Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×

Louisiana Politicos Defend Game Bill 86

Posted by Zonk from the important-legislating dept.
GameDaily reports on comments by LA Senators and politicians defending the Louisiana violent games law. The vigorous defense now has backing from the state's Attorney General, who has vowed to go to the SCOTUS if need be. From the article: "[Assistant Attorney General Burton] Guidry added that the law is 'not going to curtail the free speech of anybody,' but then he used the old 'games are training kids to kill' argument. 'This is more than speech. This is truly training for violence," he said. 'You assume the character of a mass murderer. You go out and kill people as violently as you can because you score more points.'"
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Louisiana Politicos Defend Game Bill More

Louisiana Politicos Defend Game Bill

Comments Filter:
  • ... welcome their doomed attempt to challenge the Supreme Court on this issue. Bring it on.
    • have an adorable amount of faith in our legal system.
      • "Adorable"? As in, cute? A "pink-ponies-with-red-polka-dots" level of trust in ol' Supremes?
        Ooookay, whatever...
      • Have enough faith that the speech portion of the 1st amendment, which is fairly clear and defended pretty damn consistantly even by the 'conservative' members of SCOTUS, that things will work out alright...that is, if they don't fall for that 'games aren't expression' crap. Oh wait: tech issue, new medium, crotchedy old justices. Damn, maybe we are screwed all along.

  • I hate election years. (Score:3, Insightful)

    by BigCheese ( 47608 ) <dennis.hostetler@gmail.com> on Friday July 07, 2006 @03:36PM (#15678567) Homepage Journal
    I hate all the stupid laws that get proposed and sometimes passed and the attack commercials that we have to endure every election year.

    I doubt the law in LA will last any longer then the others.

    I hate election years.

    • Re:I hate election years. (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Kesch ( 943326 ) on Friday July 07, 2006 @03:42PM (#15678630)
      Oh, but that's the great thing. These people aren't just idiots pandering for a "think of the children" vote.

      Michot then said that even if the current law is defeated that the state will come up with a new one in the next legislative session.


      These are the worst kind of idiots, my friend. These are determined idiots.
      • The courts should be allowed to ban a person from ever making or influencing a law again, especially if that person has willfully acted against the letter and the spirit of the constitution.
        • Did you ever notice that the Christian extremist nutjobs, who are constantly talking about how video games are 'training kids to kill' and 'making a new generation of serial killers', are the exact same ones who think being in the military is the best thing any person, regardless of potential, can do?
          • Christians shouldn't complain anyway. After all it's their religion that says death is the best thing that can happen to a good Christian.

          • Re:Anyone else ever notice... (Score:2, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward
            Conservatives are, largely, and especially when religious, generally a group of people with very little interest in any sort of moral or logical consistency. It is there belief that what they say is correct, and that nothing, including prior statements of their own contrary to current positions, both of which they continue to maintain, can make them wrong (you don't generally see this behavior in liberals, though they tend to have their own uniquely weird problems).

            To them, it is not the least bit inconsist

          • Re:Anyone else ever notice... (Score:1, Insightful)

            by Anonymous Coward
            That's not paradoxical. In their view, killing in military service is killing for a good cause: to support truth, justice, freedom, and the public estate. The sort of killing they're concerned video games will result in is killing indiscriminately, or killing without just cause.

            Look, these people are wrong, and I'm pretty sure most of us agree about that, but trying to draw paradox where none exists ignores the true threat of these people. Only by understanding their logic can you combat them; spurious alle
          • Yes, and they're often the same exact ones who've never served in the military and never even considered enlisting. 'Strange', don't ya think?
      • These are the worst kind of idiots, my friend. These are determined idiots.

        Determined, yes. Determined to get themselves voted out of ofice!

        Or, perhaps their constituents really want this. Even still, aren't the rights of adults always greater than the rights of children?

  • Quotes of gold. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Kesch ( 943326 ) on Friday July 07, 2006 @03:38PM (#15678590)
    Man, I love the kind of things this guy says.

    "The last thing we need is some video game promoting violent and illegal behavior. I understand where they[video game industry] are coming from. They feel like we are trying to stop the sale of these videos and in fact we are."

    "Now if this is overturned, I think you'll see the legislature address it again in the next session," he noted. "We can't legislate morality but certainly we can stop these games from being sold in Louisiana, getting into the hands of our children. It's the least we could do."

    I guess they aren't not doing what they are accused of doing.

    • "Now if this is overturned, I think you'll see the legislature address it again in the next session," he noted. "We can't legislate morality but certainly we can stop these games from being sold in Louisiana, getting into the hands of our children. It's the least we could do."

      I dunno, I kinda agree with them on that one. But I think my version of the law might read a little differently then theirs:

      All parents allowing the purchase of video games, movies, or other entertainment devices or media shall b

      • Re:Quotes of gold. (Score:4, Insightful)

        by SatanicPuppy ( 611928 ) * <SatanicpuppyNO@SPAMgmail.com> on Friday July 07, 2006 @04:00PM (#15678801) Journal
        Even that is stupid. We already have laws for "Contributing to the delinqency of a minor", which is really the absolute most that should ever be applied to a statute for the enforcement of ESRB age ratings.

        It's just political grandstanding.

      • I dunno, I kinda agree with them on that one. But I think my version of the law might read a little differently then theirs:

        All parents allowing the purchase of video games, movies, or other entertainment devices or media shall be fined an amount no more than $5000 and no less then $1000 per violation, with said fine being used to defray the cost of added law enforcement and criminal court personnel as a result of their inability to parent properly.

        So basically, your version of the law states that an

        • If you thought I was serious, please know that my favorite television programs are currently "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart", "The Colbert Report", "Family Guy", and "South Park"

          The point was simply that if people want to blame video games for their effects on children, they should blame everything. As "The Daily Show" pointed out beautifully (and rather sneakily - if you weren't paying attention you missed the PBS watermark on the war footage) in Stewart's recent rant on Congressional hearings over viol
    • You can't legislate aesthetics. However, I have come to accept utility as distinct from either one, though it appears to be a mixture of both. But that begs the question. which is some variant of "What can/should be legislated?"

  • Sigh. (Score:4, Insightful)

    by daeg ( 828071 ) on Friday July 07, 2006 @03:39PM (#15678594)
    Don't like violent video games? Don't buy them. Don't want your kids to play violent video games? Don't buy them (why is your kid carrying around $60 in cash and alone at the mall, by the way?). Afraid of your kids playing violent games at a friend's house? Check with the friend's parents -- you should be, anyway.

    Even if there is a correlation between violent video games and violence, removing the video games is not the answer. There's a correlation between driving cars and car accidents, too, but we don't ban cars. Education and parental involvement is the best solution, even if it is not the most direct or time efficient.

    • repeat after me... (Score:2, Insightful)

      by sepharious ( 900148 )
      There is no need for a Nanny State, if anything we need more laws making parents responsible for their children.
      • There's a bit of a slippery slope though. A person should have the right to raise their kids however they wish... provided they aren't harming their children in that process. There is also the problem of kids who are beyond the control of their parents. I think a law in this sense may leave the situation worst off in the end.

        Don't take this as I think you're wrong 100%. I more or less agree but I think that rather than using law there needs to be programs in place to give parents more time parent th

  • This guy needs his priorities set straight (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Capt'n Hector ( 650760 ) on Friday July 07, 2006 @03:40PM (#15678610)
    I don't know about the rest of you, but if I were a Louisiana senator, I'd be more concerned about global warming than violent videogames. The comment about Tom and Jerry in the article is spot on. Since when has America been upset by violence? I have a gut feeling that this is more about the sexual content of these games (hot coffee, prostitutes, etc) than their violent nature. But then again, what do I know. I'm just a student.
    • Maybe they should worry more about jobs, schools, and police. Have you seen what the murder rate in New Orleans is?
      I don't have a problem with passing laws the restrict the purchase of mature games. Why not we restrict the sale of alcohol, tobacco, and fire arms to minors. Why shouldn't they remove those restrictions? I mean shouldn't a parent be responsible enough to make sure that their kids don't drink, smoke, or shoot up schools with out the government getting involved?
      Get a clue folks the game manufact
      • Difference: Alcohol kills. Cigarettes kill. Guns, believe it or not, kill. Video games do not. (Yeah, I don't count the idiot who starved to death playing for days straight.) Nor do movies, nor does music. Nor ponro mags, nor prurient posters, nor Shakesperean plays. See the difference? (Occasionally books move humans to kill, re: politics, re: religion. But those folks were pretty messed in the head to begin with. And rarely under 18 these days, in any case.)
        • "Nor ponro mags"
          Actually there are several studies that show pornography is very addictive to some people and that it can cause harm to some people much like alcohol. Alcohol in moderation can actually be benifital to some people.
          I even said that I thought that that this law was just a way to look like they where doing something while in actuality doing nothing.
          Again I have no problem with the idea of ratings and limiting access to minors of certain games.
          But folks let's have a reality check here.
          The Game m
        • >Guns, believe it or not, kill.

          >...

          >(Occasionally books move humans to kill, re: politics, re:
          >religion. But those folks were pretty messed in the head to
          >begin with.

          So... you think the people that commit murder with guns aren't, somehow, "pretty messed in the head to begin with"?

          I have many guns (somewhere around 25 at last inventory). None of them (with the possible exception of the Russian surplus pistol, I don't know what was done with it before I got it) have ever killed anyone. At least

          • Way to miss the context of the conversation. We were talking about whether kids should have these things. Yes, in my world as well, guns are a tool taht can be used well or poorly. However, children don't, by and large, have the capacity to tell in many situations what a good or bad use of tools are, and so we keep the more dangerous ones out of their hands. It's easier for a ten year old who doesn't know much about alcohol (and is smaller in general) to drink themselves to death upon finding a bottle of

      • Ok, how about we restrict minors from purchasing or viewing 'R' rated movies. I'm sure there's a law against that.

        Wait..

        What was that...

        There are no laws against it!

        The movie industry has self assigned ratings and self policing theatres. If a guy working the ticket booth lets a minor into an R rated movie, he may risk losing his job for violating his employment contract(I'm guessing there's something in there about minors and 'R' movies), but he does not face fines or jail time and a mark on his criminal re
    • Couldn't agree more. I don't care if you think the stores are too lax in their selling of these types of games, there is no way in *bleep* that your kid should have $50 or more to buy a game that you don't know about. In fact, if your kid has $50 unaccounted for, that he/she uses it to buy a violent video game should be the least of your worries. I'd be far more worried about that kid getting their hands on a real weapon, or drugs.
    • "I don't know about the rest of you, but if I were a Louisiana senator, I'd be more concerned about global warming than violent videogames."

      We're talking about the Louisiana Legislature, representatives from the state with the most offshore drilling rigs in the Union. Why worry about global warming when you have campaign donations from oil companies to earn?

  • Don't forget the serial-killer training games! (Score:5, Funny)

    by enitime ( 964946 ) on Friday July 07, 2006 @03:42PM (#15678631)
    'This is truly training for violence," he said. 'You assume the character of a mass murderer. You go out and kill people as violently as you can because you score more points.'"


    Since serial killers usually have a history of abusing animals, we should also ban Whack-a-Mole. After all, the more you beat them the more points you get. Someone call PETA!

    • Re:Don't forget the serial-killer training games! (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      I've been in training to kill Spathi for years, since first picking up Star Control II. And as soon as the Ur-Quan show up, I'm going to be prepared, because video games are training for the acts which occur in them, and not entertainment. Woe betide any demons from Hell who show up, because 3 versions of Doom have taught me what to do when scientists open portals to hell dimensions! Kill, kill, kill!

  • Mixed up priorities (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Dutchmaan ( 442553 ) on Friday July 07, 2006 @03:59PM (#15678794) Homepage
    Ok so, they'll ban violent video games but real guns are a God given right? Are these the same people who talk about personal responsibility and holding the individual accountable?

    • "Yeah, but I like guns. That flashy screen is the devil's work."

      And that's the real problem. Guns are yesterday's toys. Video games are tomorrow's. Adults, by and large, get guns, they do not get video games. Yeah, sure we all spew the statistic about how the gamer population is aging, but seriously, those are people who play zork, king's quest, and fucking tetris (or their modern equivalents). Just like people protested the waltz, the novel, the TV, and Elvis Presley, the curmudgeony old folks can ta

      • Yeah, sure we all spew the statistic about how the gamer population is aging, but seriously, those are people who play zork, king's quest, and fucking tetris (or their modern equivalents).

        Whoah there buddy. I think you're generalizing bigtime there. I don't think tetris players are even considered gamers. That's like calling Solitaire players gamers. A lot of us older gamers (i.e. those of us who at least grew up with Coleco and Atari and C64, and went on from there) still play the latest twitch games

        • My personal experience with the older gamer crowd is that, yes, while there are a few 'old' twitch gamers left, most tend to leave the hand-eye coordination gymnastics to more flexible youngsters. And I was exaggerating (perhaps unfairly) to emphasize the basic point that I still believe correct: the average fifty-five year old parent/legislator knows a shite sight more about a 30.06 rifle than he/she does about Half Life 2; and being thus informed make stupid and hypocritical legal and parenting decisions
  • Then why don't we detain theatre actors that ever had a role as a criminal or ban any plays that may include those? And why don't we make sure to do something about that organization that teaches our kids to kill, you know, the "US Army". Let's arrest all soldiers that get released from the army because they are potential killers! Ban bootcamps! Ban martial arts training! Ban firing ranges!
  • You go out and kill people as violently as you can because you score more points.

    It's easy to tell when a person talking about video games has no idea what they're talking about. They talk about "scoring points." The 1980's called. They want their game and joke format back.
  • DAMMIT PEOPLE,</caps> stop trying to parent for us and just tell the parents to do it themselves! This is NOT what we pay you taxes for!
    • Oh, and as an afterthought: someone should go and shoot Jack Thompson and the like in the face. Repeatedly. </anger-induced sarcasm> (I do that a lot, don't I?)
    • No, in fact, we pay you taxes to parent large corporations. We pay you taxes to enact Net Neutrality legislation, and to break up illegal monopolies.

      But we do NOT pay you taxes to do parenting. If that's what we wanted, wouldn't it be easier and quicker to provide a state-sponsored nanny/babysitter service, so those poor parents don't have to actually parent? At least that would give the good parents the option of parenting for themselves, free from stupid restrictions like this.

      A 12-year-old won't neces
  • games are training kids to kill


    Someone call Tiger Woods and let him know that he'd be better if he played more videogames and spent less time on the course..

    Looks like the next Eddie VanHalen will come from the 'Guitar Hero' playing basements and not the garage.
    • This, to me, sounds like a good example of reductio ad absurdum; I for one am curious as to whether it has ever been used in public to deflate the 'games train people to kill' line. How about some spots wherein we see a clip of whichever LA senator actually said 'games train people to kill', followed by one of an Air Force officer buying up a CompUSA's stock of something like Lock-On: Modern Air Combat and explaining to a curious cashier that it's for 'training purposes'.
      Onscreen caption: By the honorable
  • GAMES DO NOT TRAIN YOU TO KILL. Firing a gun by pressing 'Circle' on a controller and pulling the trigger on a heavy rifle with recoil are not and will never be the same thing. Hell, even 'Sniper Scope' in the arcades is total bullshit because there's more to firing a weapon than just pointing it in the right direction.

    The best a game can do is desensitize a person, and I've yet to meet anyone who compares snapping an animal's neck (or similiar method of execution) akin to completing a video game's mission.

    • GAMES DO NOT TRAIN YOU TO KILL. Firing a gun by pressing 'Circle' on a controller and pulling the trigger on a heavy rifle with recoil are not and will never be the same thing. Hell, even 'Sniper Scope' in the arcades is total bullshit because there's more to firing a weapon than just pointing it in the right direction.

      Exactly. If you want to learn how to kill, go to the army. There you will learn to fire actual firearms and take into account such little details as recoil, ballistic arc and sight calibr

  • This may all seem a bit silly, but it is worth putting into context. Of course, rebuilding shattered economies, school systems and fixing levees is just too boring for these goons. In addition to this ridiculous game legislation, in the recent session, they also considered implementing a ban on cockfighting. This is still legal in Louisiana, as chickens are not animals under State law, as a matter of definition. However, in the end it was decided that cockfighting could remain legal, because to ban it would
    • The law is almost a moot point as there was only one abortion Clinic in Louisiana, it was in New Orleans of course, and very few doctors that offer abortion services in their offices. From most parts of the state it was already closer driving distance to go cities out of state (such as Houston TX) for abortions
    • p.s. On the topic of cockfighting, it is a Cajun cultural issue. Louisiana has a long history of political extremism, and part of the dark history of this extermeism was the near extermination of the Cajun culture in the first half of the 20th century. Beginning in the early 20th century all children in the state of Louisiana were required to attend school, the school system required students to speak english, there are many stories of cajun children being severely beaten for speaking cajun french while a
    • it seems LA needs another ten feet of water
  • (flamebait)
    . . . . that rising ocean levels will wipe out the majority of Louisiana. [usatoday.com] Hopefully, the majority of these politicos & bible bangers will remain on the coast to pray against the next category 5 hurricane. To bad we have to lose Nawlins (great town), but after all, gotta break a few eggs (free speech? free market? freedom of expression? sane lawmaking?) to make an omlet (bans on harsh video games, ridiculous abortion laws that are unconstitutional before they are signed into law, an apalling t
  • The Louisana politicians cannot and are not defending a law by plopping random comments that were already identified. If they were defending the law, they would actually have a minimal amount of success as opposed to undermining their own stance on the issue.

    Their rationalizations are as follows:

    "The last thing we need is some video game promoting violent and illegal behavior. I understand where they are coming from. They feel like we are trying to stop the sale of these videos and in fact we are," he sai

  • "[Assistant Attorney General Burton] Guidry added that the law is 'not going to curtail the free speech of anybody,' but then he used the old 'games are training kids to kill' argument. 'This is more than speech. This is truly training for violence," he said. 'You assume the character of a mass murderer. You go out and kill people as violently as you can because you score more points."

    So it's not alright to play a virtual good/bad guy and kill people, but it IS alright to watch movies and TV shows that p
  • I wonder if the district attorny would object to those same kids joining Uncle Sam? I mean, they put you in a position of danger, give you a gun, and train you to kill...

    Different?

    Oh yes, sorry, my mistake...no-one gets hurts playing video games...bad games...Oh, games allow you to think for yourself and how you do things for yourself...Yes, very bad...

    Army ok, games not? Huh? You keep doing what your told and shooting who we tell you too...That's right...good boys...

  • If we don't train the soldiers of tomorrow to kill, the terrorists will win. Guidry, are you on Osama bin Laden's payroll? You sir, are a traitor. I am disgusted and outraged. You should be put on trial for your traitorous actions.

Slashdot Top Deals

The optimum committee has no members. -- Norman Augustine

Close