Washington To Restrict Game Sales

#1 this is a good thing. I don't think children have any reason to be playing the lightly violent "GTA: Vice City" and the wonderfully fun constitutionally protected "Postal 2"

#2 Parents have yet to realize that all games are not for kids. I think it's good that government realizes this and takes steps to protect our rights as adults to play these types of games, while preventing children from purchasing inappropriate games.

#3 It's either restrict the sale to minors, or allow crazy crusading parents to restrict the sale to everyone.

#4 If your parents don't mind you playing these games, they will buy them for you.

My dad is one of those old guys you see working in walmart these days. He tells me stories of 12 year old kids trying to fool their parents into buying them M-rated games. My father, being a responsible parent himself, makes it a point to educate parents that games do have a rating system and he would not be able to sell "vice city" to children. The music industry and movie industry already have rating systems that restrict the sale to minors. Parental advisory and nc-17 have been in place for over 10 years now and have done a lot to protect authors and merchants and consumers from absolutely crazy crusading parents that want to tell you what is appropriate for your children. I rarely agree with this type of legislature as censorship and nazi-like behavior, but I think this bill is smart and appropriate for today's times when there are a lot of irresponsible parents that let their children run free.

Why is violence against women a separate categoryt? Why is violence against women worse than violence against men?

Fucking sexist senate!

The powers that be in Washignton are slaves to special interest groups. This is the state where a man is responsible for child support even if he is proven not to be the father. This is the state where you can't wear a Yankees Suck t-shirt at the ball park. Now it's the state where you can be fined by the government for selling a constitutionally protected form of entertainment. Wonder what's next...

I don't care, I'm almost 19 =P

does this mean that we aren't going to be able play multiplayer games with female models??? Guh that s4x0rz

It's time to reinstall GTA3 and go kill some cops and hookers.

Big deal. $500 for selling M rated games to minors? That's a slap on the wrist at best. If they banned M games outright in the entire state, that'd be another story...

GOD this state SUCKS.

Not to be a pretentious asshole, but the Democrats are fucking running us into oblivion. The governor is a Democrat, we have 2 Democrat ladies in the federal senate. ( http://www.senate.gov/general/contact_information/senators_cfm.cfm?State=WA )

Coincedence of legislation like this? I think not. Now I'm not a rebublican, I'm officially undeclared - but this state has gone NO WHERE forward, we've in fact gone BACKWARDS in most regards, and it might be time for a party change.

And yes, this is the state that is supposedly getting a monorail to its biggest city somehow... I wonder who will be offended by the monorail and we'll have to block our own progress???

does this mean there will be no stippers in DNF ?? (when/if it comes out) guess there gonna need another 2 years to do new models

How fucking retarded can you be.
Apparently the state of washington has just proven that it is illegal to promote the killing of females through games, while it is still completely aloud to shoot a man.

Doug Lowenstein is gonna say whatever is best for his pocket book, and if it were me, I'd say the same thing. But really, I don't see this as anything different than enforcing the ratings at a movie theater. Big deal.

Well, if the kid want it enough. There's thousand of ways they could work around the law.
Its like trying to keep pornography away from teens on the interenet. And by the time they reached the legal age, they could care less about them.

Thank god I am not a minor :)

I live in Washington, though I'm 18. Too late for me! Eat that Washington State Senate! I'm already corrupt as fuck!

you said: "but I would not treat women differently just for being a woman. "

But that's not true. You wouldn't have sex with a man, but you would have sex with a woman!

Why?


Because I'm not attracted to men?

Stop this ridiculous line of reasoning now, please. Sexuality has nothing to do with this. Having sex with me is not a "right" that everyone should have to be considered equal. It's something for me to give - and if I'm not attracted to men it doesn't mean I'm discriminating them. Just like it's not discrimination if you prefer redheads to blondes.

You can either read my post, try to understand it, and argue against it. Or you can act like an asshole, miss the point entirely, and pick out one particular wording, twisting it to mean something that clearly wasn't intended, and start arguing about that instead.
By "not treat differently" i was obviously referring to rights (as in "everyone should have the right to defend themselves against acts of violence") not sexual preference.

Discussion is not about "winning", especially not if you can not do it by arguments - but only by nitpicking on specific wording and spinning of into a completely different and ridiculous topic. It's about coming away from it a better person. So try to understand my arguments, don't pick out specific phrases trying to actively misunderstand them (even after I corrected you). It does no good whatsoever. You may "win", but you're not convincing anyone else, and you're not gaining anything from it.

If you're not interested in a real discussion based on my arguments of my reasoning, not in specifc wording or rhetorics, then just stop posting now.


I think everyone should have equal rights, but it's clear that women are different from men. Different, enough, I think to afford them different treatment in certain situations.

Why? I mean why not take the difference into account on a per-individual basis. So if a PERSON - man or woman, is weaker than you physically, you should restrain yourself a bit more than you would if the person in question was your physical match or superior.

Treating someone different because of their gender is just stupid, in my opinion. Treat them differently on the basis of their differences, not on a basis that "most people of this gender has this property, so EVERYONE of that gender should be treated differently".

That's just as stupid as the racist argument that "most black people in my experience are aggressive and criminal so we shouldn't give black people the same rights as white people".

The 0.02 dollar question:

If a 300lbs body-building woman, clearly much superior in strength to yourself, starting beating you, would you not defend yourself because she's a woman and thus has right to different treatment? Would you let her beat the crap out of you and do nothing to defend yourself?


So no: I don't believe you should beat women, in the general case. But the reason is not "because she's a girl", it's because they are weaker physically. So just like you don't beat a kid for doing stuff that you would normally get into a fist fight over if he was closer to your physical strength, you shouldn't be doing it to women.

People who treat women differently based on their gender, and not their differences, are just as likely to treat them differently in the "other" direction - like giving them less pay for the same work and such.
Treating women differently, in either direction, based on their gender is wrong, and if you're willing to go one direction you're a lot more likely to be willing to go the other direction as well.

"there is no reason to treat video games any differently"

exept for the fact that children play video games. Most parents would assume that most games are fine. There should be a games rating system at least. "this game is rated R for violence, sexual situations, suggestive dialog, and more violence"

This reminds me, I need to preorder Vice for PC.

NO POSTAL 2 FOR THE YOUNGER SHACKERS

I'm going to write the best selling game of all time.

In it, you're going to be able to wave the American flag, go to work, pay your taxes, and go to Church on Sunday. You will gain points by following the schedule in manual to the letter. You will lose points if you attempt to play the game on any terms other than those in the manual. You will lose points if you dress sloppily while playing the game. You will lose points if you actually miss church playing the game. You will lose points if you don't actually like the game.

I'm aware that no gamer in their right mind will ever buy it. BUT, and here's the catch, every other mush-brained idiot in this country will be rushing to Walmart to buy two copies. Lieberman will be singing my praises on national TV. Congress will pass resolutions officially endorsing my game. I'm going to be on the front page of every paper, lifted up as a hero of the American public. I'm going to be under every christmas tree, because every paranoid, oppressive parent is going to want my lame, safe game.

I'm going to make a fortune.

This sets a bad precedent. It *assumes* a causal relationship between video games and deviant behavior... an association which has been disproven by substantial research. This could be the beginning of much worse things to come. *sigh* I can't say that I much care for the way my country has been run lately.

I'm pretty sure this will be thrown out, but I do feel our industry needs to do a FAR better job informing people of game ratings. The commercials aren't doing it. I don't see why the standard movie ratings wouldn't work, honestly. Throw the old rated R and you'll have a parent's attention alot better than "M".

to foreiners this sounds as if it would affect all of the US. Goddamn, since when does the shack cover local politics ?

Hmmm...I wonder if GTA3 had anything to do with this.
NNNNAAAAAAAHHHHHHHH

i guess this is more incentive for developers to not make racy games too eh?

What's wrong with a fine for selling M rated games to minors? It's the same thing as selling R rated DVDs or smokes, or even booze. Kids shouldn't have this stuff. Let alone be allowed to play it for hours on end. If parents are not going to step up (which most don't) then WTF is the problem? Most of these games should be adult only. Kids should be kids, and play with dolls and pokimon until they are old enough to figure stuff out like, taking a bat to your best friend isn't a good idea.

Parents should learn to say NO more. But most just don't give a shit what kind of kid they raise. They are too busy working, boozing, or doing drugs to care for the kids.

So, does this mean they won't sell Raven Shield anymore?

what would really make me laugh is if 6 months down the line it will be found a minor can get cigarettes easier than video games

What if the women have tenticales and are trying to kill you??

Why aren't the deer hunter style games affected by this law?

For one, I hope they do start carding M rated games, makes the parents job easier. However, I think that there should be limitations on how long a game should be rated M. Look at starcraft, it was rated M when it was released (I'm assuming for violence and blood), but by today's standard, its tame. Crap, look at the original Wolfenstein 3D, it has "blood" in the form of red pixels...

ATTN: Washington Legislative Tards

All you have done is drive game sales out of Washington, toward online retailers. GG and better luck next time.

You know what the interesting thing is? The $500 fine is the same one (at least in Washington) as the one you get when you sell alchohol to a minor.

I think its just that much more stress on the guys like myself working retail selling games in Washington.

Ok, I'm going to go 180 on the whole issue and say that this is a good thing.

The only way we'll get the game industry to be more like the movie industry and still have adult oriented content be accepted is if minors don't have access to it. And whether you agree that 18 is the right age or not, it's clear that there is a time where exposure to violence and other nasty things can have an untoward effect on a child's development.

If kids couldn't buy these games, there would be less reason for parents to protest them.

Does violence against women include any game with women that has violence? Like are martial arts games or games where the main character is female off limits?

I was wondering when the the arrival of the Thought Police would be in this country. I think I'll go over to Vancouver, WA later today and taunt them.

Can we change the news title to "Washington To Restrict Game Sales to Minors"?

I'm tired of people not reading articles and commenting on the headlines

This is retarded. There's no law requiring people to enforce movie ratings, why do we need one on video games?
Also singling out killing women and police officers just seems totally arbitrary. Does this mean it's ok to kill your average man and male children in games?
I mean, you could detail the mutilation of them, and it could still be sold to your average 8 year old, under this law.