Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Restrictions on Video Games? (Updated)

Politico indicates that because the Newtown shooter was reputedly an avid player of "Call of Duty" and "Starcraft," Congress (specifically, Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) and Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.)) want a commission to study the link between violent video games and shootings such as in Newtown. Millions of people play these games without going crazy and shooting people, but I'm sure that the researchers will arrive at the conclusion that the Senators want to hear. Of course, the Hollywood elite would enjoy having restrictions on their biggest competitors.

Update (Dec. 19, 2012) More from the Daily Mail.

It's unlikely that lawmakers will pursue legislation to regulate the sales of video games; such efforts were rejected again and again in a series of court cases over the last decade.
Indeed, the industry seemed to have moved beyond the entire issue last year, when the Supreme Court revoked a California law criminalizing the sale of violent games to minors.
The Supreme Court decision focused on First Amendment concerns; in the majority opinion, Justice Antonin Scalia wrote that games 'are as much entitled to the protection of free speech as the best of literature.' Scalia also agreed with the ESA's argument that researchers haven't established a link between media violence and real-life violence.
'Psychological studies purporting to show a connection between exposure to violent video games and harmful effects on children do not prove that such exposure causes minors to act aggressively,' Scalia wrote.
While Lanza enjoyed video games, the same could be said for about 80 per cent of Americans in the shooter's age group, according to the Pew Internet and American Life Project. 
Law enforcement officials haven't made any connection between Lanza's possible motives and his interest in games.

If only we could depend on the courts being as solicitous of our 2nd Amendment rights.

No comments:

Post a Comment