Darat said:
A 6 year old should not be playing GTA.
In saying a 6 year old should not be playing GTA you have just stated your opinion. You are entitled to your opinion, of course, but others will have their opinion and they are just as entitled to it.
Adults have the right to do whatever the want that doesn’t harm others based on a premise that an adult can understand the ramifications of their choices. Our society assumes children do not have this capacity, or that it is not fully formed. Therefore society through direct legislation or adult guardianship of a child makes those decisions on behalf of the child.
Having the parents/guardians make these decisions on behalf of the child is fine, it is the direct legislation based upon unproven assumptions that I have an issue with. It is assumed that a 6 year old can't play GTA without harm resulting. If this is true I think the harm ought to be demonstrable. I don't see that it is.
In the UK it is an offence to sell certified games to someone younger then the certification. This is sensible and right and it does not infringe on the rights of adults whilst providing some control. As long as these games are properly certified to try and reduce them getting into the hands of children then there should be no complaints from the politicians.
Well in the US we have a voluntary rating system and retailers voluntarily abide by this system. Sure, there are going to be exceptions. The proposed legislation assigns heavy fines to those who sell games rated above the age of the purchaser. In and of itself this isn't problematic for me, rather it is the logic being expressed by the politicians of "protect the children" that irks me. Do the politicians assume that the 6 year old goes to walmart, buys GTA and then takes it to their secret home to play it, gets immediately and irreversibly warped and then starts beating up hookers or using a flame thrower on cops walking down the street? If you read the words of the politicians on the matter this seems to be exactly the argument they are making.
Unfortunately most politicians in power or having influence are from a generation that did not grow up with video games and have a very skewed and outdated view of video games as being "something for children" and have not realised that video games are now part of mainstream entertainment. Therefore as soon as they hear of “naughty†content in a video game they scream “think of the children†whereas most people with more then a passing acquaintance with the world as it is today just think “That sounds good – wonder when it is coming out?â€
Agreed.
(And yes there are many inconsistencies in how we deal with “think for the childrenâ€, for instance as far as I know there is no country in the EU or USA that has a certification requirement for books which means a child can legally buy a book that could have the most perverted content imaginable.)
True, and the odd thing is, there don't seem to be many book burning politicians running around. Given the sex and primarily violence that kids can see on network TV, games, books or just the news not to mention the internet it seems almost absurd to legislate some forms of content.
It would seem self explanatory that exposure to sex and violence in entertainment media doesn't produce raving psychopaths. If anything the middle east with it's fundamentalist islam where pretty much everything is censored does. I won't go so far as to say there is a causation effect, but a strong corelation certainly exists.
I would argue that legislation banning certain content is a bad thing and it sends the wrong message to kids. In the absence of demonstrable harm to the child I think there should be no legislation. Parents, as always, can make their decisions on behalf of their kids. Nothing more is needed.
The odd thing about the current spasms over the GTA mod is that the 'solution' is legislation fining retailers who sell M rated games to kids.
That isn't the problem that occured. The problem that occured is that an M rated game had hidden, locked content that may have made it an adult rated game. Let's think about this for a minute. In this M rated game one can kill cops in creative ways, have sex with hookers and multiple girlfriends, can plant explosives on people and vehicles and blow them up, can chop people up with a chainsaw etc. All this and the game is M rated. But, show some animated boobs and it is an adult rated game. That is just absurd.
Dismembering cops with a chainsaw is fine, low res boobies are harmful though. In and of itself this should amply prove the uselessness of ratings and letting government take over the rating system and enforce it isn't likely to make it any more sensible.
Actually is the Playboy restriction a legal restriction?