Monday, October 11, 2010

Are Video Games protected by the 1st Amendment? (Post #16)

The Entertainment Software Ratings Board currently rates video games, and many retailers restrict the sales of games marked "Mature" or "Adults Only," but those restrictions are voluntary. California passed a law in 2005 banning the sale of any game to minors deemed "excessively violent" by the attorney general.  Violent games are defined as those that include "killing, maiming, dismembering, or sexually assaulting an image of a human being,"; if the game lacks "serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors."  This law was struck down by a U.S. District Court and has been appealled to the Supreme Court


The music and movie industries also have voluntary ratings that let consumers know whether their products are suitable for minors.  There is no actual law or punishment on these, however.  Consider the following questions and submit by Wednesday morning at 8:00 AM.


Should a state be allowed to ban minors from "violent" video games?


What differences are there, if any, between a video game and a book or a movie?


Based on the definition above, do video games have "serious artistic value"?


Are you comfortable leaving the decision of what to ban up to the Attorney General?


Will this prevent minors from buying these games?


Under what circumstances, if any, would you say a game should be banned?


What consequences could there be for other forms of "entertainment" if the Supreme Court rules in favor of California?

135 comments:

  1. if a state is going to ban violent video games, then they should monitor the internet, censor the tele vision, magazines, and any other form of media aimed at minors, video games may be a contributing factor to violence or desensatized feelings towards man but it's not the ONLY big problem.

    the difference between a game and a movie is that the movie's actions, direction, theme, ect is all pre determined, the game is a random element controlled by the gamer's desires like the game Fable where you choose to be a good person or bad and your actions shape wether you are a holy person or someone with the visage of a demon. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fable_(video_game)
    the difference between both games and movies to books is that, a book is ALL in your imagination, you create the movie in your mind and shape how it looks in your own way, nothing is added (violent images) its all pre-existing.

    video games MOST DEFFINATELY have artistic value, to create stunningly fluid 3d images from tiny pixels of multicolored light on a liquid crystal display takes alot of talent in skill, but its a duel edged sword, like most powerful things it can be used to help or hurt.

    i am not comfortable leaving any of my decisions up to anyone else, i'd rather have majority votes on everything and let the majority rule. the people as a whole would choose better than a few biased individuals in my oppinion, who also, might have only heard, seen, or expierenced 1 side of this issue.

    i dont really have an interest in games anymore, i used to before i found other uses for my time i enjoy more, but i wouldn't want to take them away, some people really enjoy them, like i used to.

    minors will find a way to get the games, just like alcohol, cigerates, and pornography, minors have ways of getting what they want.

    i dont think any game should be banned, even a game of just walking around killing everything like Diablo http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diablo_II can have it's uses, say you had a bad day and just really want to kill something, and your not inclined to go, say, hit a punching bag, video games may be your outlet. everything has it's use if used properly.

    other forms of entertainment might be affected in the long run by slowly being censored more and more, i get the feeling that this is just the start to a whole new "big brother debate".

    Bryan Jenks
    P.1 AP Gov
    Mr. Bauer

    ReplyDelete
  2. Richard May Mr. Sloan per. 4October 11, 2010 at 1:56 PM

    there can be very violent images in books along wqith video games. The difference is one you use your imagination to picture it and another you see what it is. I'm reading Native Son in my english class with a lot of you. It's written there is it not. I mean he cuts off her head? there isn't much more grusome.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I agree that video games, movies, etc. should have a rating on them. However, I don't believe that the state should attempt to ban theses video games for minors. The decision whether a child would be able to play those types of games should be left up to the authority of his or her parents. The rating should serve as a template regarding the content of the game rather than serving as a restriction due to the age of the player. If minors dislike a new law saying that they are not allowed to play those types of games, the minors will not stop. They could simply have a parent or person of age purchase the game and they would be able to play the video game without anyone knowing. The scenario reminds me of the Prohibition Act in the 1920's. Just because violent video games would be illegal to minors does not mean it would be possible to enforce that law.

    Devin Smith, Mr. Bauer, P.1.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Maria Schmidt, Mr. Bauer, Per 5October 11, 2010 at 4:21 PM

    I agree with Devin that video games, movies, etc. should have ratings on them. The ratings give hints as to what material is in the games or movies. It should be a parents' decision on whether or not their child should be allowed to play mature or teen-rated games. Video games are different than books and movies in that in order to beat a game or advance to the next level, the player will have to kill something or someone. In books and movies you only read or see it. Also, a law will not prevent minors from obtaining the games. Older siblings, parents, or friends could buy the games for them.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I think that video games DO need to have ratings on them because you wouldn't want to get your 6 year old brother "call of duty" where you see bodies being blown up. My personal opinion is that i don't like grusume video games like that because not only does it make you compettitive to kill but when you don't when at killing the most people you get angry at the game and a lot of the time it gets over the top.
    I agree it should be a popular vote whether a video game should be banned.
    Also i think that all games that have sexual assalt should be banned.
    there is no reason what so ever that it should be okay to have that in a video game.
    Katey Santillan
    Bauer
    p1

    ReplyDelete
  6. Well I do believe that mature video games should be banned. For a number of reasons, kids do not need to associate and participate in some of the killing and gore some games have. When your older its different, it doesn't affect your brain the same. It is different from movies because it is hands on and your actually doing the killing. I don't think little bit of blood or killing animated is a problem its when it's just mass gore and carnage is when it's a problem.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Josh Agans, Bauer P.5October 11, 2010 at 5:29 PM

    I do believe certain video games should be banned to minors. little kids shouldnt be experiencing some of these actions that "mature" or "adult only" video games portray. movies are different though because the kids arent doing the killing or sexual assault. in video games the kids are actually doing everything. i dont think banning those video games from minors would prevent them from buying the game. kids will always find a way to play the game one way or another. i think it is a good idea to try to do something about it though.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Asher Maroot- SloanOctober 11, 2010 at 5:35 PM

    I do not think a state should be allowed to ban any type of video games.
    In a video game, the player is the one controlling what to do. In a movie or book, the reader or person watching the movie has no control over what will happen.
    Video games have an artistic value to them but they are not anything like a painting.
    I do not think that the attorney general should be in charge of making decisions for the entire country unless it concern national security or something in government.
    If it was illegal for minors to buy such games, then the sale of the games would go down but people would still find a way to play them.
    A game should be banned if it the game humiliates a country or brings up a bad time in its history. There are several WW2 games that are not allowed in Germany since it is not a happy point in the countries history.
    If certain video games were to be banned, then that would open up the door on other things such as movies and books

    ReplyDelete
  9. Victoria Charles
    A. Bauer
    Econ
    October 11th 2010

    video games music and books should be protected by the first amendment because its up tp the people to buy them. its not like the company is forcing children to buy them. i believe if people dont like the views of the video games, books, or music, then they should play, read or listen to them. its up to the parents to keep certain things away from their children. Also, its shouldnt be against the law to express your thoughts feelings and customes and beliefs. poeple have the right to refuse to buy. so as long as there is a rationg then it should be fine/

    ReplyDelete
  10. I think that video games should have a rating on them because then parents can know how the video is and if there child should be able to watch it or not. But overall i think the video games or movies should not be banned for minors because they can get it one way or another. Parents could buy the movies for there children and no one would even know,. So basically overall, i think parents should decide whether there kids are allowed to watch it or not.

    Jaskiran Kaur
    Mr.Bauer
    Period 2

    ReplyDelete
  11. Now days video games,book, and movies are very violent and have content that kids should not be seeing. The difference is tha in the vieo games you can actually control what is happening and who you kill or hurt.In books and movies you dont controll any of that. Some video games are alrite but others are way to violent and graphic for minors and thats why i beilve there shouls be rating and kids should not be abel to playy all of them because its a bad influence to them.

    Clarisa Carrillo
    per.4
    Mr.sloan governement.

    ReplyDelete
  12. To answer the first question- No, the state should not control who can play what. That is up to the parent/guardian of a child/teen.
    There is no real difference between a video game and a movie, except for the fact that a person can control the pixel character to perform "violent" actions. With books, you simply read about violence and it pretty much goes like this:
    BOOK--> MOVIE--> VIDEO GAME. Done.
    Video games do in fact have artistic value, as well as educational. It teaches strategy, hand-eye coordination, and timing. It incorporates music, action, and makes the eye flow everywhere among the screen not just at one spot.
    No I am not comfortable leaving it up too the Attorney General, but do we really have a voice in the matter?
    Nope. I bought my first violent rated mature video game and 10. Trust me, mature video games just have more blood, better action, better sound track, better characters, and better weapons, all it lacks is Dora the Explorer to teach you Spanish.
    A game should be banned if it promotes someone to actually go out and murder/rape a live human being (or a dead one). Do games do that? No.
    If the S.C. rules in favor, Entertainment will SUCK. No one can say they don't like a little violence in their daily lives. What bothers me is when these High-On-Their-Pedestals Religious Folk go around preaching about banning violent video games when pardon, but doesn't their "Bible" basically describe how it was okay to kill those that were of a different faith? Yeah, Hypocrisy is thy name.

    P.S. I love video games :)

    Bauer P.3

    ReplyDelete
  13. The state should be allowed to ban minors from violent video games because they do it for the public saftey. These games may cause minors to think a certain way of many things leading to violence as seen in the games. The state is only trying to insure a good future for these minors without the influence of these violent games. Their really is no real difference between a movie, book, and a game. They can all have bad and violent content. They can also all have artistic values good for minors. Some games have artistic vaulue, and some do not. For example some games that do not contain aserious artistic value are not sold to minors. I do not think that the Attourney general should make the choice of whether or not some games will be banned. The people should have a say in the matter because it involves their children. The law may not prevent minors from buying these games, but it could reduce the amount of monors buying the games. If the supreme court rules in favor of CA it could bring changes to other forms of entertaimnet. For example other forms of entertaiment will probably be regulated just like the games.

    ReplyDelete
  14. My opinion is the guardian of the minor should be looking out for their child not the state, I agree strongly on ratings it helps the guardians or parents of that child understand whats in the game.

    ReplyDelete
  15. There is no way a video game should be banned because of its content. We have a rateing system for a reason and if parents will use it correctly everything will be fine. People need to realize its just a GAME.
    jake beilby per 1

    ReplyDelete
  16. I believe that excessively violent video games should be banned from young kids and they should have rating in the same manor as movies. If parents agree to a particular video game that is banned, they could buy it for their child, but it should not be available for the young children to purchase themselves.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Video games should have ratings on them although even if they have ratings, it probably won't stop the kid from playing the game. Same with movies and t.v shows. The parents usually have control over what their kids play and watch on t.v.
    Tori Milligan
    Sloan per.3

    ReplyDelete
  18. If a state was allowed to ban violent video games then let it be. We would just be more familiar with non-violent games.

    The way I see it, there really isn't a difference between video games, books and movies. They all paint a picture in a person's mind whether it be good or bad.

    Most video games have serious artistic value because of all the characters, animation, and scenes in the games.

    No, I am not comfortable with leaving the decision up to the attorney general because it is his opinion which is not fair to the people.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I believe that video games should have ratings. So that it can notify the parent of what the video game will contain and if it will be purchased, or whether or not to purchase it. Although i do not believe that this will stop kids from getting or playing the games. They will probably have someone else buy it for them. Or if their friend has the game they will probably play it with them. So either way they will get to it. It comes down to the parents on what they choose their children to do.

    Melissa Quezada
    Mr. Bauer
    P.2

    ReplyDelete
  20. I believe that games that are totally just off the wall violent or sadistic should be banned from little kids, however upon entering high school one can only hope that you're mature enough not be pushed towards violent tendencies because of a video game. A book or a movie is already predetermined while a video game provides you the opportunity to be choose your own actions, some more than others. Some games completely revolve around whether you choose to be a jerk or a cool dude. I think games most definitely have an artistic value. To say otherwise is just plain asinine. To be able to create breathing, talking near realistic people that interact with one another from scratch is astounding. No matter what happens I'm sure kids will manage to get a hold of these games whether the attorney general says so or not. Just let the parents be the main figure in child's gaming limitations.

    Marklin Nixon
    Mr. Sloan Per 1

    ReplyDelete
  21. Violent video games and forms of entertainment that have other content that is inappropriate for minors should be able to be limited by the state or federal government. Violent video games and video games with abnormal amounts of sex or other material in them are very harmful to youth. Developing children and minors can become hardened to these forms of violence and can then become more violent themselves. I think the system right now is fine. Stores limit the games and movies sold, and parents can still make the executive decisions for their kids as to whether they think they should be able to play a Mature or Teen rated video game.
    Caleb Boyd
    Sloan
    Per. 2

    ReplyDelete
  22. Video games should be rated, but not banned. The ratings are there to give the buyer information about the content in the game, but it is up to the buyer to do what they want with the information. For example, when a parent goes to get a movie it is up to the parent to decide whether or not they will allow their minors to watch it. In my experience it seems that as soon as a child gets close to the age of 13 they are allowed to see up to rated-R. This is a matter that should be decided by the parents, not the state. Even if the state bans video games, there is still the posibility of minors going online to play video games. If violence is the problem then there should be a law to ban violence in the media, but this will never happen.

    The solution to this problem is for parents to take importance to the rating. If something is rated "mature" then they should not allow their children to play it. I believe that seeing to much violence ruins the minds of minors. There are reasons why ratings are put on video games and other media and it is so they can be followed.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Kyle Maples - Bauer Period 1October 11, 2010 at 9:33 PM

    Every video game, movie and so on should have a rating. I think that the rating system needs to be more like the European on and much more strict! It should also be a nation wide rule and not from state to state as some people think it should be.

    ReplyDelete
  24. The attorney general probably has much better things to do than watch all the video games in the world and rate them. I think it should be required for video games to be rated for all to see. Video games are very graphic. A book's image in your head is up to your imagination, and what you see in a movie is what they producer wanted you to see, and is the same every time. In a video game, you are actually causing the things to happen, which is in a sense worse because you are "killing", whereas in other things you are just witnessing.
    Sloan p2

    ReplyDelete
  25. Cierra Gonsalves, Mr. Bauer, Period 2October 11, 2010 at 9:41 PM

    I believe that the state should be able to ban minors from "violent" video games because some games do cause minors to act out based on sometimes harmful influences in media. Movies and Video games tend to be the same. Both can be as violent as they are comical. However, books may lack a visual sense no matter how descriptive. I believe that you have to be creative when creating a video game. People want variety and it takes talent and an open mind to come up with something as artistic as a violent game or movie. Since I don't play video games, the Attorney General can ban whatever it likes...I believe that you should be at least 17 to purchase a violet video game. If there is harmful material such as killing,sexual abuse, theft, drug and alcohol abuse, ect., then ban away. Keep kids somewhat innocent.

    ReplyDelete
  26. I dont think video games are a huge reason kids do what they do. I don't think states should ban them because TV has alot of things that are just as bad and the advertisements are alot worse. Video Games are just another entertaining thing to do just like watching TV or reading a book, so they shouldnt be blamed for all the things kids do. I think the attorney general shouldnt have to decide which video games are too violent, i think that should be left to the parents to decide.

    ReplyDelete
  27. In my opinion, I think there shouldn't be selling any mature games at stores. Nowadays, Little kids be buying games which they shouldn't be playing. What can parents do? when their kids see the games and cant stop crying that they want that game. same goes for movies or book. I think they should have a store for it that sells the mature games or whatever.
    Sania Bacha
    Mr. Bauer
    Period 3.
    :)

    ReplyDelete
  28. The state should be allowed to ban minors from purchasing extremely violent video games depending on the age of the minor. If the minor is almost an adult, he or she should be allowed to buy a game, but if the minor is younger, they should not be allowed to buy a violent game. If the parent approves of their child playing these games, they can purchase the games for their kids. This way the game does not get into the hands of younger kids because it can affect them.

    ReplyDelete
  29. i think states should be able to limit the sale of a violent game to a minor. if the parent allows them to play then they can buy it for them. kids learn alot by what they see and young children shouldn't be allowed to buy any game they want because they dont always know whats best for them.

    ReplyDelete
  30. States shouldnt be allowed to ban minors from violent video games. it is the parents choice if they want there child playing it or not.
    The difference between video games and books or movies i that the player has the choice in what to make the character do. Some video games have artistic value, but most do not. The decision to ban the sale of violent games to minors will not prevent them from playing them. usually, children go to stores with parents who buy it for them. works every time. under no circumstances should a game be banned. it should be left up to the sales rating for them to know what the people really think.

    ReplyDelete
  31. video games should have the same exact rules that movies have. for example i teen cant go watch an r rated movie, yet if the parent rents it and allows the child to watch it then it is there decision, and that is exactly how games would be.
    kimberlie hernandez
    sloan
    period 4

    ReplyDelete
  32. Games that are way too horrible need to be banned, but I believe games that are way too horrible are already banned. Its the same with movies. Ban it if it way to horrible, and rate it if it isn't.

    Victoria Turney
    Bauer 1st

    ReplyDelete
  33. Brian Magina, Sloan P.3October 12, 2010 at 1:28 AM

    The state should be allowed to ban minors from purchasing violent video game. If the minor is from the ages of 7-17 then i believe they should not be able to buy these"mature" games. But if they are 18 and an adult, then he or she should be allowed to buy the game. If the parent approves of their child playing these games, then they can go ahead and buy the games for their kids. It should be the choice of an adult to decide whether or not a minor becomes violent.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I think video games with violence and abnormal amounts of sexaul content should be limited by the state or federal government. They are very harmful to kids and teens. They lead their imaginations in the wrong directions and make them curoius about things they never would have been. Ultimately though, its the parents decision as to wheather or not allow their kids to purchase and play those violent and sexual video games.
    brenda anguiano
    Mr Bauer P4

    ReplyDelete
  35. I think that video games should have a rating on them. It helps the person who is buying the game to be informed about the content that is in the game. Parents would probably be really upset if they bought a violent game for their kid and they didn't know it. Sloan per 1

    ReplyDelete
  36. States should NOT be allowed to ban "violent" video games. Video games are not really much different than watching a movie or reading a book, the only notable difference being that you control a character in that story. Video games do have serious artistic value because many video games have a story or something that makes the game worth playing. I don't think the Attorney General should have the power to ban violent video games. I don't think under any circumstances that a video game should be banned. And banning violent video games will not deter minors from getting their hands on them anyways. If this ban is allowed to happen, then most of our artistic freedoms and ability to view what we wish (most notably in the privacy of our own homes) will be severely diminished and we will be nothing but sheep to what the government wants us to see.

    Brian S.
    Per. 4

    ReplyDelete
  37. It is a good idea to set a ban on mature video games being distributed to minors because there are things they shouldnt be seeing. The only way that they could get the game would be through their parents and then it is their parents choice of weather or not they want them playing the mature game. I still feel there is very little difference between mature movies, books or video games because they all are mature for the same reasons such as graphic images, nudity, and language. The only difference between video games, books, and movies is that you do the actions in a video game. Even if there is a ban on distributing them to minors there are many ways around it so in reality there is not a 100% ban on it therefore it truly doesnt matter.

    ReplyDelete
  38. Ok why in the world would they ban video games when their are MORE violent things out there. Just because the video game company make bank doesnt mean that all kids are going to get violent games. People need to open their eyes and see there other types of games that are age group prefered. Its so dumb that people want to ban video game when there some much things are happing.
    Rene Bonilla
    Bauer 4th

    ReplyDelete
  39. No, I do not believe the state should decide who is banned from violent video games. It’s somewhat like a rated R movie; younger people watch them as long as their parents don’t oppose it. In the theaters, you can watch a rated R movie if accompanied by an adult. I don’t think there is a difference between a rated R movie and a violent video game. The same rules should be applied.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Even if state bans minors from "violent" video games they're going to get it some how I mean there's no stopping them. Differences between book, movie and a video game is that in a video game you are actually the character playing him/her and you are responsible for the actions the character does. Now in a book or movie your either watching or reading, not really taking place in anything. There isn't any circumstances, its a virtual world, way different than the real world. If supreme court rules in favor of california the entertainment consequences could be not being able to make and sell violent games books movies ect if possible. But most likely that'll never happen.

    Sloan Period 1

    ReplyDelete
  41. I don't think a state shad ban violent video games because, well, it's a game. Kids don't have to play these and when they do, they should know the difference between life and the game. It's all on the kids and players to take effect from these games. That's just my opinion though.

    Daniel Ruiz
    Sloan
    Govt Per. 5

    ReplyDelete
  42. I think that states should have the power to ban minors from violent video games because those video games may promote kids to commit violence that they see as "cool" which can endanger the safety of citizens in that state. Video games are interactive while books are just read and movies are just seen, but in video games you play, read and watch all at once. I think the decision of what to ban should be given to the people, because the opinion of a multitude is given rather than the bias opinion of one person. This will prevent some minors from buying these games, but there is always going to be a group of rebellious kids that will get a hold of those games somehow like drug dealers get a hold of their drugs. A game should be banned if the played character commits an act of crime is done like sexual assault, drug dealing, or torturing. Some movies and books could be banned as well if they contain the same material.

    Melody M
    Mr. Sloan
    per. 1

    ReplyDelete
  43. Emily Staab Bauer Per 2October 12, 2010 at 4:39 PM

    Personally, i think the ratings on video games are a good thing. ButI don't think that the state should go as far as banning the violent games, but there should be some sort of consent form that the parent/guardian should have to sign. AS far as differences go, with a book you kind of have to use your imagination on how disturbing a scene might be, and that is what a directors does when he makes a movie: he uses his imagination to create an effective scene. But with video games,it is up to the game creators to decide how bloody or inappropiate a scene gets. In some video games, when the payer kills another character, blood shoots out from everywhere which is not necesarily important. But there should at least be some sort of restriction to who can buy those violent games.

    ReplyDelete
  44. Video games should have ratings, but I don't think they should be banned. Why are parents even buying these 'violent' games for their kids in the first place? We have the freedom to play whatever games we want. They're just games.

    Guadalupe Velasquez
    Sloan, period 1

    ReplyDelete
  45. I think that banning the sale of certain violent video games to minors is ok. Whether or not a minor has access to such a source of violence should be a decision for parents to make. Sure there are other ways to access mature-rated materials such as at a friend's house or on the internet, but that should be for the parents to deal with. Playing video games and watching movies at home seems a little too personal for the government to interfere with. Bauer/Sloan

    ReplyDelete
  46. Alexis Watson Bauer 3October 12, 2010 at 5:38 PM

    I agree with Danielle. Video games should have ratings in order for parents to decide whether or not their children should be allowed to play such violent games. But that should be parents alone to make those decisions.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Miriam Bejines p.5 Mr.SloanOctober 12, 2010 at 6:11 PM

    I think that video games should be banned from chidren under 18 years old because if those kids that play video games that are violently or sexualy involved might grow up with his mind full of violent thoughts and probably cause to kil or even raped because he or she might think it is normal like the video games.I think that the law might help this issue and also that the parents should not allow their children this kind of video games.

    ReplyDelete
  48. I think the games shouldn't be banned, but if they are then why wouldn't movies, music, and books be banned as well. I think if a parent thinks a games ect. is too violent or explicit then the parents should punish the kids not the law. If the games are banned it won't stop minors from getting the games, they will find a way. It shouldn't be up to the General Attorney to ban entertainment it should be the parents job if they have a problem with it.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Games that are rated adults only are almost never made because they don't sell. Other than that, the only restrictions that should be made are letting kids under the age of like 12 play rated M video games, unless a parent consents to letting their child buy it. Once they become teens, they'll be fine. http://www.pbs.org/kcts/videogamerevolution/impact/myths.html <--- Video games won't ruin a childhood.
    Sloan Per. 3
    Bauer Per. 4

    ReplyDelete
  50. I think that it would be a good idea to ban certain video games to minors, but they will find a way somehow to get one, and even though books, video games, and the television, are basicaly the same thing, in a vidoe game you can actually kill someone, where in a book, you have to use your imagination.

    ReplyDelete
  51. Steven Reichmuth, Bauer, period 2October 12, 2010 at 6:50 PM

    This always happens...some over protective parents ruin it for everyone else. Instead of banning these video games and making some new music video illegal...the solution is simple, if you don't want your kid playing or listening to something you view as inappropriate, DON'T BUY IT FOR THEM! If people want the goverment to keep creating laws like this, we might as well be living in communist China. There you can't even surf the internet freely.

    ReplyDelete
  52. personally, I do not believe states should ban "violent" video games because the kids do not have the authority to buy these so called "violent" video games. it is ultimately up to the parent to buy these sort of games for their children. An minor can not buy a rated M game unless their parents are present and agree with the child. The internet can toy with somebodies brain more than a video game can because access to such websites is as easy as "taking candy from a baby."
    Ruben Rodriguez
    Mr. Bauer Per.3

    ReplyDelete
  53. Spencer PellandiniOctober 12, 2010 at 7:02 PM

    The government can try and ban games from minors but it will never work. It is the same as alcohol, although it is ban minors will still get ahold of it. If they are going to tempt to monitor video games they should be monitoring tv, movies, magazines and internet it all has the same images. It is just impossible to block all these images from minors they will be exposed at one point or another it is the parents job to ensure that when they child does become exposed to these images that they teach their childern the rights and wrongs on the issue.

    Spencer Pellandini
    Sloan
    P.1

    ReplyDelete
  54. Danielle Bulmer -- Bauer-- 4October 12, 2010 at 7:06 PM

    I think that the states may TRY to ban the games; however, like some others have stated we can still obtain the game multiple ways. Also in my opinion, I love playing those type of games mostly because it is interesting and it catches my interest a lot more than the other games. Though I do have to agree that those type of games do have an affect on us mentally, and in some cases, physically. I don't think banning the games will have much effect as stated earlier, we can still get our hands on the games.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I think that states should be able to ban kids from playing violent games. if they are able to play those types of games its possible for them to be influenced on what they see.
    Monica Salazar
    mr. sloan
    p.4

    ReplyDelete
  56. I dont see a reason for video games to be banned. If parents dont want their children to have the game then so be it, thats what the rating is for. If the parents dont oppose of it then they should be able to play it.

    Chelsea Ray
    Mr. Sloan, p.1

    ReplyDelete
  57. Video games allow youth to use their imagination and solve a problem. However as time has progressed, the objective of video games have evolved to solely kill. Violent games should be rated and decided by the parent of the youth if it is suitable for their child. children handle violence differently, some simple can't.

    Gabby Cello
    p.3
    Mr. Sloan

    ReplyDelete
  58. Danielle Smith, Sloan P1October 12, 2010 at 7:12 PM

    I think the ratings on video games are good because it warns the parents or guardians of what the video game entails. States shouldn't be allowed to ban minors from violent video games because 1. people have different opinions on what qualifies something as violent or not, 2. buying a child a game with a mature rating, or whatever rating is in question, is totally up to the parent's discretion, anddd 3. I'm almost positive the Attorney General has plenty more important things to do than sit and moniter the content of every video game coming out. Though video games, books, and movies all tell a story, books and movies are more acceptable to have violent content, in my opinion, because we are just watching it; whereas with a video game, we are doing the actions (killing!). Obviously video games have serious artistic value. The entire thing is a digital story with creators behind the whole thing, artists included. Who do you think makes the graphics for them?! I don't think the Attorney General should be in charge of this decision. Minors are going to buy what game they want, regardless of the rating, so the Attorney General shouldn't waste his time. He should have some much more important duties on his plate other than worrying about video games with the state our country is in right now. Maybe a game should be banned if it teaches some seriously low moral traits, like if there was a game about bombing the Middle East when we were in the middle of a war. I'd say that could be a big no no. The only consequence I see falling into our hands from this is a Big Brother situation. It just makes me picture an over controlling government like that.

    ReplyDelete
  59. I think that the government should be able to ban minors from violent games, but only if the government can prove that violent video games pose a threat for the public. I do not think that any law will prevent minors from obtaining violent games; they will just ask an older friend or sibling to buy the game. Some parents might even buy the games for them.

    Omar Hoyos
    Bauer

    ReplyDelete
  60. Faye Roberson, Bauer, period 5October 12, 2010 at 7:30 PM

    I agree with there being an age limit on bad video games because there is no reason for a little kid to be playing with crazy games. It makes them crazy. Older teenagers can barely handle them. I have seen to many showws on how peolpe try to make lie into a real video game and go out killing other people and even there families. But i also dont think a video game is to different from a book or a movie because with a book you make your own imaginations and a movie is also watching people kill people and thats not always good either for certian people.Some people just cant handle that but then i think its their fault for buyin it.

    ReplyDelete
  61. I believe video games are protected by the first amendament. It is a form of speech and does not create an imminent danger. Parents can also monitor what their kids play.

    ReplyDelete
  62. I think that certain video games should be banned by the government. Despite this I also believe that they shouldn't have to be banned by the government because parents should ban them without being told to do so. It is because of the fact that some parents do not realize what is in these games that we need these. Due to this, I believe that we do need stricter ristrictions on these videogames to protect kids when their parents won't.
    Oshalim
    Bauer per. 1
    Sloan per. 3

    ReplyDelete
  63. I think minors should be banned from buying very violent games and if they really want it they should ask their parents if its ok and have them purchase the game. I don't think its fair for the attorney general to pick what is to be banned, i think it should be picked by a committee of people not just one person. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of California then the entertainment industry might face lower product sails if they don't clean up their entertainment.

    ReplyDelete
  64. I BELIEVE THAT THE STATE SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO BAN VIDEO GAMES BECAUSE THE MINORS CAN JUST GET THE VIDEO GAMES THROUGH ADULTS OR THEIR PARENTS. THERE IS NO POINT IN BANNING A VIDEO GAME NO MATTER THE CONTENT. IF A VIDEO GAME IS TOO VIOLENT OR WHAT EVER THEN WHY WOULD THEY EVEN CREATE IT? IT SEEMS STUPID TO ME TO BAN THEM. BANNING THEM WILL NOT STOP THE MINORS FROM BUYING OR PLAYING THESE GGAMES. IT WILL NOT WORK BECAUSE KIDS ARE BANNED TO DO A LOT OF THINGS BUT STILL DO THEM. HOW WILL THEY EVER GET CAUGHT ? IF THEY DO GET CAUGHT WILL THERE BE CONSEQUENCES?IF SO, WHAT WILL THEY BE?
    DIANA REYESS=]

    ReplyDelete
  65. I don't think the government should be able to ban video games. The video games should have a rating and warning of any inappropriate contents. It should br up to parents to decide whether they want their kid to play that video game.
    Erica Ayala
    Mr. Bauer
    Per. 4

    ReplyDelete
  66. Cristian Garcia/ Bauer period 3October 12, 2010 at 8:11 PM

    first of all kids will always find ways to get violent video games. violence in video games does not change the way kids act. a video game is just for entertainment it is protected by the first amen because its freedom of speech video games have the right to be as violent or graphic as they want.i feel as if we the people should decide if children should have violent games.

    ReplyDelete
  67. Bryana Zamarripa Bauer p3October 12, 2010 at 8:20 PM

    i believe that video games with mature content such as nudity or sexual content she not be sold to kids under the age of 16. gore is not as much as a problem as those things. i dont believe the government should decide the games which kids are allowed to play. they shouldnt be able to ban games either. the people that buy the games should decide.
    Bryana Zamarripa
    bauer p3

    ReplyDelete
  68. Karina Ramos Mr. Sloan Period 1

    States should be allowed to ban minors from "violent" video games. there is a reason why movies, games, and books are rated. and this should be a warning. this could also be seen as an illegal thing to do. not all video games have a "serious artistic value." i think that some video games should be banned if they are too violent. and if they also contain overly the top illegal stuff. i really don't think that if the attorney general does this, this still won"t prevent minors from buying these types of games.

    ReplyDelete
  69. The current restrictions are absolutely ideal. The government should have some presence in restricting the sale of violent video games to minors. Meanwhile, the Entertainment Software Ratings Board(ESRB) is pretty effective in outlining the composition of obscenity that a game may feature. Government is enforcing a law to inform the public, while parents still have the ultimate authority to make the decisions. It's a nice balance.

    The new Medal of Honor came out today. w00t!(Sloan P.3/Bauer P.4)

    ReplyDelete
  70. Cecilia Gonzales Mr. Sloan Period 4

    in my opinion, i believe that every video game, book, and movie should have a rating. this shows if one is able to watch it or not. but i really don't believe in the banning of these violent video games. either way minors will get their hands on these games. for one thing these are just games and all people should tell the difference between reality and what not. but i do see where these minors could have actions later in life caused by these violent games. if these games are too gruesome then they should just have a higher rating or maybe just be banned.

    ReplyDelete
  71. The government should not have the right to ban a video game, or anything that is solely created for entertainment. It should be left to parental consent, for the ratings of the game are clearly posted on the box. I think this is ridiculous and should be struck down immediately.

    ReplyDelete
  72. I don't think the state should be able regulate what a minor can or can't play because it protects them from certain content that they shouldn't see. Just because they ban minors from certain games doesn't mean they're not going to still buy them. If they can't buy them themselves someone else will. So yes, the state should be allowed to, however it's kind of pointless. There's not much difference between a video gamea and a book and a movie. A video game you're more interactive with, a book you actualy read and just visualize, and a movie you just watch. Either way if they're is violence it's going to be shown in one way or another. Yes video games have "serious artistic value" because it took creativity to design the game and put it together, which is an art that not just anyone can do. Vidoe games that should be banned are games that have too much sexual content or and games that graphically show brutal violence. I think that if the Supreme Court rules in favor of California it would ban pretty much all of out entertainment.

    Sloan P.2

    ReplyDelete
  73. I think that due to pass teens who are so influenced by violent video games result in assaults and even murders that it is a good idea to ban violent video games from minors. Some kids just don't know how to handle themselves. I believe that video games are more of an influence than movies because in video games you can control the object or character yourself almost as if you were the master mind of all it's actions.

    ReplyDelete
  74. Nathalie Trevino; A. Bauer period1October 12, 2010 at 8:45 PM

    I am completely comfortable allowing the Attorney General to ban certain video games they deem inappropriate. I have witnessed several occasions where parents unknowingly purchase inappropriate games for their children. Movies and video games should have ratings, plain and simple. Many do have a lot of artistic value, but some are just trash. I do believe all books have value, much more value than any video could ever offer.

    ReplyDelete
  75. I think that the state has the right to ban violent games for minors. However, I think that there are too many variables to blame video games alone for violent behavior. If a kid has a strong moral background and his parents have taught him right from wrong I really doubt violent video games make much of a difference. The problem is parents whom use violent video games as a baby sitter and allow them to saturate themselves in violence.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Janeiry Balderas, Mr. Sloan, Period 4October 12, 2010 at 8:52 PM

    As a video gamer i believe that there should be ratings to movies and games. In some instances though i believe that the ratings sometimes do not make sense such as some M(17+) ratings should be lowered, because they have as much violence as an T rated video game. Overall though some ratings should change the age limit but that does not mean that i don't believe in having rated video games. Overall though video games should be given ratings, mostly the ones that are to sexual or gory, but if they are to offensive i believe that they shouldn't even be released on the market. As to whether video games are artistic, well some can but actually some games make you think more than you would think they would. For example, they can make you do puzzles, trick your mind, and challenge the way that you think. At the end though everyone has their agency and they should be allowed to see and do what they want(at least have a certain age though, no young kids). Least and most important is the fact that young children cant just buy these games by themselves and i believe that is also part of the problem, but only time can tell the future of video games.

    ReplyDelete
  77. Sure, ratings on a game are good for the people who actually care, but that wont stop the teenagers who don’t. If a kid wants a game bad enough but he or she can’t buy one due to a rating, there is a possibility for theft. Not only that they could have an older sibling or even a parent buy it for them, whether they know how violent of a game it is. And yeah, games are different than movies or books. With the books you have a vague image even in the most graphic book. There’s no solid movement. In movies, it’s the next step. There is a clear image and visible movement, though uncontrollable. You’re more of a witness then a killer. Now a game is the extreme of the three. In a game, you are the killer. You go around shooting zombies, slicing and dicing alien creatures or beating up a hoe. You are the one “put under pressure” to kill before being killed. From the minor experience with violent games, when you don’t succeed in the game, you become angry. So one thing about these games is a raise in irritation, which is defiantly different than reading a book or watching a movie. With the book and movie, you go with the flow of the plot, you don’t have to do anything but read or watch. But with a game, you are faced with obstacles that make you decide whether you should pop a bullet in the guys head silently, or make a scene, kill them viciously and run for your life. There defiantly is a major difference there. Yeah, sure there should be ratings on these games. Great comparison is to Germany. In America, we have these violent video games and following, a high violence rate. In Germany violent video games are not accepted (but not banned) and their violence rates a lower. Maybe, if we stopped produced so many violent games, we wouldn’t have to worry about the game ratings. Hahah. What are video games but a way to make money?

    ReplyDelete
  78. Kevin Krivda, Bauer P1
    I believe that if a state wants to ban the sale of video games deemed "violent" than they should be able to. There is no difference between video games, books, and movies, in my opnion. However, if a state were to ban a video game, i believe that people will still find ways to get their hands on those games that are banned. Personally, I could care less whether the decision is made by the attorney general or someone else. Some games have some teaching value, but in the end, video games are meant to entertain teens and all people. I think if you ban video games, then the government might as well ban movies that are too violent, and we all know that is not gonna happen.

    ReplyDelete
  79. I think that the banning of video games is ridiculous.Banning anything will just create more of a demand for it and create even more problems in the process. The banning of video games, not just a certain title, should be dealt with a vote not a attorney general.Although, the majority of people who play violent video games aren't even old enough to vote.Sort of ironic
    Jose Alvarez p.4 Sloan

    ReplyDelete
  80. Whether or not kids play violent video games it is up to them and their parents. There shouldn't be a law that prohibits, these more mature games from being sold at stores.

    -Ivan Cardenas
    Mr. Sloan Per. 3

    ReplyDelete
  81. Jacob Farrar Bauer 4th

    I dont think the state should be alound to ban violent video games from minors becuse there is such a high demand for it that it would never happen. I dont think there is a big diffrance from a book or movie compaired to a video game. the only diffrance i can think of is that a video game is more interactive and is played over and over unlike a book or a movie that you watch only one time.I think that we have the freedom to speech and a vedio game is one brqanch of that so you cant just ban it, you would have to ban all links to media of violance to the children. i dont think making a law will prevent minors from buying these games. older Fasmily members will buy these games for themself and for others just like evrything else minors cant optaine ligally. i dont think any game should be bann becuse it goes aginst the constitution but if it had to be ban i would think a game that goes aginst our nation and the government belifes. You just cant ban video games from minors becuse there is alwase diffrent was of violence apond children. they would have to block t.v, games, movies, books, internet, and many other sorces of media.

    ReplyDelete
  82. Lucero Cardiel. Mr. Bauer 3rd periodOctober 12, 2010 at 9:39 PM

    I think video games should be treated as movies are treated. Movies have a rating and those who are going to watch it know the content of the production. This is also where the parents come in. Parents have the right to decide whether that child play that video game.
    Personally, I don't think video games have any artistic value whatsoever. Of course, we have to give credit to those who created the games and had to go through the whole process, but artistic? no.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Mallory lemieux Mr sloan pd 4October 12, 2010 at 9:40 PM

    I think that the banning of video games would be stupid because it shouldn't be a law of what a child plays but instead the parents decision.if a game is bad then there would be a sticker warning of it and then a parents decision to buy it for them

    ReplyDelete
  84. video games have the capacity to be far more harmful than a book or movie. in a violent movie, you are desensitized to the violence and sexual images, yes, but you are only a passive observer. in vulgar video games, the gamer is encouraged by the rules of the game to engage in unlawful, indecent, and inappropriate activities. psychological studies support that children with early exposure to such content are more prone to violence.

    there are games with literary or artistic value! final fantasy VII and XII would be my personal favorites. they are extremely artistic as far as graphics go, and their plots have significance and parallels to world affairs today.

    i will never take my children to see a rated R movie, and for good reason! movie rating standards have changed over the years! a PG 13 movie has a ridiculously larger amount of swearing, violence, and sexuality now than it did 20 years ago. whoever is rating these movies is doing it badly. there are some PG 13 movies out today that my parents wouldn't want me to see. the same goes for video game ratings.

    when should a game be banned? well, there are already video games today that allow the player to murder, rape, and torture other human beings. isn't that as bad as it can get? the line should have been drawn a long time ago.

    ReplyDelete
  85. I really just laughed because as i respond to this blog im am in the process of finally beating one of the most grusome games to ever come out on the xbox 360. GUess what? im a minor im only 17 , but truly i believe this articles is asking should "little kids" be able to play "bloody" video games.Well one things first do little kids have pay checks . No they dont they get the money from their parents. Dont go blaming companies because these video games have negative an influence on the "lil ones" . Bottom line parents if you dont think you child is ready to see things like in these video games then dont buy them common sense .

    PS. I still believe that that call of duty modern warfare 2 games was made to show america hello this is truly what war is like , so please stop sending us here
    jordan elzie sloan per2

    ReplyDelete
  86. i think the ratings are a good thing because they let you know what's in the game. But i don't think there should be any laws about the ratings, it's up to the parents to decide what they can play

    ReplyDelete
  87. In my opinion having ratings on video games is enough information for the public. It's no different than having a rating on a movie. Kids should not be banned from mature rated games but their parents should be responsible enough to know what is healthy for their children.
    Chris Woodard- Bauer P1

    ReplyDelete
  88. Emily Geiszler, Bauer, Period 4October 12, 2010 at 10:16 PM

    I believe that states should have the right to limit the violent games minors purchase. It is very similar to watching an "R" rated movie at a theater. You must be 17 to purchase a ticket to see those movies, so you should have to be that age to purchase a violent video game with a mature or adult only rating. You wouldn't want your younger family members to be able to play those games, so the age limit is a good thing. They would have to have parental consent, and I believe that is a good thing. Minors should have limits.

    ReplyDelete
  89. Samantha Barragan Mr.Bauer Pd.3October 12, 2010 at 10:21 PM

    I think that is should be illegal to sell them to minors because it really is violent. The kids should not be influenced by it and be able to purchase such games. The difference between games and books is that in games you areactually virtually doing the violent acts and other acts. In books, you are just reading about it, not acting any of it out or visually seeing any of them being acted out. I believe that the government should have some power over this law, but that mostly the game stores and parents should make the decisions over their customers and children's decisions.

    ReplyDelete
  90. Alejandro Ibarra (Mr. Sloan, p.1)October 12, 2010 at 10:22 PM

    I believe that the state or atorney general should have no right over which games a minor is able to buy. I think that this has to do more with how their parents want to raise their children. If someone is to decide i believe the parents should, but i also think a video game is no different from a movie or book. In all these you are exposing them from the violence you dont want them to be exposed too yet these iteams dont have any restrictions.

    ReplyDelete
  91. Sergio Maldonado, Sloan p.3/ Bauer p.4October 12, 2010 at 10:22 PM

    States should not be allowed to ban minors from video games. Only the parents should decide what their child plays. In books and movies, you interpret the violence, while in video games the violence is actually done by the player. I don't think that this ban would stop minors from playing the violent games(playing not buying seems to the problem),however it probably will stop them from buying violent games. The minors could just resort to an adult to buy it for them. Games should only be banned from minors if a large number of the population objects to a game. I think that the current system that provides ratings for games works fine, because the parents could just take away any games they deem inappropriate for their children.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Justin Tyler,Bauer,p.3October 12, 2010 at 10:35 PM

    I do not think their is a need to ban a video game. I understand the rating because that gives the public an idea of the gameplay that goes on on the game;however, to go as far as banning minors from playing the game is not right. If they want to play the game, let them. There are much more things to worry about than a video game for example the internet.There are tons of horror and grusome and sexual things on the internet that minors are able to get ahold of with the push of a button.

    ReplyDelete
  93. Lourdes Godinez
    Mr Bauer
    p2
    I think that ratings should be put on video games. I dont think its okay for little kids to be playing the video games that include alot of violence because then they become influenced by it. I think that even if the government banned it, minors would still play the game because the parents would buy it for them.

    ReplyDelete
  94. Maria Perez
    Sloan
    Per: 4
    I think that it would be a good idea to ban minors from "violent" because it does them no good but even then the people buying it would not care and listen about that. They would still give it to a minor. I think that books, movies, and video games are the same because they all can have violent parts in it. I feel confortable leaving the decision to the general attorney on what to ban, but still it won't prevent minors from buying the games and playing them. I think that the video games that involve killing is the one that should be banned because it influences in a negative way. Some consequences for playing these games are that many people become influenced and do things they are not suppose to do.

    ReplyDelete
  95. I'm sure if I actually enjoyed playing violent video games, my opinion would be different, but I don't see a problem in states banning violent video games. These games are awful influences to minors, and we don't want any kids repeating in real life what they do in the game. Now, I know most kids wouldn't do that, but some kids are mentally unstable, and this is the kind of stuff they feed off of. If there bombing cars and shooting citizens in video games, who knows what the kids will be inspired to do. I guess video games can hold some fo of artistic value, but all that is gonna to is influence the minors just as art is usually meant to do.

    Mr. Sloan
    Period 5

    ReplyDelete
  96. Margarita Flores per.5 Mr.BauerOctober 12, 2010 at 11:05 PM

    A state shouldn't be allowed to ban minors from "violent" video games, because the minors will still get those games somehow even parents could buy it for then it should really be up to the parents what their kids should play not the state.The differences between a video game and movie is that kids can actually see it and the book they could only image. Yes video games have "serious artistic value".I am not comfortable leaving the decision of what to ban up to the Attorney General who said they know what is best. This will not prevent minors from buying these games like most illegal things minors find a way to get to it. Under the circumstances,a game should be banned when it has pron or realist killing. The consequences could be for other forms of "entertainment" if the Supreme Court rules in favor of California that maybe there will be less buyers.

    ReplyDelete
  97. i think that banning video games would be a dum idea .why ? because the parnets of the person play a game have the controll of letting them play or not and it should be the parents decision

    sloan pr5
    richard manzo

    ReplyDelete
  98. I believe that video games are rated for a reason and it us up to the parent of that child to decide wether or not their child should have the game not the states. I also disagree with the person that said that video games affect a Childs mind because when I was younger I would play rated mature games and I cannot say that any of it has influenced me in any way.
    Victor Alvarez
    Mr.Sloan Pd5

    ReplyDelete
  99. I have my own philosophy: let every single child play or watch mature things. One of these days, these kids will be playing or watching something violent. Why should we keep these things away from them? These kids will become adults, why should they not experience what adults do?

    ReplyDelete
  100. Unfotunately letting kids watch and do and say what they want is the reason upon why we have horrible things in society right now. People dont care about things others believe they need for life and other such things. But banning a video and the contents of it should not be up to the government. Kids of certian ages should be shown what life could be like for them. Parents see that their kids act as such and if they see better they teach them better than that. Parents should know what is best for their family. it should not be up to the gov.
    Joeliane M, sloan, p. 5

    ReplyDelete
  101. Overall banning minors from obtaining violent video games will in deed not benefit from anything. in the end, minors are still faced with many other technologies in which uphold the same obscurities as video games. & the decisions of whether or not a minor should or shouldn't be able to play violent video games should be approved andauthorized by the parent and or guardian of the minor. & even though ratings are set on certain games prohibiting and allowing minor interaction, it would not stop a minor from playing it if he or she wanted to.
    Sloan P/2

    ReplyDelete
  102. I believe video games should have a rating, but shouldn't be punishable if abused. They should be just like a movie or a book. A lot of gamers would say that certain games are art. Art is in the eye of the beholder. =)

    ReplyDelete
  103. i beleave that games should not be baned the reason why is because the parents have controll of what their kids play and there for i think there is no problem i also think it all should depend on the kids behavior.


    ricardo villalpando
    sloan pr5

    ReplyDelete
  104. Should a state be allowed to ban minors from "violent" video games?
    There is no difference that I see between a book or a movie, except when reading books, you would have to create your own images. Video games do have artistic values because one is able to do many things in a video game. A state should not be allowed to ban minors from "violent" video games. The people to ban these minors should be their parents. Banning video games won't prevent minors from buying, because they are not the ones who are paying for it.

    Chrissy Vue
    Sloan
    Period 3

    ReplyDelete
  105. Ithink that videos should not be aloud to be banned because if they already have a law so minors cant buy them , then the parents would still have to approve it before they buy. So it is up to the parents if the kids are aloud to get it or not. Video games are kinda in the same category as books and movies, because they can all be violent. I agree with chrissy, because they cant pay for it, so an adult does.

    Blake Harrison
    Bauer
    Period 3

    ReplyDelete
  106. First, I would say that video games certainly have artistic value, the same as any film or book would, though with the added artistic choices tat come through the methods of gameplay. A good game with have artistic value in its concept development, design art, backgrounds, characters, story, soundtrack, and voice acting, just like any film. A difference, as Bryan stated, is the ability to make your own moral choice in a game. Another example would be Bioshock, where your own moral choices in trying to brave the dystopia you find yourself in, change the outcome of the game for you as a player. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BioShock

    While a game like Bioshock is violent, it also has high artistic merit, both in visuals and in its storytelling, with strong morals that follows the player through the game. To say that a game like this, which is rated M for mature, is mindless shooting is to completely ignore the point of the game, and the work of hundreds of designers and developers.

    But how does a board regulate what is of artistic merit? It seems that they are trying to draw a line between games such as Grand Theft Autohttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grand_Theft_Auto_%28series%29 and Bioshock or Shadow of the Colossus , but it is impossible to put a label on something as "artistically meritorious". To say that even Grand Theft Auto holds no art would be a huge slap in the face to those artists who worked so hard on it. It is a matter of opinion, and therefore a board cannot sit up in high seats and declare what is art and what is not.
    All is art!

    Also, the ratings are there for parents, to deem what is right and proper for their own children. It is not video games that make children violent, it is parents. They should be able to judge if their children can handle it a not, and ensure that their children are not playing what is not appropriate for them.

    Sasha Schotzko-Harris
    Bauer P.1

    ReplyDelete
  107. This is very dumb. Video games should be allowed to be sold to minors. This is not that big of a deal of 13 year olds see some video game guy getting shot in the head. They've probably seen worse from movies and books. They are just learning about life and I don't feel like the government should even get into this because minors are just going to play "hey mister" and play it any anyways.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Young children are influienced very easily, and it is horrible to think that most of them spend a lot of time playing video games that contain unappropriate content. I think that each game should have a rating to let others especially parents know what type of game it is. My overall opinion is that I do not think it is right to let children play these games. They will be neutralized to all violence and might see it as nothing and start being viloent themselves

    ReplyDelete
  109. I believe that a state should not ban video games that are violent. They have the rating on them and if they are rated M then to buy it you have to be at least 17. This allows the parents to regulate what kind of video games their children are playing because they are the ones buying them. I do think a violent video game would be worse then a violent book however, because you are actually seeing the images and you are the one controlling the character who is killing these people. Some games are too violent for children, but that is why there is a rating system and I think that is suitable for keeping them away from most children.

    ReplyDelete
  110. Zach Mietz posted the comment above.

    ReplyDelete
  111. I think it is a good idea to place ratings on the video games and CD's, otherwise a kid may come home and their parent could get really upset at the nature of the video game or music and cause a big parent uproar! By putting the rating on we avoid a problem. It will prevent minors from buying the games if they are banned from doing so, but their parents can still do that from them, with their consent. i think a game should be banned under the circumstances of extreme violence, nudity, and language. A parent should be warned of what their children will see and hear when subjected to these games.
    Hayley Swearingen
    Sloan
    Per. 4

    ReplyDelete
  112. I believe that children get influenced pretty easily by things, and the majority of children play video games. It may be bad for children to experience and play violent video games since they could try the things in which they're shown in the games. In the end though, it should be up to their adults on whether they should be exposed to those games, since they are their legal guardians and know what's best. Sloan, Period 2

    ReplyDelete
  113. While I do believe there is artistic value in these video games they are also violent and vulgar.Those disturbing games have been known to cause violent tendencies. Yet it really depends on the child themselves, no eight year old playing halo will just suddenly want to kill someone in real life without other cause and mental thought of it before hand. I believe any parent should be aware of the games that they are buying their children. However, I do not believe that this would make any difference in what the kids want to play. Therefore I suggest making different video games that kids would find just as entertaining without involving hurting someone and if that's not possible make the games less realistic or less violent.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Christina Luna
    Mr.Bauer P.01

    I think that video games should'nt be banned to minors because either way they somehow get to play at a relative or friends house. I do agree though that video games are too violent and its obviously different from books, movies, etc because in video games you are playing so therefore you're doing the killing or assault etc.

    ReplyDelete
  115. I believe that video games and entertainment in general shouldnt be banned to certain age groups. If the parents are monitoring what the kids are playing then its obviously not that big of a deal. We all have a responsibility, the gaming company makes games, people play them, and if parents dont approve of the game their kids are playing, dont let them play it. If there was a ban, the game companies would greatly be affected.

    ReplyDelete
  116. Ryan thinks that videos not selling to minors is a great idea and it puts all the problems on the parents and makes them look like a bad parent and if they want to buy go head but the kids can't buy it directly so what ever happens is good because if they keep it its great

    ReplyDelete
  117. I think that video games should have ratings. So that it can notify the parent of what the video game will contain and if it will be purchased, or whether or not to purchase it. Although i do not believe that this will stop kids from getting or playing the games. They will probably have someone else buy it for them. Or if their friend has the game they will probably play it with them. So either way they will get to it. It comes down to the parents on what they choose their children to do.
    Stephanie Arredondo
    Mr.Sloan
    Per.4

    ReplyDelete
  118. The state shouldn't be allowed to ban minors from violent video games, because the minors will still get those games somehow even parents could buy it for then it should really be up to the parents what their kids should play not the state.The differences between a video game and movie is that kids can actually see it and the book they could only image. Yes video games have serious artistic value.I am not comfortable leaving the decision of what to ban up to the Attorney General who said they know what is best. This will not prevent minors from buying these games like most illegal things minors find a way to get to it. Under the circumstances,a game should be banned when it has pron or realist killing.
    GUADALUPE CAMPOS
    MR.SLOAN /PER.4

    ReplyDelete
  119. I believe that states should ban children from buying mature video games. Children under the age of 18 should not be subjected to the violence, and sexual content, that is in some video games rated mature. They might view it on t.v, but children should not take part in killing a person on a video game, that can make that child become violent as he/she grows up.
    states should do the best they can to keep mature rated video games out of the hamds of children.

    Trista Dowdy
    Sloan per.5

    ReplyDelete
  120. Regardless if the state tried to ban violent video games, it wouldn't matter. Same situation with drugs, there is always a resource to get them from. It's dumb anyways, it should be up to the parents of the minor on what they can buy, watch, play and everything else. How can you set a standard for everyone's age when people mature and grow at different levels and speeds. Dumb decision.
    -Matt Nolen
    Sloan P.1

    ReplyDelete
  121. I think it is a good idea for the companies to put ratings on their products. Do i think any one should be limiting who can buy these? No.
    Regard to violence specifically, no they should not have that ability.
    It should be parents regulating what their kids buy, not the government or what ever.

    I ask what percentage of video game players, play it for artistic,scientific, or whatever reasons?

    Let the record show,,,,i can not wait for holodecks to be invented.
    Caleb Newman

    ReplyDelete
  122. I believe that the first amendment defends the rights of video game creators. Whether or not we want to endulge ourselves in a violence-filled video games is up to us, not the Attorney General. No state should be able to ban the use of violent video games, either. Parents are responsible for their children, and should be able to choose whether or not their child is mature enough to play violent video games.
    Conner Woods Bauer

    ReplyDelete
  123. I believe it should be the parents' job to police what their children buy. A game that is too violent for one seventeen year old may be completely within the bounds of maturity for another seventeen year old. It should be at the parents' discretion to choose whether or not their child can play. That being said, the only way to ensure that parents know exactly what their children are buying is to restrict the purchase of said violent games to adults only. Hopefully, children exposed to such violence will choose not to exhibit it out in the world.

    Emily Dirksen
    Bauer/ AP Gov

    ReplyDelete
  124. i do believe that video games should be rated. i dont think that they should be banned because it is up to the parents in what games they let their children play. they should know what is and what isnt appropriate for their kids.
    ~~brooke fletcher:)
    mr bauer
    period 3

    ReplyDelete
  125. I believe that the ratings are good because it leaves the decision up to the parent, because they could just buy it for the kid . Games are very similar to books but they are more interactive making them worse then books

    ReplyDelete
  126. Like said, games are different than books because they display images rather than requiring you to imagine them. Ratings are good in the sense that they show consumers what theyre getting into, but they dont seem to impact anyone's decisions. Games with graphic images should not be banned, but they should be controlled in the manner of which these images are used. For instance, war games are graphic in semi-realistic situations, but then we have games like GTA (Grand Theft Auto) where you can curb stomp dude's faces for like half an hour after they're dead. Sex and gore thrown in only for sadistic enjoyment should be filtered from the media output.

    ReplyDelete
  127. Video games should not be a big deal. They say dat video games make people ack differently but i dont think so it depends on the person. This should not be in the supreme court because its just a waste of time. nobody has ever made a big deal on video games other than the government. video games, movies, and books are all the same.
    Jonathan Ramos
    Mr.Bauer
    Economics

    ReplyDelete
  128. There should be no bann on video games. The decision should not go further than the state and it should be only to not allow kids buy elicit video games. It should be up to the parents if they want them to play these elicit games.

    ReplyDelete
  129. i thinkk if they banned them from some areas. there gettin online, which itll be more easy for minors to get them. and if they dont, itll be no use cause you know theyre still gonna get them, one way or another.

    ReplyDelete
  130. Michael Freeman Per 5 SloanDecember 13, 2010 at 9:02 PM

    No, Though they are a minor, they still have a right to play them if parents let them. It is the same thing with the R movies. You can watch them if you are under 17, if you have an adult there with you. I think that this is just another shot at video games to get rid of them. If we were to loos all of are good games, Sony, Microsoft, ECT would shut down the gaming market. Because a game is not fun or worth $60 if you are just playing with bunny's or little puppy dogs all day.

    ReplyDelete
  131. Vicente Chavez
    Sloan per 5th
    I agree with the state to have restrictions with the video games because this should advise the parents of what the game has accroding to what it is rated, but i dissagree with the state in wanting to ban video games because then again its just a way of enterntainment like a movie or a book they all have a way of entertainin someone and should have a rating but should not be banned

    ReplyDelete
  132. Well since I have a 12 year old brother with ADHD that is very easily influenced and his favorite video game is Grand Theft Auto...I personally hate the things he learns from those types of games. All kids are easily influenced by these games and some will even get the idea that some of the things in these games are okay to do in real life..come on..your not just going to carry around an AK47 in your pocket,kill some dude for his car,then go pick up a hooker in it...they're just not realistic and they are a little absurd..when your 18, go ahead and buy all the mature games you want..Therefore i beleieve they should ban these games for minors.

    Danielle Barros
    Sloan p.4

    ReplyDelete
  133. Yes, video games are protected by the 1st amendment. Video games do not have a big of affect that people actually think they do. The parents of teens buy them the violent games anyways. There are many good values of video games too.

    ReplyDelete
  134. enrique salazar sloanper5December 15, 2010 at 3:48 PM

    I believe video games should be protected by the first amendment , afterall its just a game

    ReplyDelete
  135. kayla rodriguez sloan5December 16, 2010 at 12:54 AM

    over protective parents spoil it for everyone. if you don't want your children playing or listening to something you view as inappropriate, then why purchase it for them in the first place? people keep demanding that the goverment keeps creating laws like this. video games are protected by amendment number 1 and i honestly dont think that it has that big of an influence on kids.

    ReplyDelete

All comments will be reviewed before they are published. Make sure to leave your name to receive credit.