It isn't just King; the entire writing community is against censorship. First they censor the games, then they censor the books. I expect the Author's Guild to join legal challenges if such a law comes down the pike.

Parental accountability would sort a lot of these problems, IMO. You leave your kid running loose around town like a jackal, and they break a window you get hauled out of bed to apologise and get fined.

Of course. But as far as I can tell you're only giving credence to the "governments should censor violent games from children" stance.

 

Governments should make it so that if a kid wants a game, the parent needs to buy it for the kid, and has a big blaring warning about what the game is. This way it cannot be said the government is taking on the role of the parent - as it makes the parent more actively involved, forces them to make a moral choice about their children rather than continue in ignorance of the game's nature, ideally.

 

I'm thinking like cigarettes have "THESE WILL KILL YOU, BITCH" (is it also surrogate parenting when the government puts death labels on cigarettes?) rather than the small poxy little classification logo at the bottom corner of the game box.

 

And I think that if such a game gets into the hands of a minor it should be a reportable offence as bad as selling porn, gambling or alcohol to minors. Right now, even though legally there is really no difference, in practice there is.

 

The thing is, there is such a system in place. The parents, however, seem to be completely unaware of this because they take zero interest. I call it "old fart syndrome". It's the opinion that still exists almost everywhere outside gaming communities that "only kids play videogames anyway".

Edited April 12, 200817 yr by TrueNeutral

Parental accountability would sort a lot of these problems, IMO. You leave your kid running loose around town like a jackal, and they break a window you get hauled out of bed to apologise and get fined.

So we should fine parents if their kids gets their fingers on an 18+ game?

 

Also my perhaps biggest problem with the government getting involved in this is that I still haven't seen a reasonable amount of studies showing that kids are damaged by violent video games, it seems to be simply a widely supported assumption.

Parental accountability would sort a lot of these problems, IMO. You leave your kid running loose around town like a jackal, and they break a window you get hauled out of bed to apologise and get fined.

So we should fine parents if their kids gets their fingers on an 18+ game?

 

Also my perhaps biggest problem with the government getting involved in this is that I still haven't seen a reasonable amount of studies showing that kids are damaged by violent video games, it seems to be simply a widely supported assumption.

 

Very good point. But since when as any public policy guided by scientific study? At least wherever Joe Public can poke a nose in.

 

What I'm arguing for is making existing systems more comprehensive. A parrallel would be our local council. Instead of raising council tax they worked out 10% of people weren't paying. They made those 10% pay and tax stayed the same. I'm saying we simply make the people with best oversight accountable for enforcing the existing system.

 

I suppose I'm also saying that maybe we shoud wipe away a lot of this b*****cks about pre-empting things and focus more on the bastards who actually do anything wrong. i.e. if people actually ARE vilent we deal with them more effectively, rather than hysterically rushing about trying to avoid any possible way they might become violent.