Mother Talkers

Massachusetts: Ban Video Games!

by Elisa

Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 09:24:22 AM PDT

The Bay State doesn't want to ban all video games -- just the ones "harmful to minors."

If Boston Mayor Tom Menino and other prominent state legislators have their way, Gov. Deval Patrick will sign into law House Bill 1423, which would prohibit the sale of violent and sexually explicit video games to anyone under the age of 18.

“Harmful to minors”, matter is harmful to minors if it is obscene or, if taken as a whole, it (1) describes or represents nudity, sexual conduct or sexual excitement, so as to appeal predominantly to the prurient interest of minors; (2) depicts violence in a manner patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community, so as to appeal predominantly to the morbid interest in violence of minors; (3) is patently contrary to prevailing standards of adults in the county where the offense was committed as to suitable material for such minors; and (4) lacks serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors.”

As Stephen King, an author not short on R-Rated material himself, pointed out in an Entertainment Weekly column, politicians usually scapegoat violent video games, movies, music -- popular culture, if you will -- to score cheap political points. Even though King himself is not a gamer, he reprimanded Massachusetts legislators for attempting to play "surrogate parents."

One of HB 1423's cosponsors is Rep. Christine E. Canavan, of Brockton. ''I think this legislation is a good idea,'' she told the Boston Herald. ''I don't want this constant barrage of violence on young minds and for them to think it is all right.'' It's a good point...except that it seems to me that the games only reflect a violence that already exists in the society.

Nor will I argue for the artistic value of stuff like God of War, or 50 Cent: Bulletproof, where looting the victims of gang violence is part of the game (players use the money to buy new Fiddy tunes and music videos — classy). I do, however, want to point out that videogames, like movies, have a ratings system, and ones with the big M or A on the box mean ''Not for you, baby brother.''

And if there's violence to be had, the kids are gonna find a way to get it, just as they'll find a way to get all-day shooters like No Country for Old Men from cable if they want. Or Girls Gone Wild, for that matter. Can parents block that stuff? You bet. But most never do. The most effective bar against what was called ''the seduction of the innocent'' when this hot-button issue centered on violent comic books 60 years ago is still parents who know and care not just about what their kids are watching and reading, but what they're doing and who they're hanging with. Parents need to have the guts to forbid material they find objectionable...and then explain why it's being forbidden. They also need to monitor their children's lives in the pop culture — which means a lot more than seeing what games they're renting down the street.

If HB 1423 becomes law, will it remain law? Doubtful. Similar legislation has been declared unconstitutional in several states. Could Massachusetts legislators find better ways to watch out for the kiddies? Man, I sure hope so, because there's a lot more to America's culture of violence than Resident Evil 4.

  • ::

Of course, not all parents are as fortunate as King to have two work-at-home parents and probably a barrage of paid help. A little help from the state would be welcomed by many working families struggling to raise children under the weight of bills and a cacophony of violent media.

But it does seem to be a slippery slope for the state to decipher what material has "serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors." Also, as King pointed out, how come minors are allowed to watch R Rated movies at 17, but not play Grand Theft Auto? The law would not apply to all media -- just video games.

At the same time, I completely sympathize with mothers afraid of their young children playing video games. The games themselves have become so much more graphic and violent than my Nintendo Mario Brothers-playing days. Ari does have a Transformers game on his handheld Play Station that is violent, but we closely monitor and restrict his playing. If it were up to me, he would not play at all. But my husband who grew up playing video games and is aching to buy a Wii, sees nothing wrong with it (in doses). Because he knows more about the games than I do, I have let him set limits on video game playing in our household. For that, I am grateful as it takes the pressure off of me.

Tags: video games, Massachusetts, HB 1423, Entertainment Weekly, ban, censorship (all tags)

Permalink | 13 comments

  • Mandatory Age Restrictions. (0 / 0)

    I would favor replacing the voluntary video game rating system currently in place (essentially, the producer says what rating they think it should get, and there's no actual enforcement on who can buy mature rated games) with a government enforced one, with laws mandating age checks for buying mature games, and also obliging game retailers to make sure adults making purchases understand when adult games are adult games. Banning isn't a reasonable solution, but controlling distribution and helping get information out is, I think. Right now, the voluntary system doesn't work.

    "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

    by Expat Briton on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 09:53:40 AM PDT

  • What's the difference between (0 / 0)

    this and R rated movies?  I don't see much difference between the two genres.  If we're ok with preventing 12  or 14 year olds from seeing "Saw" - in the theater at least - why wouldn't it be ok for us to prevent them from buying "Grand Theft Auto"?

    Of course, there are many ways around these laws, starting with other people buying or renting them and bringing them home.  Regardless, if we have a problem with a rule for video games then maybe we should revisit the rules about movies.

    I actually don't have a strong opinion about these laws one way or the other, but it doesn't make a lot of sense to me for them to be totally inconsistent.

    Katherine

    by pat of butter in a sea of grits on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 10:33:49 AM PDT

  • Mommy Play Playstation!! (0 / 0)

    Those are Jack's latest demands. Actually it is some variation of "Jack play Daddy's Football/Golf game" or "Play Playstation??". He's been sitting in DH's lap while DH plays since the age of 6 months and now wants to play by himself. We only let him play those two sports games and honestly he mostly interesting in the other features like setting up the teams/colors/courses ect and his interest lasts all of 30 minutes. The little stinker even knows what memory card DH has his latest golf match saved on! Sigh.

    DH and I agree that as he gets old we will have to closely monitor what games he plays and we feel that it is our job to do it. DH says he will even go as far as playing the game first to make sure that he thinks it is appropriate for him (and I think to get good at it so DS won't beat him...).

    Is that state of MA going too far? I'd have to read the legislation. But there are already age requirements for music and movies, I'd have no problem with some system to make sure that these adult oriented games are purchased by adults. And having watch DH play some of these games, there are some that are definately made for adult audiences, and are NOT appropriate for children.

    Jen in NJ

    by littlepear on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 11:10:28 AM PDT

  • I would appreciate some back up with this stuff (0 / 0)

    I would really appreciate reasonable laws to help me out here. While I am perfectly capable of monitoring ds's future game playing, am I alone here in wanting  - fairly desperately sometimes - to feel like I can afford to be less vigilant as a parent - not just with games, but product safety, food safety, and all the rest??

    Think about how many untold hours we all spend on this kind of thing. It's sad.
    And some people just can't do it - it takes too much time and energy that they don't really have.

    Sometimes I feel these arguments against these kinds of regs only accomplish one thing: free reign for those who make and sell them. Do we care that much about cheesy video games?

    by RachelD on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 11:40:04 AM PDT

  • you know what? (0 / 0)

    Does anyone not know that Grand Theft Auto is going to feature material that's not appropriate for some age groups? I mean, seriously. Look at the title.

    I wouldn't object to a national rating system maintained by an objective body (if such a group exists), but control sales and ban things? Me no likey. It's a cheap way to score political points.

    I say this as one half of a parental unit that has absolutely not the slightest intention of buying any sort of video gaming equipment for our family. Neither DH nor I had video games as kids, are not gamers and have no intention of bringing this into the family. If this changes at some point in the future, you can damn well bet that we'll be viewing the games before our kid(s) play them.

    by Rachel on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 01:36:53 PM PDT

    • What's wrong with controlling sales? (0 / 0)

      Do you object to age controls on the sale of alcohol? Why is this different? You're restricting material based upon age. I don't support outright bans on anything, really, but restrictions? I may disagree with specifics sometimes (often?), but I think the principle is sound.

      "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

      by Expat Briton on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 10:27:47 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      • there's a difference (0 / 0)

        there's a difference between alcohol and cigarettes and video games to my mind. Alcohol and cigarettes have a known physical impact on health and development, not to mention the role alcohol plays in car accidents and such. Restricting sales of alcohol and cigarettes to youths has an established history of improving the public good, in terms of outcomes. I'm not so sure that banning video games is going to have the same positive impact.

        However, I come to this with a big first amendment bias; to me, video games fall under the whole category of free speech. I admit, this does color my reactions.

        by Rachel on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 04:00:56 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        • Well, I would oppose a complete ban. (0 / 0)

          I think that would be a free speech issue, definitely. Here, I feel like it's more fuzzy. And what I'm talking about is also something I'd consider as a help to parents in choosing appropriate material - I wouldn't ban a parent choosing to give a child an adult video game if that's what they want to do, either. I just think there should be some restrictions on who can buy them, and that parents should be informed at point of sale precisely what it is they're buying if there's violent or sexual content. What adults choose to do with that material after they've purchased it is really their deal. I feel like, while that's a restriction, it's a pretty minor one, and also allows flexibility because while you're restricting direct access, parents can circumvent that if they want to, and no one is creating an outright ban of anything.

          Can I just say, completely off topic, but that out of everyone here, I'd love to be able to sit down and have a beer or something with you, because I think we'd have some great conversations.

          "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

          by Expat Briton on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 10:01:13 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

          • I'm flattered and I agree (0 / 0)

            I often think that the greatest drawback of this place is the fact that I definitely want to have a beer with people who are totally on another continent! It'd be very interesting to compare notes on expat life in English speaking countries, among other things.

            Back OT, I think we agree loosely on the subject; I don't mind labelling in the slightest; if there's wild violence or cursing or sexual content in a video game, I wouldn't mind seeing it on the front label. I think implimenting a system of restrictions is poor policy because of the unwieldy enforcement mechanism. Who is going to enforce the standard? What kind of penalty would there be on a store owner who does sell to a sub-18 year old? Would a store owner run the risk of having to pay a fine if caught versus the expected profit margin that comes with selling a restricted game?

            As someone who has studied policy, I tend to be against regimes that are difficult to police and have uncertain outcomes. They tend to cost institutional reputation, which is never a good thing.

            by Rachel on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 07:50:40 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

  • If you're too young (0 / 0)

    you can't buy R-rated movies.  (Is that a law?  Or just a store policy?)  So a law that's in keeping with that should be fine.  What gets rated how is sticky, and having a rating body could be a good idea.

    It doesn't prevent kids from accessing the material, nor should it.  They just need adult permission.

    by lonespark on Wed Apr 16, 2008 at 03:13:15 PM PDT

    • IIRC, just store policy. (0 / 0)

      Anyone can walk into an R rated movie, legally. I think it's similar to purchase them. NC-17 movies (yeah, because there's so many of those) have legal restrictions on who can go in and see them (and, I think, buy them) but that really only extends into porn or movies with a lot of sexual content. I mean, if something like Reservoir Dogs only gets an R, nothing is ever going to get NC-17 for violence alone. I'd like to see an entire re-vamping of the movie rating system here.

      "You're never more alone than when you're alone in a crowd."

      by Expat Briton on Thu Apr 17, 2008 at 10:26:18 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  • I wouldn't mind rules (0 / 0)

    about who can buy what.  The games are already rated.  So, anyone should be able to purchase "E" stuff, and "T" and "M" would require the buyer to be a certain age.  I'd be cool with that.

    We have used those ratings to help DS understand why we don't want him playing certain games.  Although now that he's playing "Halo 3" we've probably lost some leverage :)  He's good about following our time limits and respecting our wishes about what games he can play, at least at home. The problem for us is that DH is willing to okay things that are more violent than I would like.  And then, with DS we talk about violence, fantasy v reality, what would that really feel like, etc.  I do hope we're not creating an axe murderer.

    by mamacita on Fri Apr 18, 2008 at 11:44:26 AM PDT

Permalink | 13 comments