Seriously?again with this sh!t?

[borrofburi]

Err... No. Or more precisely: who are you that you get to determine what is better for kids and what isn't? Why do you think it's right for the government to legislate what children should be doing (without any evidence)?

I am me. And I don't determine what's better for kids nor what isn't. Pay attention to the thread. I'm only agreeing with this, because I find it beneficial. Think. You're barking at the wrong tree (it's obvious that you can disagree with me or agree or do nothing/ just like depricatezero, you're assuming I made this law).

There are lines we don't get to cross. I think it'd be beneficial for fox news and their ilk to be silenced, yet I would oppose the hell out of such an unconstitutional law.

 

[lrkun]

There are lines we don't get to cross. I think it'd be beneficial for fox news and their ilk to be silenced, yet I would oppose the hell out of such an unconstitutional law.

And what is an unconstitutional law? or what law do you think is unconstitutional? How do you oppose it?

 

[scalyblue]

http://kotaku.com/5679655/highlights-of-todays-big-supreme-court-video-game-case?skyline=true&s=i

The supreme court is actually being quite rational about this.

California deputy attorney general Zackery Morazzini, staring oral arguments:The California law at issue today before this Court differs from the New York law at issue in Ginsberg in only one respect. Where New York was concerned with minors' access to harmful sexual material outside the guidance of a parent, California is no less concerned with a minor's access to the deviant level of violence that is presented in a certain category of video games that can be no less harmful to the development of minors.

When this Court in Ginsberg crafted a rule of law that permits States to regulate a minor's access to such material outside the presence of a parent, it did so for two fundamental reasons that are equally applicable this morning in this case.

First, this rule permits parents' claim to authority in their own household to direct the upbringing and development of their children; and secondly, this rule promotes the State's independent interest in helping parents protect the wellbeing of children in those instances when parents cannot be present.

So this morning, California asks this Court to adopt a rule of law that permits States to restrict minors' ability to purchase deviant, violent video games that the legislature has determined can be harmful to the development -

Justice Antonin Scalia: What's a deviant , a deviant, violent video game? As opposed to what? A normal violent video game?

Morazzini: Yes, Your Honor. Deviant would be departing from established norms.

Scalia: There are established norms of violence?

Morazzini: Well, I think if we look back -

Scalia: Some of the Grimm's fairy tales are quite grim, to tell you the truth.

Morazzini: Agreed, Your Honor. But the level of violence -

Scalia: Are they okay? Are you going to ban them, too?

Morazinni: Not at all, Your Honor.

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg: What's the difference? mean, if you are supposing a category of violent materials dangerous to children, then how do you cut it off at video games? What about films? What about comic books? Grimm's fairy tales?
Why are video games special? Or does your principle extend to all deviant, violent material in whatever form?

Morazinni: No, Your Honor. That's why I believe California incorporated the three prongs of the Miller standard. So it's not just deviant violence. It's not just patently offensive violence. It's violence that meets all three of the terms set forth in -

Chief Justice John Roberts: I think that misses Justice Ginsburg's question, which is: Why just video games? Why not movies, for example, as well?

Morazzini: Sure, Your Honor. The California legislature was presented with substantial evidence that demonstrates that the interactive nature of violent , of violent video games where the minor or the young adult is the aggressor, is the , is the individual acting out this , this obscene level of violence, if you will, is especially harmful to minors. It -

Kagan: Suppose a new study suggested that movies were just as violent. Then, presumably, California could regulate movies just as it could regulate video games?

Morazzini: Well, Your Honor, there is scientific literature out there regarding the impact of violent media on children. In fact, for decades, the President, Congress, the FTC, parenting groups, have been uniquely concerned with the level of violent media available to minors that they have ready access to.
Justice Sonia Sotomayor: I don't think; is that answering Justice Kagan's question? One of the studies, the Anderson study, says that the effect of violence is the same for a Bugs Bunny episode as it is for a violent video. So can the legislature now, because it has that study, say we can outlaw Bugs Bunny?

Morazzini: No ,

Sotomayor: There are people who would say that a cartoon has very little social value; it's entertainment, but not much else. This is entertainment.
I'm not suggesting that I like this video, the one at issue that you provided the five-minute clip about. To me, it's not entertaining, but that's not the point. To some it may well be.

Morazzini: Justice Sotomayor, cartoons do not depart from the established norms to a level of violence to which children have been historically exposed to.

 

[ajh]

http://kotaku.com/5679655/highlights-of-todays-big-supreme-court-video-game-case?skyline=true&s=i

The supreme court is actually being quite rational about this.

while i'm happy to see that this is going the way it should,im still pissed that the court has to go over this,a topic that has been covered time and time again,through different mediums.thank you very much for this link!

 

[scalyblue]

http://kotaku.com/5679655/highlights-of-todays-big-supreme-court-video-game-case?skyline=true&s=i

The supreme court is actually being quite rational about this.

while i'm happy to see that this is going the way it should,im still pissed that the court has to go over this,a topic that has been covered time and time again,through different mediums.thank you very much for this link!

Yeah, if it's relevant to the gaming industry you will probably see it on kotaku. I lurve them!