|
|
 |
| [Oct 27, 2010, 11:31 am ET] - Share - Viewing Comments |
TIME - Violent Video Games- Protected by the First Amendment.
But the courts have so far rightly refused to do this. Indecency law, after all, has become a mess of late. The puritanical censors at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) have been running amok for the past few years, imposing fines on broadcasters for airing off-color language — all in the name of "protecting the children." (One example: the FCC fined a small public television station in San Mateo, Calif., $15,000 for airing Martin Scorsese's acclaimed documentary The Blues, which had musicians using raunchy language.) It is scary to think what the FCC censors would do with the power to crack down on people who put out images they regard as too violent.
Post Comment
Enter the details of the comment
you'd like to post in the boxes below and click the button at
the bottom of the form.
 |
| 10. |
Re: Op Ed |
Oct 27, 2010, 20:20 |
skyguy |
|
|
theyarecomingforyou wrote on Oct 27, 2010, 19:20: Unless I'm misinterpreting something here? All video game retailers in the united states already have age requirements for buying mature video games. And all movie theaters in the united states have age requirements for entering an R rated movie.
This is not because the law requires it, it is because public opinion demands it.
Enacting laws relegating mature video games to an "indecent" status is not about protecting children, it is about stigmatizing those that enjoy mature video games. They want you to have to ask at the desk for a mature video game. They want to ban public advertisements of mature video games. It may seem odd to foreigners, but not allowing laws restricting the availability of media, whether it would restrict books, movies, or video games, is a very important bulwark against the censorship of "offensive" media and ideas. |
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
.. ..
Copyright © 1996-2013 Stephen Heaslip. All rights reserved.
All trademarks are properties of their respective owners.