Violent video games same risk as smoking cigarettes

[CptStern]

"“Studies prove that playing these violent video games are bad for kids mental and physical health,” said Jim Steyer, “The health threat involved with kids playing such games is equivalent to smoking cigarettes.”


if you live in california and you're a minor better hope you're parents will buy you the latest greatest game because you wont be able to purchase it yourself. Yesterday the law banning sales of M rated games to minors came into effect ...here's the press release that made the statement that violent video games are just as dangerous as smoking cigarettes

http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a12/press/p122005099.htm

“By signing this commonsense bill into law, the Governor joined our medical professionals and our parents in putting our children’s best interests first,” said Speaker pro Tem Yee. “Although the Governor and I don’t always agree, we are both fathers and understand the importance of raising healthy kids. California parents will now have a vital tool in helping them raise their children.”


.....so what happens if a parent buys a minor an M rated video game? nothing?



"The State Assembly earlier passed AB 1179 on a 66-7 vote and the Senate approved the bill on a 22-9 vote. AB 1179 will officially become law on January 1, 2006"

 

[Skaadi]

Its times like these I'm glad I'm not an American.

 

[gh0st]

you dont sell alcohol to 20 year olds
you dont get a drivers license until youre experienced or 18
you dont get cigarettes until youre 18
you dont buy rated r movies until youre 17
you dont buy rated m games until your 17

DAMN those californians for enforcing a law :\.

 

[bam23]

What the hell does all that mean?

 

[CptStern]

you dont sell alcohol to 20 year olds
you dont get a drivers license until youre experienced or 18
you dont get cigarettes until youre 18
you dont buy rated r movies until youre 17
you dont buy rated m games until your 17

DAMN those californians for enforcing a law :\.

you are so short sighted ..cant wait till the day when I rub it in your face

 

[Skaadi]

you dont sell alcohol to 20 year olds
you dont get a drivers license until youre experienced or 18
you dont get cigarettes until youre 18
you dont buy rated r movies until youre 17
you dont buy rated m games until your 17

DAMN those californians for enforcing a law :\.

Thats not freedom!

 

[gh0st]

you are so short sighted ..cant wait till the day when I rub it in your face

yeah i'll be waiting for them to ban video games just like they banned movies and beer. some nutcase like you was probably rattling like this when they came out with the rating systems for movies.

 

[SimonomiS]

I hear they're enforcing new packaging rules for games:

 

[OvA]

In a ideal world, there would be some kind of screening process. I'm still a teenager but I have a higher mental capacity and maturity level than many adults, sadly, and am capable of seeing games as just...games.

 

[CptStern]

yeah i'll be waiting for them to ban video games just like they banned movies and beer. some nutcase like you was probably rattling like this when they came out with the rating systems for movies.

ban video games? you're an idiot..


so when they ban selling M rated games to minors and yet minors still seem to get them somehow what's next? how can they ensure that violent video games dont get into the hands of minors?

 

[gh0st]

ban video games? you're an idiot..


so when they ban selling M rated games to minors and yet minors still seem to get them somehow what's next? how can they ensure that violent video games dont get into the hands of minors?

why.. well.. THEY WOULD BAN ALL VIDEO GAMES?!?!111 :rolling: they are enforcing the ratings system. if an adult buys it for the children, its no different than you taking one of your kids to a rated R movie, it implies consent. the idea is to INCLUDE parents.

 

[giant384]

its of stupid for them to say that video games cause mental problems or stuff like;its the parents that cause the problems. i mean ive played lots of violent games and im only 16

 

[CptStern]

why.. well.. THEY WOULD BAN ALL VIDEO GAMES?!?!111 :rolling: they are enforcing the ratings system. if an adult buys it for the children, its no different than you taking one of your kids to a rated R movie, it implies consent. the idea is to INCLUDE parents.

:upstare: ...is that your response?


implied consent you havent a clue ...highschool law

 

[gh0st]

:upstare: ...is that your response?


implied consent you havent a clue ...highschool law

youre the reactionary fear mongerer here, not me. i said it IMPLIES consent, i didnt call it implied consent. reading comprehension wouldnt hurt.

 

[BF2slut]

youre the reactionary fear mongerer here, not me. i said it IMPLIES consent, i didnt call it implied consent. reading comprehension wouldnt hurt.

Ladies and gentlemen.. What you see here is a debate.

 

[JNightshade]

It's times like this I'm glad I only have a year to go, and I don't live in California.

 

[OCybrManO]

Wow...

Implied consent is when surrounding circumstances exist which would lead a reasonable person to believe that consent had been given, although no direct, express or explicit words of agreement had been uttered. That sounds exactly like what you said, gh0st. If an action "implies consent" it creates "implied consent" by definition. The only difference is that one refers to the action and the other is the result.

 

[Dalamari]

So...if I play too much WoW I will end up laying in a hospital bed shooting flem from my mouth as my hair falls out from the cancer therapy?

 

[gh0st]

i think stern thought i was talking about the law regarding chemically testing your breathe when you are suspected of driving drunk. you know, the one referred to as implied consent. i think in this scenario something implying consent would be different than the specific law "implied consent". thanks for your interpretation though.

 

[TheSomeone]

It's funny how they conveniently avoid fact:

 

[gh0st]

It's funny how they conveniently avoid fact:

umm correct me if i'm wrong.. but isnt that the vicitimization stats for people aged 12 years and over (indicating basically everyone except pre-adolescents)?

 

[CptStern]

i think stern thought i was talking about the law regarding chemically testing your breathe when you are suspected of driving drunk. you know, the one referred to as implied consent. i think in this scenario something implying consent would be different than the specific law "implied consent". thanks for your interpretation though.

no, this is exactly what I meant:


"Implied consent is when surrounding circumstances exist which would lead a reasonable person to believe that consent had been given, although no direct, express or explicit words of agreement had been uttered. That sounds exactly like what you said, gh0st. If an action "implies consent" it creates "implied consent" by definition. The only difference is that one refers to the action and the other is the result."


thanks OCybrManO :thumbs:

 

[Top Secret]

you dont sell alcohol to 20 year olds
you dont get a drivers license until youre experienced or 18
you dont get cigarettes until youre 18
you dont buy rated r movies until youre 17
you dont buy rated m games until your 17

DAMN those californians for enforcing a law :\.

1. Correct
2. Wrong.
3. Wrong.
4. Correct.
5. Wrong.

2/5 right. Not horrible I suppose...

 

[gh0st]

1. Correct
2. Wrong.
3. Wrong.
4. Correct.
5. Wrong.

2/5 right. Not horrible I suppose...

1. right
2. in washington and most states, given no drivers ed you cant get a license until youre an adult. if you have taken independant courses you can get your license at 17 or even 16. which is why i said "with experience". so actually i am right, thanks.
3. umm in the united states you cant smoke tobacco until you're 18
4. right
5. right. unfortunately right now it isnt enforced, but in a lot of places it is.

 

[DrDevin]

I am here in Ontario and can't buy games like Doom 3 or Far Cry at EB or futureshop, so I don't see this as a big deal. It is just another hastle of getting an adult to buy them so I can play them.

 

[Snakebyte]

Yes, playing video games is exactly like smoking cigarettes... if you use them you'll get lung cancer and die.

Now where are the details of this "study" exactly?

 

[OCybrManO]

I thought I should address this while I'm here:

you dont sell alcohol to 20 year olds
you dont get a drivers license until youre experienced or 18
you dont get cigarettes until youre 18
you dont buy rated r movies until youre 17
you dont buy rated m games until your 17

The first three are directly connected to the physical health of yourself and those around you. They are there not only to protect you, but the rest of the population. Also, in these laws, parental supervision has no effect on their legality. They are in the realm of directly observable physical damage. Their effects aren't exactly debated.

The fourth is neither a federal law nor a law in most states (last time I checked)... it's merely encouraged. The companies enforce it because it is in their best interest. Still, technically, it's not illegal. Video games should be treated that way, too. They require moral judgement calls that should not be in the hands of the government... no matter what. The government is not to dictate what people do in their own free time unless it directly harms people... and video games aren't proven to create a society with more violent crimes any moreso than playing competitive sports or other activities that involve tension/stress. There may be individual cases in which a few people who are already ****ed up in the head use video games as an excuse... but on the whole they keep people occupied in their homes where they don't hurt others, increase mental dexterity, and some scientists speculate that they act as a way to release tension. The "evidence" supporting banning video games is inconclusive, at best.

Now, back to the current discussion...

umm correct me if i'm wrong.. but isnt that the vicitimization stats for people aged 12 years and over (indicating basically everyone except pre-adolescents)?

gh0st, a "victimization" is a crime in which there is a victim. It is the act of making someone a victim. It's not how many people 12 and older are made victims. It's how many people 12 and older commit crimes that directly harm others. You may know this, but I'm just making sure. If so, what's your point?

Another funny thing about that graph is that, if you'll notice, the downward slope happens to neatly coincide with the Clinton administration's time in office (during which, crime was one of the issues they focused on)... with a nice leveling off just after Bush gets elected. So, it seems to have either decreased as technology (and video games, specifically) became more popular or as the government started to crack down on crime... I don't have enough information to determine which is the cause but, either way, gh0st wouldn't like the outcome.

Yes, playing video games is exactly like smoking cigarettes... if you use them you'll get lung cancer and die.

Now where are the details of this "study" exactly?

I, also, would like to see the study they keep referring to...

 

[gh0st]

I thought I should address this while I'm here:
The first three are directly connected to the physical health of yourself and those around you. They are there not only to protect you, but the rest of the population. Also, in these laws, parental supervision has no effect on their legality. They are in the realm of directly observable physical damage. Their effects aren't exactly debated.

i know, and i agree with this.

The fourth is neither a federal law nor a law in most states (last time I checked)... it's merely encouraged. The companies enforce it because it is in their best interest. Still, technically, it's not illegal. Video games should be treated that way, too. They require moral judgement calls that should not be in the hands of the government... no matter what. The government is not to dictate what people do in their own free time unless it directly harms people... and video games aren't proven to create a society with more violent crimes any moreso than playing competitive sports or other activities that involve tension/stress. There may be individual cases in which a few people who are already ****ed up in the head use video games as an excuse... but on the whole they keep people occupied in their homes where they don't hurt others, increase mental dexterity, and some scientists speculate that they act as a way to release tension. The "evidence" supporting banning video games is inconclusive, at best.

ok, lets just say i have SOME faith in the ratings that movies and games are given, and generally i think they should be obeyed unless a parent believes otherwise.

Now, back to the current discussion...

gh0st, a "victimization" is a crime in which there is a victim. It is the act of making someone a victim. It's not how many people 12 and older are made victims. It's how many people 12 and older commit crimes that directly harm others. You may know this, but I'm just making sure. If so, what's your point?

right but if im "vicimized" i'm made the victim. so i was just wondering if that was the crimes that were committed upon people aged 12 or older ot the crimes that people aged 12 or older commit, its kind of oddly phrased.
[/QUOTE]

 

[OCybrManO]

right but if im "vicimized" i'm made the victim. so i was just wondering if that was the crimes that were committed upon people aged 12 or older ot the crimes that people aged 12 or older commit, its kind of oddly phrased.

Yeah, that's legal jargon for you... blame Angry Lawyer!

 

[xLostx]

hulk smash.

 

[spookymooky]

I think the idea is that games make people couch potatoes, not that they get up and kill people.

 

[Murray_H]

What if you smoked a video game? Is that like eating cancer on a bed of ebola?

 

[EVIL]

don't mind the law. IMO 14 year old's shouldn't play these games any way.

 

[Tr0n]

don't mind the law. IMO 14 year old's shouldn't play these games any way.

I was playing doom and quake when I was ten. I RESENT THAT STATEMENT YOU BITCH

 

[CptStern]

I was playing doom and quake when I was ten. I RESENT THAT STATEMENT YOU BITCH

and look how you turned out

 

[TheSomeone]

umm correct me if i'm wrong.. but isnt that the vicitimization stats for people aged 12 years and over (indicating basically everyone except pre-adolescents)?

What, you can't make the connection between victimization and crime?

 

[Que-Ever]

"“Studies prove that playing these violent video games are bad for kids mental and physical health,” said Jim Steyer, “The health threat involved with kids playing such games is equivalent to smoking cigarettes.”


if you live in california and you're a minor better hope you're parents will buy you the latest greatest game because you wont be able to purchase it yourself. Yesterday the law banning sales of M rated games to minors came into effect ...here's the press release that made the statement that violent video games are just as dangerous as smoking cigarettes

http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a12/press/p122005099.htm

“By signing this commonsense bill into law, the Governor joined our medical professionals and our parents in putting our children’s best interests first,” said Speaker pro Tem Yee. “Although the Governor and I don’t always agree, we are both fathers and understand the importance of raising healthy kids. California parents will now have a vital tool in helping them raise their children.”


.....so what happens if a parent buys a minor an M rated video game? nothing?



"The State Assembly earlier passed AB 1179 on a 66-7 vote and the Senate approved the bill on a 22-9 vote. AB 1179 will officially become law on January 1, 2006"

Woohoo, they finally started doing what they're supposed to. Now, if only it actually made a difference...

 

[gh0st]

Woohoo, they finally started doing what they're supposed to. Now, if only it actually made a difference...

their problem is that the government is stepping in and doing what a private board has been doing the past few years. i for one have no problem keeping violent video games out of the hands of minors, and ithink this is a necessary way to do so. parents of course can still buy the game, as the law only prohibits minors from BUYING the game, not playing it. and thats how it should be, parents being involved in what their kids play. it should be the same with any other kind of technology.

 

[CptStern]

how will this all of the sudden involve parents in what their kids are playing



doesnt seem like she was even remotely aware of what the game was about

 

[madog]

I'll still be able to get M games, there are still retailers that will sell to minors. Im only 16 but I look 19/20ish, so it will be no problem.
Besides, playing violent games is not near as bad as smoking cigarettes or getting stoned like a lot of the kids around here do.