Theory

In order for the ESA and the State of California to come to an agreement, I believe that both sides will need to figure out a true definition of what constitutes as “violent.”  Wikipedia defines violence as “the expression of physical or verbal force against one or more people.”  This is an incredibly broad concept because some people may view the tackling in Madden to be overly violent.  Now, that is obviously an extreme case, but it shows how the proposed law could be twisted to fit certain people’s personal grudges or political agendas.  In fact, Associate Justice Antonin Scalia asked the state if they were going to ban children from reading Grimm’s fairy tales because they are violent too.  

If they can agree on a true definition of violence, then they have to compromise on how the games are sold to children that are underage.  The video game industry already has a ratings system in place for games that describe the age group that the game is intended for as well as the content that is included.  Retailers already have rules in place that restrict the sale of 'Mature' rated video games to people who are 17 years of age or older; just like how movie theaters are not allowed to sell a ticket to a 'R' rated movie to someone under 17.  I believe that if the 'M' rated titles were placed on a higher shelf or put somewhere where the average minor will not look for it, then it will greatly reduce the number of children who dupe their parents into purchasing inappropriate content for them.  Plus, the less kids that get their hands on the new 'Call of Duty' or any other popular game greatly reduces my chance of annoyance while playing online.  Those ten year olds with their squeaky, annoying voices are so irritating.

2007 Clip from Star Jones that Discusses the Debate

This video clip is from 2007 in which lawyer and television personality Star Jones discusses the video game ban in California.  It shows the argument from both sides, including the author of the bill California State Senator Leland Yee.

Social Experiment

Since the Supreme Court began hearing opening arguments for the California game ban law on Tuesday, I decided to conduct a small social experiment.  Next Tuesday, November 9th, Call of Duty: Black Ops will be released.  CoD is rated M for Mature audiences 17 and older.  Now, people tend to mistake me for someone that is only about fifteen years old.  Honestly, some people do not believe that I am an 18 (almost 19) year old college kid.  This may help me in the future when I'm about 30, but right now it is a little depressing.  Anyway, I digress.  My point is that I was forced to show my government certified ID in order to PRE-ORDER a video game.  California is claiming that the institutions set in place by the ESA and ESRB are not being effective.  Believe it or not, many companies, especially GameStop, threaten their employees with immediate termination or other harsh penalties if they were to sell a 'M' rated game to someone under the age of 17.  If I had not had my license on me, I would not have been able to entertain myself come 12:01 am Tuesday morning.  And that would have been tragic.  Very tragic.

Analyzing the Debate

It seems that in recent years, video games have become the scapegoat for the increased violence and aggression in today’s youth; in a similar fashion as to what happened to comic books in the 1950s.  There have been studies both supporting and refuting the idea that games are slowly turning innocent children into violent monsters.  In response to the negative criticism generated, former child psychologist and current California State Senator Leland Yee authored a bill that would ban the sale of video games to minors.  The bill passed the in the state legislature in October 2005, was signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, and was set to go into effect on January 1, 2006.  

In December 2005, the Entertainment Software Association (ESA) was granted an injunction against the law by US District Court Judge Ronald Whyte.  In 2007, Whyte would later rule the law to be unconstitutional on the grounds that video games are not any more violent than any other form of media.  In 2009, Whyte's original ruling was upheld by the United States Court of Appeals on the grounds that it violated the freedoms established by both the First and Fourteenth Amendments of the US Constitution.  The State appealed further, and in April 2010 the Supreme Court of the United States agreed to review the case.

In reviewing the case, the Court must decide upon many factors including: what constitutes as violent and if there is there truly a negative correlation between violent video games and violent actions.  The biggest concern among most opponents of the law how it could possibly affect government regulation of other forms of media.  Representatives from other forms of mass media have jointly filed friend of the court briefs siding with the gaming industry.  Nine other states and Puerto Rico have also decided to join the video game industry in opposing California's law.  Even Stan Lee, one of the greatest comic book writers to ever live, has voiced his support for the video game industry via a written letter. 

California is getting some support as well in the form of conservative watchdog group the Parents Television Council and from eleven other states.  It is safe to say that this case could possibly determine how mass media is distributed in the future.  After five long years in the legal system, the Supreme Court will have the final say on a highly debated and highly controversial issue.  We will see the outcome starting on November 2nd.

"Hey there! I haven't seen you in a while..."

Wow.

It’s been a while hasn’t it?  Let me start off by saying that college life is pure, unadulterated hell.  Plain and simple.  While that in and of itself is not a valid reason for the lack of updates to this blog, I felt like I needed to get that off of my chest before proceeding any further.  From studying for midterms to having to read ridiculous amounts of literature, my life has been overly hectic and stressful.  However, that has all passed and I am back and prepared to present my topic to the absolute best of my ability. 

That being said….

I’m going to continue working and I’m not going to stop.

What I'm Playing Now..

OK, since I consider myself a diehard gamer, I felt the need to do more than just talk about court cases.   I game on my PlayStation 3 and I love it to death. I received it when it first launched in 2006 when it was $599 + tax. I went through hell and high water but I was still able to open a PS3 on Christmas Day when thousands (if not millions) of others were less fortunate. Well, either less fortunate or they had to settle for a Wii... But anyway, I digress. The main point of this post is to tell you guys, my loyal readers, what I am currently up to in my world of gaming. As a college student, most of my time is being taken up by partying studying and reading, therefore I have not had a lot of time dedicated to playing games as I would like.  I also have a limited college student budget, so I cannot buy as many games as I would like. Therefore, I'm just going to stick with what I have for now.

Recently, I have spent a lot of my time playing Madden 11.  I bought the game at midnight on the day that it was released. I was hella bored, so I decided to drive a half hour to Wal-Mart to buy it...it was sort of an impulse decision. I started a franchise with my beloved Steelers and I fantasy drafted a monster team consisting of Brett Favre, Reggie Bush, Larry Fitzgerald and TO (among others) for an all around offensive powerhouse. My defense is not bad either with Ray Lewis, Brian Cushing and Ike Taylor as some of my picks.

Too bad that I really suck at Madden.

Madden 11 is the first Madden game that I decided to purchase in over three years, so I'm also rusty on top of my general suckage in the sports genre of video games. I tend to get raped very badly when playing with an incredibly skilled player. So that's why I spend a lot of my time in Franchise Mode. Away from human opponents and away from rape-age. Currently, my team is first in the NFL with a 10-2 record. However, I just suffered a debilitating loss to a Peyton Manning led Ravens offense that shredded my defense (specifically my secondary) to pieces.  But that's not going to stop my dreams of a Super Bowl XLV victory. I'm going to finally give Favre his long deserved 2nd Super Bowl ring.

I'll keep you posted on my progress as I continue my path to success.

Introduction

I am a gamer.  I have been gaming since the days of the Super Nintendo and Sega Genesis; I have fond memories of being a second grader and playing GoldenEye 007 on my Nintendo 64 with friends for countless hours; I remember each of the Christmases when I was blessed with the fortune of receiving the hottest new game, game console or handheld available on the market.  I am a gamer.  In recent years, gaming has evolved from a pastime enjoyed by a small group of dedicated devotees into something enjoyed by millions: even grandmothers.  

Gaming is increasingly becoming the number one form of entertainment for many households.  This is evidenced by the steady decline in revenue for the movie industry and the steady climb of revenue for the video game industry.  Today’s games are more life-like and realistic than ever before.  As such, the more violent ones are considered to be “killing simulators” by some politicians and media outlets.  Apparently, video games are “teaching” our young children how to be ruthless killing machines.  Because of this, there is now a push to regulate the sale of violent video games to minors. 

It really bothers me when people attempt to blame a medium of entertainment for the “destructive and violent nature of our youth.”  It is the responsibility of the child’s parents to determine what is appropriate for the child to play; not the government.  Every game sold at retailers is clearly marked with ratings and content descriptors that describe what can be found within said game.  If a parent deems that the subject matter in a particular game is suitable for their child, then they should not be prosecuted or fined because of some stupid law.  The government has absolutely NO right to attempt to raise someone’s child for them.  This law must not be allowed to pass.  I have enough faith that the United States Supreme Court will deem this law unconstitutional on the grounds that it clearly violates the rights of both the parents and the video game studios.  I will follow this story all of the way to the trial in November and attempt to find some logic in this ridiculous situation.