TV Schedule

NY law to restrict violent video games



  1. Psychedelic
  2. related topics
ALBANY, N.Y. - Gov. David Paterson signed a law Tuesday that he said will lead to restrictions on video game violence and help families better monitor grisly games.

The law will create an advisory council to study the effects of violent games on the children. It will also require parental controls on game consoles by 2010 and prominent displays of age ratings on game packages.

But critics say the bill is too vague and too watered down to accomplish its goal. And critics including the group Americans for Tax Reform contend that curbing video violence wasn't really the point in New York or nearly a dozen other states that enacted similar laws, only to see them struck down by courts as unconstitutional.
"It's moral preening," said Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform. "The bill is unconstitutional and has been found that way in other states. And when the inevitable lawsuit comes, the state pays for everybody's legal expenses."

"The reason it is politically popular," he said, "Is the average citizen will read a headline that says, `State Legislature is against violence in children's video games.' They are unlikely to read a headline that says, `Legislature will waste $70,000 of your tax dollars.'"

"It also unfairly singles out the video game industry over all other forms of media," said Richard Taylor of the Entertainment Software Association. "If New York lawmakers feel it is the role of government to convene a government commission on game content, they could next turn to other content such as books, theater and film."

Violations of new labeling and parental control provisions in New York could result in $100 civil penalties. However, the parental controls and the voluntary ratings are already common in the industry.

Language making a felony of selling video games that are sexually explicit or contain depraved violence was lost during furious lobbying that derailed the bill in May 2007. That provision would have made the law among the strictest in the nation.

Then-Gov. Eliot Spitzer made a high priority of the issue in 2007 and it was the subject of several press conferences. The effort continued in the Legislature after Spitzer resigned in March after being disgraced in a prostitution investigation.

The new law was strongly supported in the Senate and Assembly this legislative election year.

The question was never whether to do something about video games that star automatic weapons and gore — that's been politically attractive for years, resulting in legislation in the other states besides New York. The question has always been how to do it without losing a constitutional challenge in the courts.

A prime sponsor, Republican Sen. Andrew Lanza of Staten Island, said the felony provision wouldn't have held up in court, but the remaining elements should stand and help limit access to the games. When the bill was passed this spring, Lanza said the criminal sanction sought by some is already addressed at least in part under pornography and other laws.
Most of the cities and states that have seen their regulations invalidated by courts tried to equate video violence with pornography and restricted the sale of the games to children. The courts have ruled the restrictions violated the U.S. Constitution's freedom of speech protections.

"New Yorkers do not need the state judging which video games are appropriate and which aren't," said New York Civil Liberties Union Executive Director Donna Lieberman. "Parents, not government committees, should be responsible for making those judgments."
Psychedelic

4 responses // NY law to restrict violent video games

  • "The reason it is politically popular," he said, "Is the average citizen will read a headline that says, `State Legislature is against violence in children's video games.' They are unlikely to read a headline that says, `Legislature will waste $70,000 of your tax dollars.'"

    do not be fooled
    this is just another attempt to get votes
    cheakywillie
  • You don’t need a study to know that letting young kids play violent video games is bad for them?! Come on!
  • We had something similar in the 80s, "Video nasty" was a term coined in the United Kingdom in the 1980s that originally applied to a number of films distributed on video cassette that were criticised for their violent content by elements in the press and commentators. The furore created by the moral crusade against video nasties led to the introduction of the UK's Video Recordings Act 1984 which imposed a stricter code of censorship on videos than was required for cinema release. Eventually the the British Board of Film Censors did loosen its standards for classification, especially at the 18 level, in response to public consultation... but not until 2000!
    dearmat23
  • It must be an election year. Are we going to shelter our kids from everything that people think is bad for them? Some think television is bad......so lets take that away. Some think certain types of music is bad like rap, rock, punk......lets take that away. Some believe that certain books contain inappropriate content......so lets have a good old fashion Nazi book burning. Religion has been the cause of more wars then any conflict in the history of humanity. Wars need soldiers and at one point soldiers were children.......lets ban religion........but, ofcoarse, then there are those who think atheism does not give the moral clarity to be a productive member of society........so, then, umm......huh.....well we'll come back to that.

    I'm not going to debate about how there hasn't been a single study that proves video game violence causes violence. I'm also not going to waste my time talking about how out of the hundreds of lawsuits to try and ban video games, every single time a court has held up that it is a violation of our constitutional right of free speech. What I will say though is that everyone who agrees that the state should regulate content in video games are pretty much admitting that children should be raised by the government and not by parents. If you don't know how to say no to your kids, then don't fuckin have kids. Stop trying to oppress the rest of us because you don't want to take the time and get involved in your kids lives.

Add your response

Login/Registration is required to add a response.