Comments | gamepolitics: Sunday Editorial Roundup

gamepolitics

Sunday Editorial Roundup

Apr 16, 2006 09:51

( Read more... )

clock tower 3, sam brownback, jim ward, jeff johnson, kansas, wichita eagle, republicans, u.s. senate, minnesota, legislation

Comments 46

no_relation April 16 2006, 15:02:27 UTC

Are we sure he's not under the impression that Clock Tower is a Charles Whitman simulator?

angry_man April 16 2006, 15:09:25 UTC

Bad laws are merely a trap for money.

zippydsmlee April 17 2006, 03:35:08 UTC

dont you mean bad laws sux up money?

The Garbage Comment bustermanzero April 16 2006, 15:45:59 UTC

Tisk tisk. Are you a comedian, Mr. Johnson? No, you are not. Thus, way to tick off the lobbyists.

At least he's honest about his target jabrwock April 16 2006, 16:01:50 UTC

But I hope the new law will catch the attention of at least a few of the painfully oblivious parents in our state who are paying absolutely no attention

At least he's honest about his reasoning behind the bill. Unfortunatly, this bill really won't catch their attention, because they're not the ones being fined...

startropics April 16 2006, 16:02:19 UTC

...a bill which would assess $25 fines against under-17's who attempt to buy M-rated games.

So when little eight year old Johnny curiously places a copy of Rumble Roses on the EB store counter, they automatically have to fine the kid $25?

Kids don't really keep up with politics, usually. Is it really fair to legislate fines against them when a very good majority of them won't even know about it?

marbledog April 16 2006, 16:24:59 UTC

As an eight-year-old can not own property, the legal responsibility for paying the fine would fall to the parent.

bigman_k April 16 2006, 16:42:56 UTC

This just pisses me off. Fining kids for trying to buy the game is worse then trying to fine the retailers and is probably more unconstitutional (as it specifically targets the minors themselves rather then just there ability to access it). In the end though this anti-gaming trash bill is unconstitutional. Minors have Free Speech rights unless the material falls under the legal definition of "obscene for minors" and an M rating can't determine that constitutionally. Not only that but violence can't be found to be obscene for either minors or adults. Obscenity covers only sexual conduct and nothing else.

kharne83 April 16 2006, 17:09:07 UTC

I see two outcomes:

1) the fine will be widely ignored.

2) the fine is enforced and pocketed by the stores in question, who then report that no fines have ever been processed.

Thread 8