For years, video game violence has been a contentious issue among parents, children, advocacy groups, and politicians alike. Many in those groups insist that video games and the violence therein are protected by the first amendment, and more and more, our judicial system seems to agree.
Time to put another notch in the Constitution's bedpost. An Oklahoma—OKLAHOMA--judge has ruled that a ban on selling or renting violent video games to minors would be unconstitutional and violate the right to free speech.
Mr. Schwarzenegger's name, however, is not clean.Meanwhile, in California, a federal judge in San Jose declared unconstitutional a bill that would institute the ban. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger said he plans to appeal the ruling.
Mr. Schwarzenegger's name, however, is not clean. In 1991, one of the greatest flash gun video games of all time was unleashed upon waves of quarter-popping adolescents in video arcades nationwide. "Terminator II: Judgment Day," was an adaptation of the movie of the same name, starring Mr. Schwarzenegger. In the game, players shot anything and everything in sight with powerful machine guns. Did Schwarzenegger speak up then? No. In fact, he provided voiceovers recorded specifically for the game.
Violence was in video games then just like it is now, and at least one of our current leaders who condemn it once profited from it. But it isn't anything new. In fact, the realistic portrayal of violence in any medium of entertainment has been the goal of some of the world's greatest artists for time immemorial. From Igor Stravinsky's soul-stirring interpretation of human sacrifice in "The Rites of Spring" to Martin Scorsese's gripping portrayal of a cripplingly unstable human being in "Taxi Driver," violent realism is an inherent product of our creative process.
Not to mention a right. I'm all for ratings on video games—I am in favor of most things that can help parents be more informed about what they are buying for their children. But a ban on such material is not only unconstitutional, it's prohibition, and we all know how that works. Pretty soon, people are making extremely violent underground video games that any kid in the country can play any time he logs on to the Internet. If parents are worried about their children being involved with violent video games, they should get more involved in the lives of those children.But then again, that's already started. Take "Cat-a-pult," for instance. This little gem requires no verification of age or parental consent. Just a couple of clicks, and you're launching cats into the air, the goal being to watch their eventual destruction as they explode on the wall in front of you in a cloud of bones and blood. You can be sure that the SCPA would love it if the game disappeared into the ether, but should it be banned for that violence? Hell no. Because that would violate the first amendment.
If parents are worried about their children being involved with violent video games, they should get more involved in the lives of those children. With video games, it's easy. Ratings are applied to all games sold in retail stores, and the Internet allows for very efficient research into the content of any particular game. Speaking of the Internet, parents can easily use one of the thousands of programs or features that can help them restrict what their children can see on the World Wide Web.
Legislation will not solve any problems relating to the irresponsibility of parents who do not monitor the nature of the media that their children intake. Unlike most of the problems in this country, the negative effects of violent video games on society have nothing to do with legislators or the people that create such games. Those problems stem from the parents, and until they take the necessary responsibility, nothing, not even a Constitutional amendment, will solve any of the problems associated with exposure to violent video games.
Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to blow off some steam by catapulting cats into the wall. [NY Times, Wikipedia]
The return of George “It's not my fault” Bush
As if he had gone anywhere in the first place. It seems that once again, President Bush is covering his ass at the expense of the truth and honesty the American people deserve from our leaders. But he isn't alone this time. Now, Congress is in on the act—a congress that still includes many members who voted for the war in Iraq (and many of whom face reelection in 2008).
...it is also despicable that such unnecessary infighting could cause serious morale problems for troops laying their lives on the line in this “War on Terror.”A report classified since its completion in June 2005 was ordered released by Congress under a law signed by President Bush last week. The report seems to point all the blame for faulty, incomplete intelligence about Al Qaeda before the September 11, 2001 attacks squarely at the CIA, in particular, at former director George Tenet. Tenet has released a statement condemning the report, citing the now-infamous August 2001 report released by his agency stating that Al Qaeda could possibly carry out attacks in the United States using commercial aircraft. The contents of that report were summarized for President Bush in his President’s Daily Brief on August 6, 2001, with the clear-as-day statement, “Bin Laden determined to strike in U.S.”
Not only is it convenient that such a report be released at this time, when support for both the President and Congress is waning at record lows, it is also despicable that such unnecessary infighting could cause serious morale problems for troops laying their lives on the line in this “War on Terror.” From lambasting the spy community for gathering insufficient evidence, to deriding the director's use of the Counterterrorism Center in strategic planning, the report finds blame for everything under the sun—except the guy who didn't pay attention to the intelligence contained in his daily briefing on August 6, 2001. [Washington Post, NY Times]
Iraqi progress “extremely disappointing”
This jaw-dropping headline is brought to you courtesy of U.S. ambassador Ryan Crocker, who also ensured that U.S. support for the Iraqi government is “not a blank check.”
This kind of classification of the war shouldn't surprise anyone.These statements, coming less than a month before Crocker is expected to deliver a report on the state of affairs in Iraq to Congress and General David Petraeus, could precede a very dramatic shift in U.S. policy toward Iraq, as benchmarks set forth by Congress for withdrawal of troops loom closer on the horizon every day.
This kind of classification of the war shouldn't surprise anyone. It shouldn't surprise Congress, it shouldn't surprise the American people, and it damn well shouldn't surprise the President. Our invasion of a sovereign country already plagued by civil strife, extreme prejudice between religious groups, and a long history of being ruled by nothing but oppression and violence could have led to no other situation. If we as a people ever learn anything from this war, hopefully it is this: no matter how strong our military is, we cannot solve the problems of a sovereign nation through invasion and occupation—no matter how noble our goals are. America, remember this the next time one of our leaders proposes a preventative war such as this one. While “preemptive strike” seems to be the preferred nomenclature, there's no doubting that the former description is far more accurate. [Reuters] Compiled by Branden Hart, TheSequitur.com Senior Editor.
I really enjoyed the violent video game article B. For a long time now, I have been one who speaks negatively of violent video games and bitches about their impact on kids today. However with the ratings system in place, it truly is the parents job to 'monitor the nature of the media that their children intake'. So the responsibility lies with the parents (again) and thats what being a parent is all about - taking responsibility for another human being's life and upbringing. (I also simply love the irony of Terminator situation - priceless.)
Morning Coffee is a collection of top-fold news, oddities, observations and wisecracks, peppered with financial advice, movie reviews and more gathered by TheSequitur.com contributors and editors.
Morning Coffee 
