Louisiana has the dumbest politicians. The Democrats & Republicans are virtually the same. The state ranks at the top for taxes yet is always broke and has little to show for it. This is the same Blanco that couldn't save her people during Hurricane Katrina. "Protecting the children" is nothing more than political grandstanding.

Looks like someone's trying to get her approval ratings up before election time, perhaps?

This is ridiculous.

Let's put the blame, and the onus, where it belongs, people.

The retailers are *not* responsible for raising our kids. Nor should they be held accountable for it.

Put the penalties on the negligent parents. Where it belongs.

AmI the only one who finds it insulting, as a parent, to have the state try and tell my children what they are supposed to do and not supposed to do? I thought that was *my* job.

amen to that!

yeah but there really has to be more attention given to ratings and such, as of now its only 1"x.5" box that nobody really sees. there needs to be like a tv commercial ratings campaign or something, maybe billboards, idk im not a marketing guy but there needs to be more public knowledge. maybe a fine somehow for parents letting young children play games like gta.

The rating doesn't need to be bigger... parents just need to look for it. We can't hold society responsible for doing our job. As a parent, if you are not sure about a game, read the label, look for the rating. If the parent doesn't look or doesn't care it is not a breakdown of society that the store owner/clerk should pay for.

Perhaps we should cover the entire front of the box with the rating, that way there is no possible way someone can claim they didn't see it.

right thats what im saying, but maybe there needs to be someone pointing the parents to the rating.

They are on the cover there is no need to impede the cover design. It isn't hidden in any way and they are always in the same spot.

no i dont mean something on the box i mean like commercials or posters next to the game shelf or something.

Uh.. they DO do that, appearently you haven't gone to a store that sells video games or watched TV video games commercials lately. Or for the past ten years.

What has the European Space Agency got to do with games?

they dont want some un-supervised united states youth turning into a psycotic astronaut and causing chaos across the galaxy :-P

The government can't handle what they have on their plate already, why the hell would we want to put more of this BS on them? In three years the same folks that are for government enforcement on this issue will complain that they are unfair in the way they rule. Why not take on some responsibility? It's so easy to complain about nobody doing anything about it, do something about it yourselves.

Sorry about the rant, but I'm sick of people and "Associations" that believe the government is a genie in a bottle--I wish this, I wish that...the government MUST do this or that. Geez, get off your dead butts and do something yourselves.

I tottally agree that concerned citizens must be activists for those causes that they want to promote. Just the other day there was a young 15 year old kid walking into a department store wearing a s*** the said the F Y phrase in large letters. One of the customers objected and the store asked the kid to leave. He got all loud and said he was an American and they couldn't do this to him. As a group we all escorted this young man to the door and called the police. He decided to leave before they got there. I'm sure his parents did not know he was wearing something like this in public. They probably didn't even know he had bought it.

It's about time someone stands up to the man. A line needs to be drawn for kids but there is such a thing as overdoing it. The government needs a better answer here. Rating's work if parents and stores actuall do what is needed.

ah but at least half of stores violent video games sales are to minors, and they are more interested in money, although for the last year or so i still get carded in the majority of places if i try to buy m or over rated games.

So get the problem at it's source, negligent parents, and *not* the retailer. It is not their job to raise your children for you.

yeah there needs to be more parental education on the matter. like i posted above im not sure how, im dont know good ways to get the message to parents, but there has to be a good solution, cause letting people do it themselves isnt working. i mean anyone remember that article a month or so ago about the 12 year old who stole his teachers car and raced it around, cause he had been playing gta? i mean besides the point that video games dont really make people go out and do things, just used as an excuse, children often try to mimic what they see in movies and games and such. if we would like to remember when kids used to get hurt imitating mortal combat the game or the show jackass stunts. my main point is why the hell was a 12 year old playing a "Mature", then later rated "restricted" game anyway, what kind of crap parenting is that? that teacher should have sued the pants off that kids stupid a** parents. there is a reason there is a rating of 18 or older, and it is because kids are easily influenced by things at young ages, i mean hell when do most kids take up smoking? maybe 12-16 year age range, why? because of the cool factor that influenced them. social services should freaking take away kids from parents who let their kids smoke at young ages and play violent games that young.

I think that there is a lot of good that can come from preventing the sale of these violent games to minors. The parents are often not around when the kid goes to the store and buys this type of game. These games teach violence is OK and they teach disrespect for the laws and police. It won't stop an adult from buying or playing them. It will just stop the kids that think they are "grown up" and know everything from being inundated with yet another bad choice by greedy companies. It doesn't affect adults at all.

"The parents are often not around when the kid goes to the store and buys this type of game."

Where do you think the kid gets the money?

Hey when I was 12 I had three paper routes with which I bought my first computer. This was back in the day when kids actual did chores (mow the lawn, clean their room, take out the trash) and were not rewarded for helping out aournd the house for the free food and roof over their heads. God I sound old, maybe just a little old-fashion (I am 80's teen) What was my point, maybe nothing other then pointing out that I had a couple of paper routes. Boy it is late...

These games teach violence is OK and they teach disrespect for the laws and police.

Yeah.

If you ignore completely the simply fact that the games are fiction, and that real life is, well...reality.

Most folks, at least, those with a modicum of intelligence, can tell the difference between the two.

"Hey when I was..."
Yeah, yeah, me too; but I don't think paper routes are paying for the common teenager cellphone seen these days, nor the videogames they are playing.

That is another point. Teenagers are spoiled, give me, give me as they come to expect it more then the previous generation. I guess each generation says this about the previous (I am no exception). Mind you not all teenagers are materialistically spoiled. For example, all though my child is an occasional pain she has to pay for her own phone,many clothes she likes and other things that most take for granted.
Getting back to the other tangent, studies show that many are not willing to work because they get everything from their parents and it is seemingly beneath them to work at these establishments. This is not an absolute rule. But, here in California this is one of the reasons that many establishments that now imploy rescent border crossers have had to do so; kids who once dominated these jobs here aren't willing to work for minmum wage. And believe it not you can pay for your phone, the movies, video games etc... working for minimum wage. You won't be able to rent a place and eat, but hey we are talking about teenagers.

Yes, it does affect adults, as these laws are not needed nor warranted for any other form of entertainment. You sound like you're talking about GTA. Guess what, GTA is rated MA!!! It's not marketed towards kids. It's not for kids. Neither is Natural Born Killers, the movie. Or Godfather. If some dumba** parent buy their kid Godfather, that parent gets and deserves what ever "happens" to their kid. Video games are just another medium for art and entertainment, no idfferent than motion pictures or television or movies. We have some kind of rating system for all of those. We do not go to such lengths as we do here. Games have been around for over 4 decades now, the only people who consider these to be a "kids only" medium are those who are so old to be adults when the medium started, and will die off soon with this illogical thinking.

Lazy a** parents use video games, TV, or whatever as baby sitters and do not pay attention to what they are doing. Parents should be required to pass an "idiot" test before having kids. If they don't pass - no kids.

hey lets just take it a step further and if you dont pass you get euthenized.

reminds me of a certain family guy, "i'm sorry billy you need 10 tickets to live"....

hey lets just take it a step further and if you dont pass you get euthenized.

This has needed done for quite some time. I've been saying so for at least 12 years. (I've gotten soft as I've gotten older though. I'd be satisfied with sterilzation.)

*The ESA calls the bill unnecessary, saying the industry and parents are already working together to curb sales of questionable titles.*

I would have to agree. Besides, what if some idiot at Electronics boutique sells a video game to an underage minor, and he didn't check his ID first? Its ESA's fault for the negligence of a retailer, because they were too lazy to check? I don't think so.

This whole thing is getting blown out of proportion anyway.

PARENTS, not gamers, not developers, not retailers, PARENTS should be watching their kids. PARENTS! If they are vigilant about their kids activities, THEY should be the ones to keep on eye on them.

You are telling me that if I send my kid to EB and he buys a game I don't want, and all of a sudden he is playing a new game on Xbox, and I don't check..that retailer that sold it to him should be fined because me as a parent didn't do their job? Come on!

If you are that concerned about your child's gaming habits, then you should check what they are playing.

I agree completely... teach your children to assume responsibility by assuming some yourself. Placing a content warning on the label is more than enough.

Applying your logic of parental responsibility then, if you come home and your twelve year old is watching the newest XXX feature Bachelorette Bang while downing his twelve pack of Coors and smoking his fith Marlboro cigarette then you should not be mad at the stores who sold them the items. For, it is completely your fault as a parent you failed (yes, in this particular case that is probaly true) but it is also society that failed. Why be mad, you should be glad because they are expressing themselves and those laws make as much sense as this law, lets toss them all out. Kids are going to break them anyway. Why do we need to protect them at all.

Don't get me wrong I agree parents have a huge responsibility. There are many parents who are role models but there are just as many irresponsible parents. So it falls upons society to protect those of irresponsible even it infringes upon those that are responsible. The courts have ruled in many cases that the rules of societal responsibility are different when you are under 18. It is the same reason that minors are banned (under the law) from porno, smoking, curfews, dating someone over 18
and a variety of other societal regulations.

[Why is their a rating system for anything? In most cases (and industry knows this) it attracts rather then repels youth to something.]

Futher, by reading the many posts here I am gathering that most are either barely able to drink, if that or do not have children (that you know of). But wait until you do, believe me, the rules change.

Alas, I am even further saddened by an industry that blantantly goes and peddles violence to children and uses the excuse that parents should educate their children rather the industry being more respnsible. (A typicl lobbying effort to blame the other person for their failings, throw a few dollars into PR and smile and look good to the cameras.)

What I fear is going to happen in the end, like many cases that appear to be based in some logical protection of both parents, society, children and the business in a chaning world will be the fact that the pendulum of ideology will swing to the opposite side of the spectrum with the U.S. Supreme making a decistion (purley conjecture on my part. But, believe me a more resrtive law will win over and even I don't want that to happen.

As a parent it comes upon to say for the same reasons I don't want children voting, drinking going to local strip club, or buying violently/sexually rated games without a parent is the same reasons I thnk that laws like this are necessary, they aren't mature enough to handle them and placing responsibility on a parent for everything is wrong. Society shares responsibilty.

i dont know about where you live but here you have to be 18 to buy tobbacco and video games marked m or higher, and 21 for alcohol. im pretty sure that is all over the U.S. but not sure if the games thing is country wide.

Applying your logic of parental responsibility then, if you come home and your twelve year old is watching the newest XXX feature Bachelorette Bang while downing his twelve pack of Coors and smoking his fith Marlboro cigarette then you should not be mad at the stores who sold them the items.

Why don't we? Why apply one set of rules to one thing (booze) and another set to another (games)?

Oh..wait... I know!

Because booze is physically harmful when used immaturely (this covers most uses of the stuff, BTW...and yeah, I'm guilty...on occaision), and games are *not*.

:)

...just sayin'.

actually you shouldnt be mad at the store, you should be pissed at yourself as a parent there too, cause when it comes down to it, you are the first line in education and prevention, and if your kid is smoking and drinking and watching porn then it mean YOU have FAILED, not the store, not the government, YOU. I'm tired of the blame being placed on others, oh its someone elses fault, not mine. stand up and take responsability for your parenting, when you have a damn kid you are taking on the responsability of protecting them and steering their way along in life until they are 18. its your job to have a pretty good idea of what your kids are doing 100% of the time, and if you think thats unreasonable, DONT HAVE A g**d***ED KID!

...twelve year old is watching the newest XXX feature Bachelorette Bang while downing his twelve pack of Coors and smoking his fith Marlboro cigarette

How do you know so much about my childhood? And to clear up the confusion: I was 13, the feature was "Debbie Does Debbie", it was crappy Keystone beer, and it was my 6th cigarette.

"Futher, by reading the many posts here I am gathering that most are either barely able to drink, if that or do not have children (that you know of). But wait until you do, believe me, the rules change."

Your condescending attitude doesn't make your point valid. At the time you posted, the other comments were not ignorant to the subject, they just didn't agree with your line of thinking. You almost sound as if we are helping society raise our children instead of us being helped. When a child requires so much help that society is doing more than their parents, they probably aren't buying video games. I have two children for which I accept full responsibility for, and I still find this law to be ridiculous and unnecessary.

Once again if you read the point I wa trying to make, societies goal is not to protect one child or 100 children but to protect all children. Whether you are a responsible adult or not society recognizes that it must as whole assume the lowest common denominator and protect as if you were not responsible and caring parent. I also point out that many parents are truly good and in control of the situation (at least most of the time until they reach 16 then all bets are off:) )

But, as a whole we as society have shown a lack of responsibility at every level. Parents blame the schools, films and everything else. Schools blame the parents and media and everything else. Medaia blames the parents and everything else. In the immortal words of Mrs. Clinton, "it takes a village"

Ah, Keystone the bottom of the barrel Coors. Can't get more disgusting then that.

What do you consider immaturely? Is getting drunk immature? If so then many people over 21 get immature all the time. So how does that become age related issue? Shouldn't I be allowed to determine if my child is mature and not have society determine if for me. Really I know my child is mature and 21 should not be the mark of legality when I think it should 13. The point is society readily determines artificial constructs for age determinants when deciding maturity. Not to harp, because in general I agree with your point I just don't think requiring a parent's approval to buy is wrong and a business should be held responsible if they blatanly ignore this or similar laws. I mean they still ID you to get beer until your late 20's even if you have a greying beard.

You further mention that games are not a direct determinant but let's look at secondary causes of video games. The average child is 18%+ heavy then the previous generation (no that is not muscle mass around them bellies). It is shown that it is not just the fast food to blame but lack of activity. Children, thanks into a great part video games and Nick at Night :), are not outdoors but playing on their screens instead. You may not know this but the number one killer in America is not cigarettes or alcohol but obesity and other food and related diseases by a margin of almost 10 to 1. You right it won't kill you today but you wait and see your; your future body type is determined in your teen years. Someone who is fat during these years generally finds it difficult to loose later in life. O.K. enough preaching I have to get my fat butt of this chair and into the gym :)

Once again if read the point I trying to make, society is to protect all children not just those that who take full responsibility.

Could you rephrase that first part, I can't quite understand what you are trying to say. I would agree that there are some good parents out there; but that for the most part, people do not take responsibility for their children anymore. In a society that forbids parents from punishing their children with anything more than "timeouts", I ALMOST can't blame them. If only there weren't so many people that saw children as less of a commitment than marriage.

I promised my self I was going to go to bed at 5am but I didn't and those last twelve hours of fragging those damn aliens has left me scattered brain and farther from the bed then before. But, thanks for pointing out my complete lack language skills. Thank god you couldn't see the drool on my keyboard from my almost comatose body.

Once again if you read the point I wa trying to make, societies goal is not to protect one child or 100 children but to protect all children. Whether you are a responsible adult or not society recognizes that it must as whole assume the lowest common denominator and protect as if you were not responsible and caring parent.

"They say it takes a village to raise a child. Well, some of the villagers have better things to do." -Bill Maher, heavily paraphrased.

Society's goals might include taking care of children; but government's goal is to keep people from killing, stealing from, generally victimizing each other, and guarding against outside threats. The difference is one makes the video game seller a jerk, the other makes him a criminal.

13 cans will still get you quite drunk though.

You do know that there isn't laws that outlaw such situtuions with R-rated movies, don't you? A video game is no different than a movie, or television show... there are rating systems for all of these, but only video games as of late gets picked on for these "alledged" cases of selling to minors. There is no such jailtime for selling an R-Rated movie, or for the "accidental" broadcast of an MA-Rated television show to a child. Nor is there jailtime/fins for these alledged cases against selling CDs with explicit lyrics. This is how our system is set up now curently, I don't see any reason to change things. The vlountaryt ratings system works in favor of both children and consenting adults, and only doesn't work if you're a dunba** parent or a negligent parent, and it's not the governmet's responsibility to legislate that, which is one among many reasons why these laws get struck down.

You do know that there isn't laws that outlaw such situtuions with R-rated movies, don't you? A video game is no different than a movie, or television show... there are rating systems for all of these, but only video games as of late gets picked on for these "alledged" cases of selling to minors. There is no such jailtime for selling an R-Rated movie, or for the "accidental" broadcast of an MA-Rated television show to a child. Nor is there jailtime/fins for these alledged cases against selling CDs with explicit lyrics. This is how our system is set up now curently, I don't see any reason to change things. The vlountaryt ratings system works in favor of both children and consenting adults, and only doesn't work if you're a dunba** parent or a negligent parent, and it's not the governmet's responsibility to legislate that, which is one among many reasons why these laws get struck down.