No matter what influence, IE Video Games, Alcohol, or Drugs, you dont just do something. That thought must already be in your head, be it the deepest darkest thought, that you dont even realize you have consciously(spelling). But it is in your head, everything else in the world is just influences, but they are not for blame, as they are just a minute agent in it.

Bilago · 10-27-2005, 05:34 AM

Quote:

I doubt little Billy saved up enough lunch money to buy it

why did you have to involve me in this :-p

but seriously at a young age kids shouldnt play violent video games (like starcraft :-p) but after the years of high influential learning, it shouldnt be a problem.

JLTucker · 10-27-2005, 06:01 AM

Violent video games causing these instances is completely utter bullsh*t. I play violent video games all of the time. I'm not going to kill anyone, though I sometimes fantasize about what it would be like to kill zombies and shoot imps. Blaming video games for the violent actions that one makes is a lame excuse for said action. I also disagree that alienation from fellow students at school caused this violent behavior. I was alienated and made fun of throughout my years in school. It all stopped my junior year in high school, where I met some good people. Alienation and being an outcast is yet another excuse. The parents were partly responsible for the Columbine shootout. The parents did not keep tabs on where their children were. It is obvious that the parents didn't give a rat's ass what their kids did.

ComradeSlavic · 10-27-2005, 06:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fallen

Which also brings me to the next topic, why are only people targetting video games? Movies, T.V., Literature, etc.. All of these also have influences on people. A man and a women were discussing video games, and literature. And the man had said "Books are just the same, I mean should it be right for a young boy to just go up and buy American Psycho, which contains very descriptive and detailed nudity and the violence of which took place." And the woman had just responded "Yes".

While you bring up a good point, you have to realize that somebody or something has to be the scapegoat. Nobody wants to take responcibility personally so they just blame it on something large, in this case a video game/company. Instead of facing the real problem, which would be difficult, they just try to spin it into more bull**** about how "We have a violent society." What they fail to realize is that we have always had a violent society as a species, and people will always murder and be murdered, the real solution would be raising children with good morals and ideas, hoping that they will make the right decisions; but that is too difficult for most people now.

Ikji · 10-27-2005, 06:39 AM

What I see in America today is the dumbing down of death to where if it is even showed, it is not highlighed much, we sort of pass over it. Even in parts of our society that do show it intensely, it does not make much of a difference, video games would be the object where violence is very brutal. These violent acts will not really influence the person as a whole since they have been exposed to death throughout their life through the passing over of it to the high exposure of it.
Even while video games show graphic material they still do not really make death as a great event to behold and look at. The video game industry is just making what they perceive our society wants. They see that death is all over, they increase the gore in it for kids to make it stand out from the common and market it.
The video games show how we truely feel and exhibit our wants and needs. This is why the industry is booming, they have found something that can captivate us, and never get boring. Death has been with us since the dawn of man, in the form of hunting.
There is violence in our past and our present, to say that just one part of our society causes violence in us is absurd. If it is video games, then it is whole society. While many claim that brutal actions are undertaken by the direct influence of video games, there are not many cases to support this. There are just isolated incidents where fragmented families or abused kids (emotionally, physically; at school or home) are susceptible to our common nature, violence.

Sorry if this isn't very coherrent, I'm tired; I'll try to correct my mistakes tomorrow when I get home from school.

10-27-2005, 07:43 AM

[Support Team]
We should blame only on games.

Can anyone remember how many punches or kicks Jackie Chan have given to the bad guys in the movies? Definately nobody. How many times must you stab someone in order to kill him in CS? I think at least a quater of you guys know!

What if Jackie Chan was in a form of a really poplular internet game? I'm sure more then half of us will know the 'correct' place to punch, and the number of kicks it takes to knock out somebody. The difference between games and other medias is that games make you feel involved, while movies/literature only makes you feel like a coach potato.

THE_KID mentioned it's about a person's bad attitude and thoughts. However, Violent games are the main cause for their thoughts. For example, Half Life's crow bar attack and GTA's car stealing moves can directly tell an innocent small kid right into his face "You can do this too!"

Nubium argues that Parents are to be blammed. Why should they be blammed when they provide shelter , education and love for their children? If parents have control over your entire childhood, knowing your games, friends, hidden porn CDs, imagine what your life will be like? Its also not possible to do so when they have to work for their family. Hence, a child faces games at home, and violent faces inspired them to perform violent acts. There are many counter-games such as "freddy fish" (educational). However, if I'm age 8, i'll rather play CS and throw away the freddy fish.

Ikji bring out a "corrupted society" point of view. This I completely disagree. If there are murders outside, it doesnt mean we're murders too. Once again, if we're acting like murders in a game, we will keep thinking of better ways to kill a person from time to time. Violent murder games can make someone think, make someone do, and kept someone entertained after each murder. Which criminal can offer a much better influence?

Some 'simple' influence : Ninja cosplay, Ryu/Ken's fireball action, counter strike's bomb throwing. If 'simple' influence exists, its logical that 'deep' influence exist as well. You're only dressing like a ninja? I've already killed my teacher.

Violent games are to be blammed.

Orchidomegaly · 10-27-2005, 08:38 AM

I think that we are over generalizing this. Violent video games do contribute to violent behavior, but not every body is as impressionable as the next. For instance i have two younger brothers. One will become very aggressive right after playing a violent video game, while the other is very non-violent no matter what.

As the years went by i've seen my impressionable brother become less and less affected by video games. I must agree that age does have a drastic affect on how video games imfluence people.

Looking toward the future when one day I might have kids (yes a scary thought!) I already know that i want my kids to be able to enjoy video games, but i would never what them to influence them in any way. However, telling kids that they aren't allowed to do something makes that thing seem glorified or even more desirable then it really is.

However! since the law has to be the same for all people, i think that violent video games shouldn't be sold to young teens.

EyeOfFire · 10-27-2005, 08:41 AM

I find it interesting that there are only the most rare cases reported. Then games are immediately blamed. Put it this way - would anybody like to consider the population that plays violent games and DOESN'T do crazy **** like that? Try about 50% of the teenagers in the western world. The other 49.9% don't play games at all.

If people do things like this, violent games CANNOT be blamed because there is so much evidence that they aren't responsible. Chances are that in the very rare cases, the children have serious mental or ethical disabilities to begin with. In that case, they should not be playing violent games or doing anything that might influence them in a detrimental manner. It is therefore their parents' or guardians' fault for allowing them to play violent games when they would have such disabilities.

People are not psycopathic as a result of violent games, they are psycopathic because mummy winked at the postman. I will admit that violent games can be a detrimental influence on those with severe ethical problems, but so can going to the shops and seeing some adult get in a fight with the store owner. Violent games are a bad influence - but only on the very very few who don't know any better as a result of disability. And in that case, there are a million different things that can influence them badly as well.

Fallen · 10-27-2005, 08:40 PM

I think its ridiculous when a kid shoots up a school, and he just happens to play video games (Like millions of others). So therefore they blame the video games. I mean what 10+ yr, has not heard or atleast played Doom, GTA, or any other killing game?

Quote:

While you bring up a good point, you have to realize that somebody or something has to be the scapegoat.

Indeed. And since video games were also violent back in the 90's, they figured. Oh he played Doom, thats where he got the idea. [sarcasm]Gosh, those creators/designers are mother****ers lets sue them.[/sarcasm] When in fact Doom takes place in a fantasy world with demons, not some hick town high school. Yeah, they could of learned how to use guns by playing it but DID NOT learn how to contruct/build them by playing this game. (Which was the incident in the 1999/2000)

rangedunits · 10-27-2005, 08:51 PM

Florida Game Restriction Bill Introduced

Florida-1

In a stroke of deja vu gamers are quickly becoming familiar with, Florida state senator Alex Diaz de la Portilla has introduced a bill that seeks to restrict the sale or rental of violent video games to minors.

The bill bears more than a passing resemblance to the game restriction bill California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently signed into law. The language for what constitutes a "violent video game" is identical, as are the $1,000 limit on fines resulting from breaking the law and the requirement that violent games be labeled with a 2-inch-by-2-inch sticker depicting a solid white "18" outlined in black. About the only difference between the two bills is that Diaz de la Portilla's legislation makes it illegal for violent games to be made available to minors in arcades as well as in stores.

Game restriction laws are becoming a popular topic for both Republicans and Democrats of late. California Democrat Assemblyman Leland Yee introduced the game bill in that state, while earlier this year, Democrat New York Senator Hillary Clinton called for federal legislation based on Yee's bill. However, Schwarzenegger and Diaz de la Portilla are both Republicans, and a bi-partisan group backing Clinton's call for federal legislation shows the violent games debate is one that isn't likely to split along party lines.

The bill would likely be a welcome change of tone in publicity for Diaz de la Portilla, who has spent much of the year embroiled in an ethics scandal over his failure to comply with campaign finance laws, according to the St. Petersburg Times. The newspaper reports that, after winning a 2000 special election, Diaz de la Portilla was accused of failing to report more than $150,000 in cash and contributions, as well as $68,000 in expenditures. In 2001, the Florida Elections Commission found him guilty of 311 violations of the law and handed down a fine of more than $300,000. However, a jury acquitted him of the criminal charges and he had most of the fines overturned on appeal, and is currently contesting the last $17,000 in fines.

That suck

rangedunits · 10-27-2005, 08:52 PM

Florida Game Restriction Bill Introduced

Florida-1

In a stroke of deja vu gamers are quickly becoming familiar with, Florida state senator Alex Diaz de la Portilla has introduced a bill that seeks to restrict the sale or rental of violent video games to minors.

The bill bears more than a passing resemblance to the game restriction bill California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently signed into law. The language for what constitutes a "violent video game" is identical, as are the $1,000 limit on fines resulting from breaking the law and the requirement that violent games be labeled with a 2-inch-by-2-inch sticker depicting a solid white "18" outlined in black. About the only difference between the two bills is that Diaz de la Portilla's legislation makes it illegal for violent games to be made available to minors in arcades as well as in stores.

Game restriction laws are becoming a popular topic for both Republicans and Democrats of late. California Democrat Assemblyman Leland Yee introduced the game bill in that state, while earlier this year, Democrat New York Senator Hillary Clinton called for federal legislation based on Yee's bill. However, Schwarzenegger and Diaz de la Portilla are both Republicans, and a bi-partisan group backing Clinton's call for federal legislation shows the violent games debate is one that isn't likely to split along party lines.

The bill would likely be a welcome change of tone in publicity for Diaz de la Portilla, who has spent much of the year embroiled in an ethics scandal over his failure to comply with campaign finance laws, according to the St. Petersburg Times. The newspaper reports that, after winning a 2000 special election, Diaz de la Portilla was accused of failing to report more than $150,000 in cash and contributions, as well as $68,000 in expenditures. In 2001, the Florida Elections Commission found him guilty of 311 violations of the law and handed down a fine of more than $300,000. However, a jury acquitted him of the criminal charges and he had most of the fines overturned on appeal, and is currently contesting the last $17,000 in fines.

That suck

Belphegor · 10-27-2005, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Akazukin

THE_KID mentioned it's about a person's bad attitude and thoughts. However, Violent games are the main cause for their thoughts. For example, Half Life's crow bar attack and GTA's car stealing moves can directly tell an innocent small kid right into his face "You can do this too!"

I agree, to a extent.

Although video games are a powerfull influence of murder, and crime. It is the person's mind who allows them to think of such things.

Basicly Akazukin, who are we, to deny free will?

rangedunits · 10-27-2005, 08:55 PM

Everyone that play cs , starcraft and gta like violence in games.. starcraft is violence since you have to kill drone and stuff..

Pickles the Drummer · 10-27-2005, 09:10 PM

I've been playing violent games all my life, yet I've never had an urge to kill someone. The only way I could see a violent game playing any kind of role with a person harming someone, would be if that person was mentally ill. Why do you think we have ratings on these games? It would be the parents to blame on that part. If the person wasn't mentally ill, then something would have to be done to them (ex. being teased in school or betting beat up alot.) Therefor couldn't be completely blammed on the game. Ever hear the saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people"? It's the same things for games.

Games don't kill people, people kill people.

10-27-2005, 05:25 AM	#1 (permalink)
Fallen Doesnt afraid of anything Senior Member Retired Staff Member Blessed Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,190	Violence in Video Games :Debate: Thats right, I hope this to be a very serious topic for, I think this is a very serious subject. I had finished watching a special report on G4TV on this subject. It had showed what many of done to try and stop from teenagers/kids from obtaining video games that are clearly restricted to them. (i.e. Mature 17+ Violence). It showed the people against video games opinions and those who just think its non-sense to blame it all on video games. Sometime in either 1999 or 2000, there were two students who had shot up their high-school. Up to 30+ students/teachers were either wounded or killed. Many had accused this incident on the violent game known as "Doom". But which they fail to realize is that yes I'm sure it did have a small part in their wrong-doing, but they were also very alienated in their school. (i.e. Emo's/Goths/Nerds). One incident dealing with a young boy who had stole a gun from a police officer, and then shot him and another officer. When brought to court the young boy had clearly stated "Life is a video game... You have to die sometime." And then people out and, thats right, blame video games. I believe in this incident, at such a young age video games can influence a human's personality. But you also have to wonder, where was the parent? Video games nowaday cost up to $50, I doubt little Billy saved up enough lunch money to buy it. Parents are clearly going out and buying these video games for them, and when something goes wrong they blame video games. Many think that there should be more strict process when buying video games, but seeing how the video game industry is so large and there are many copies of different games that they can't just slap another sticker explaining violence to all of them. Which also brings me to the next topic, why are only people targetting video games? Movies, T.V., Literature, etc.. All of these also have influences on people. A man and a women were discussing video games, and literature. And the man had said "Books are just the same, I mean should it be right for a young boy to just go up and buy American Psycho, which contains very descriptive and detailed nudity and the violence of which took place." And the woman had just responded "Yes". Yees, one of those who are against video games, had also. I have to admit a very compelling argument about the difference of video games and movies/literature. One had asked and he responded that "In video games you have to press a button to destory/maim/kill an individual." Which I believe is what makes video games more influencial <(sp?) then literatures/movies. I am kinda at a fair balance when dealing with the topic that whether or not we should include movies/literature in with the violence in video games. But as for video games being the main reason for people shooting up people in their school, its just ridiculous. What are your views? __________________
$Fallen 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

10-27-2005, 05:31 AM	#2 (permalink)
Belphegor Senior Member Gold Member Inquisitor Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 4,156	My views stand with one basic point. No matter what influence, IE Video Games, Alcohol, or Drugs, you dont just do something. That thought must already be in your head, be it the deepest darkest thought, that you dont even realize you have consciously(spelling). But it is in your head, everything else in the world is just influences, but they are not for blame, as they are just a minute agent in it. __________________ we pop bitchez wit r gatz klub LCS, 707, BELPHEGOR
$Belphegor 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

10-27-2005, 06:39 AM	#6 (permalink)
Ikji Disciple Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: university Posts: 406	What I see in America today is the dumbing down of death to where if it is even showed, it is not highlighed much, we sort of pass over it. Even in parts of our society that do show it intensely, it does not make much of a difference, video games would be the object where violence is very brutal. These violent acts will not really influence the person as a whole since they have been exposed to death throughout their life through the passing over of it to the high exposure of it. Even while video games show graphic material they still do not really make death as a great event to behold and look at. The video game industry is just making what they perceive our society wants. They see that death is all over, they increase the gore in it for kids to make it stand out from the common and market it. The video games show how we truely feel and exhibit our wants and needs. This is why the industry is booming, they have found something that can captivate us, and never get boring. Death has been with us since the dawn of man, in the form of hunting. There is violence in our past and our present, to say that just one part of our society causes violence in us is absurd. If it is video games, then it is whole society. While many claim that brutal actions are undertaken by the direct influence of video games, there are not many cases to support this. There are just isolated incidents where fragmented families or abused kids (emotionally, physically; at school or home) are susceptible to our common nature, violence. Sorry if this isn't very coherrent, I'm tired; I'll try to correct my mistakes tomorrow when I get home from school.
$Ikji 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

10-27-2005, 08:38 AM	#8 (permalink)
Orchidomegaly Disciple Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 548	I think that we are over generalizing this. Violent video games do contribute to violent behavior, but not every body is as impressionable as the next. For instance i have two younger brothers. One will become very aggressive right after playing a violent video game, while the other is very non-violent no matter what. As the years went by i've seen my impressionable brother become less and less affected by video games. I must agree that age does have a drastic affect on how video games imfluence people. Looking toward the future when one day I might have kids (yes a scary thought!) I already know that i want my kids to be able to enjoy video games, but i would never what them to influence them in any way. However, telling kids that they aren't allowed to do something makes that thing seem glorified or even more desirable then it really is. However! since the law has to be the same for all people, i think that violent video games shouldn't be sold to young teens. __________________ -Orchidomegaly
$Orchidomegaly 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

10-27-2005, 08:41 AM	#9 (permalink)
EyeOfFire There's too much blood in my caffeine system Crusader Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Australia. Respect it Posts: 3,409	I find it interesting that there are only the most rare cases reported. Then games are immediately blamed. Put it this way - would anybody like to consider the population that plays violent games and DOESN'T do crazy **** like that? Try about 50% of the teenagers in the western world. The other 49.9% don't play games at all. If people do things like this, violent games CANNOT be blamed because there is so much evidence that they aren't responsible. Chances are that in the very rare cases, the children have serious mental or ethical disabilities to begin with. In that case, they should not be playing violent games or doing anything that might influence them in a detrimental manner. It is therefore their parents' or guardians' fault for allowing them to play violent games when they would have such disabilities. People are not psycopathic as a result of violent games, they are psycopathic because mummy winked at the postman. I will admit that violent games can be a detrimental influence on those with severe ethical problems, but so can going to the shops and seeing some adult get in a fight with the store owner. Violent games are a bad influence - but only on the very very few who don't know any better as a result of disability. And in that case, there are a million different things that can influence them badly as well. __________________
$EyeOfFire 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

Remove advertisements
BWHacks Advertisement	Sponsored links

10-27-2005, 07:43 AM	#7 (permalink)
Akazukin Guest Posts: n/a	[Support Team] We should blame only on games. Can anyone remember how many punches or kicks Jackie Chan have given to the bad guys in the movies? Definately nobody. How many times must you stab someone in order to kill him in CS? I think at least a quater of you guys know! What if Jackie Chan was in a form of a really poplular internet game? I'm sure more then half of us will know the 'correct' place to punch, and the number of kicks it takes to knock out somebody. The difference between games and other medias is that games make you feel involved, while movies/literature only makes you feel like a coach potato. THE_KID mentioned it's about a person's bad attitude and thoughts. However, Violent games are the main cause for their thoughts. For example, Half Life's crow bar attack and GTA's car stealing moves can directly tell an innocent small kid right into his face "You can do this too!" Nubium argues that Parents are to be blammed. Why should they be blammed when they provide shelter , education and love for their children? If parents have control over your entire childhood, knowing your games, friends, hidden porn CDs, imagine what your life will be like? Its also not possible to do so when they have to work for their family. Hence, a child faces games at home, and violent faces inspired them to perform violent acts. There are many counter-games such as "freddy fish" (educational). However, if I'm age 8, i'll rather play CS and throw away the freddy fish. Ikji bring out a "corrupted society" point of view. This I completely disagree. If there are murders outside, it doesnt mean we're murders too. Once again, if we're acting like murders in a game, we will keep thinking of better ways to kill a person from time to time. Violent murder games can make someone think, make someone do, and kept someone entertained after each murder. Which criminal can offer a much better influence? Some 'simple' influence : Ninja cosplay, Ryu/Ken's fireball action, counter strike's bomb throwing. If 'simple' influence exists, its logical that 'deep' influence exist as well. You're only dressing like a ninja? I've already killed my teacher. Violent games are to be blammed.

10-27-2005, 08:51 PM	#11 (permalink)
rangedunits Akazukin druggie? Senior Member Gold Member Evangelist Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,297	Florida Game Restriction Bill Introduced Florida-1 In a stroke of deja vu gamers are quickly becoming familiar with, Florida state senator Alex Diaz de la Portilla has introduced a bill that seeks to restrict the sale or rental of violent video games to minors. The bill bears more than a passing resemblance to the game restriction bill California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently signed into law. The language for what constitutes a "violent video game" is identical, as are the $1,000 limit on fines resulting from breaking the law and the requirement that violent games be labeled with a 2-inch-by-2-inch sticker depicting a solid white "18" outlined in black. About the only difference between the two bills is that Diaz de la Portilla's legislation makes it illegal for violent games to be made available to minors in arcades as well as in stores. Game restriction laws are becoming a popular topic for both Republicans and Democrats of late. California Democrat Assemblyman Leland Yee introduced the game bill in that state, while earlier this year, Democrat New York Senator Hillary Clinton called for federal legislation based on Yee's bill. However, Schwarzenegger and Diaz de la Portilla are both Republicans, and a bi-partisan group backing Clinton's call for federal legislation shows the violent games debate is one that isn't likely to split along party lines. The bill would likely be a welcome change of tone in publicity for Diaz de la Portilla, who has spent much of the year embroiled in an ethics scandal over his failure to comply with campaign finance laws, according to the St. Petersburg Times. The newspaper reports that, after winning a 2000 special election, Diaz de la Portilla was accused of failing to report more than $150,000 in cash and contributions, as well as $68,000 in expenditures. In 2001, the Florida Elections Commission found him guilty of 311 violations of the law and handed down a fine of more than $300,000. However, a jury acquitted him of the criminal charges and he had most of the fines overturned on appeal, and is currently contesting the last $17,000 in fines. That suck __________________
$rangedunits 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

10-27-2005, 08:52 PM	#12 (permalink)
rangedunits Akazukin druggie? Senior Member Gold Member Evangelist Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,297	Florida Game Restriction Bill Introduced Florida-1 In a stroke of deja vu gamers are quickly becoming familiar with, Florida state senator Alex Diaz de la Portilla has introduced a bill that seeks to restrict the sale or rental of violent video games to minors. The bill bears more than a passing resemblance to the game restriction bill California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger recently signed into law. The language for what constitutes a "violent video game" is identical, as are the $1,000 limit on fines resulting from breaking the law and the requirement that violent games be labeled with a 2-inch-by-2-inch sticker depicting a solid white "18" outlined in black. About the only difference between the two bills is that Diaz de la Portilla's legislation makes it illegal for violent games to be made available to minors in arcades as well as in stores. Game restriction laws are becoming a popular topic for both Republicans and Democrats of late. California Democrat Assemblyman Leland Yee introduced the game bill in that state, while earlier this year, Democrat New York Senator Hillary Clinton called for federal legislation based on Yee's bill. However, Schwarzenegger and Diaz de la Portilla are both Republicans, and a bi-partisan group backing Clinton's call for federal legislation shows the violent games debate is one that isn't likely to split along party lines. The bill would likely be a welcome change of tone in publicity for Diaz de la Portilla, who has spent much of the year embroiled in an ethics scandal over his failure to comply with campaign finance laws, according to the St. Petersburg Times. The newspaper reports that, after winning a 2000 special election, Diaz de la Portilla was accused of failing to report more than $150,000 in cash and contributions, as well as $68,000 in expenditures. In 2001, the Florida Elections Commission found him guilty of 311 violations of the law and handed down a fine of more than $300,000. However, a jury acquitted him of the criminal charges and he had most of the fines overturned on appeal, and is currently contesting the last $17,000 in fines. That suck __________________
$rangedunits 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

10-27-2005, 08:55 PM	#14 (permalink)
rangedunits Akazukin druggie? Senior Member Gold Member Evangelist Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 1,297	Everyone that play cs , starcraft and gta like violence in games.. starcraft is violence since you have to kill drone and stuff.. __________________
$rangedunits 15 0FF11\|\\|3$

10-27-2005, 09:10 PM	#15 (permalink)
Pickles the Drummer Dethklok! Evangelist Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: MI, In the D Posts: 1,249	I've been playing violent games all my life, yet I've never had an urge to kill someone. The only way I could see a violent game playing any kind of role with a person harming someone, would be if that person was mentally ill. Why do you think we have ratings on these games? It would be the parents to blame on that part. If the person wasn't mentally ill, then something would have to be done to them (ex. being teased in school or betting beat up alot.) Therefor couldn't be completely blammed on the game. Ever hear the saying "Guns don't kill people, people kill people"? It's the same things for games. Games don't kill people, people kill people.
$Pickles the Drummer 15 0FF11\|\\|3$