Court lifts video-game ban

Alien

Part Of The Furniture
PF Member
A federal appeals court panel has struck down a law that restricted children's access to violent video games, giving the software the same free-speech protection as that for works of art.

A panel of the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Tuesday that a St. Louis County, Mo., ordinance that bans the rentals or sales of graphically violent video games to minors violates free-speech rights. In doing so, the panel reversed a ruling by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri and ordered the lower court to craft an injunction that would prohibit the ordinance from taking effect.

In Tuesday's ruling, the panel decided that if the paintings of Jackson Pollock, the music of Arnold Schoenberg and the Jabberwocky verse of Lewis Carroll are protected by the First Amendment, then video games should be, too.

"We see no reason why the pictures, graphic design, concept art, sounds, music, stories and narrative present in video games are not entitled to similar protection," the judges wrote. "The mere fact that they appear in a novel medium is of no legal consequence."

The panel said that the games are constitutionally protected speech.

"Whether we believe the advent of violent video games adds anything of value to society is irrelevant," the judges wrote. "Guided by the First Amendment, we are obliged to recognize that they are as much entitled to the protection of free speech as the best of literature."

A ban on such games, the panel said, would encourage other local governments to violate the First Amendment rights of minors under the pretext of parental authority. They also rejected the county's assertions that games should be banned because they're harmful to minors.

"The county's conclusion that there is a strong likelihood that minors who play violent video games will suffer a deleterious effect on their psychological health is simply unsupported in the record," they said.

Want to learn more?
http://msnbc-cnet.com.com/2100-1043...&part=msnbc&tag=alert&form=feed&subj=cnetnews
 
From what I understand, the law that was trying to be passed was to only stop minors from renting or buying violent video games. Honestly, I think it would be fine to do that. I don't think it violates freedom of speech if they are only tryign to restrict rentals and sales to minors. Older people buy these games as well. Maybe just put a small age restriction on it. Like, for example, 16 or older is legal to buy this type of game. Kids see this stuff on news and in life. There isn't a really good way to keep them from seeing this type of violence but if it's something that will make parents happy, this is not a bad thing. That way if a parent is fine with their kids playing violent games they can buy the games for their kids. Kids will find a way anyhow to purchase violent games, this will just make it harder.

The only reason why I'd be ok with this is because it's not banning the violent games all together. It's like movie age restrictions. movies will get watched either way, it's just the case of who purchases the tickets making it harder for younger kids to see the movie by themselves.
 
I think this is a good decision. I've never been a fan of censorship. I hated it when I was younger, and I still hate it now. Good riddance to the law.
 
Back
Top