Congressman wants to put cigarette-style label on videogames. Again.

Congressman Joe Baca apparently has so much free time on his hands he wants to try labeling those evil, nasty videogames, with the following warning

WARNING: Exposure to violent video games has been linked to aggressive behavior. [Citation Needed]

Same Bill was proposed back in 2009 and 2011, both times it failed miserably. Give the man some credit for perseverance, I guess. Also, the label is proposed to be carried by any games rated E and up. Seriously.

He also took the time to modify the original label he proposed, which read as:

WARNING: Excessive exposure to violent video games and other violent media has been linked to aggressive behavior

I am backing this proposal 100%. We can't have our children be exposed to these nasty videogame violence, with their Pokey mans and their illegally immigrated Italian plumbers. It's anti-american.

That was sarcasm.

edited 21st Mar '12 11:51:47 AM by ThatOneGuyNamedX

Has this been proven? I know everyone starts crying when some kid does something violent and he played video games but has there ever been an actual casual link between video games and violence?

I don't think so. The closest thing was what is constantly repeated in my Statistics and Psychology classes: Correlation does not equal causation. For all he knows, naturally violent people just like violent videogames. Aren't there also studies showing that violent crime has gone down recently anyway?

Oh, and kids can be almost disturbingly violent sometimes with little to no media influence.

edited 21st Mar '12 12:01:02 PM by Zendervai

I think like 3 that I have ever heard of.

edited 21st Mar '12 12:01:53 PM by Envyus

...Whoever's responsible for this is determined to make himself look like an absolute idiot. Agreed?

Well, going by this man's logic of correlation (People are violent, people play video games, therefore violent people play videogames, ergo videogames make you violent), working as a congressman makes you stupid. I haven't seen a lot of violent gamers, but I've seen a ton of stupid congressmen.

We should get a petition drive going that, since being elected to Congress is correlated with overt displays of idiocy, Congress should have a warning label.

WARNING: Exposure to the United States Congress has been linked to extreme displays of ignorance and narcissistic behavior.

Then they can counter this claim by saying, "On the contrary, ignorant and narcissistic people seek out Congress."

edited 21st Mar '12 12:10:58 PM by Fighteer

I am disappointed in politicians making dumb video-game related decisions, but am pretty sure nothing will come of this.

Again.

I'd get behind that.

Seriously, this is stupid. It had better not happen outside the US.

The fact that Video Games are protected under Law now makes it even less likely this will happen.

edited 21st Mar '12 12:15:35 PM by Demongodofchaos2

The most comprehensive study to date found quite the opposite. While it's true video games were linked to a very short-term increase in hostility, overall, people who play video games were less violent than people who don't.

So this guy is actually demonstrably wrong in his claim. He wants to put what is essentially a lie on video game packages.

It pisses me off when people make the claim that video games make people more violent, because it's simply not true. If you're going to make a claim like that, and state it as fact, you might wanna do some fucking research first.

Oh look, probably another thick-headed Republican trying to appeal to the ri-

Oh. He's a Democrat.

I got nothing.

Being a Democrat in Congress doesn't make you immune to stupidity; far from it. The fact is that Republicans and Democrats alike like to play Moral Guardians, regardless of the facts.

No, it's not that I think he's any better or worse because of his party. I just usually expect these kinds of "moral protections" to come from the right.

Eh, "Political Correctness" is very much an invention of the left, if my understanding is correct, and the Video Games Are Evil drive comes as much from there as it does from the right.

It's funny because in a way it comes from both sides: the Right thinks violence is fine but doesn't want sex, and the Left hates the naughty language and the violence. Since the score ends up as Violence 0.5, Sex -1, Language 0, that's why games with a body count to rival anything Hollywood has released get a rating bump if someone says "Fuck", and games with mass murder and Cluster F Bombs can't show tits without getting an AO rating.

edited 21st Mar '12 12:35:20 PM by Fighteer

I just consume whatever's shoved down my gullet.

But no really? This is pretty dumb, if only because we already have a ratings system in place. It's kinda like the information is already right there in front of you, so the only reason you're missing it is because of your ignorance. I think the only way you could make it clearer is if the ESRB used numbers like the BBFC or just adopted the MPAA ratings scale.

The ESRB's rating system is more comprehensive than the MPAA's, technically. The problem is more that Mommy buys little Johnny whatever he's willing to whine enough over, and then is shocked, SHOCKED when the games that she thinks are glorified Pac Man (or Super Mario Bros, depending on their reference pools) turn out to have realistic people shooting each other in the head.

All of the above is why Assassins Creed, which features the hero performing such gory executions as chopping halfway through a badguy's head with an axe and then pulling it back out afterwards, or hooking a guy in the head, spinning him around 180, and breaking his back, have to hide most of their cursing behind translated subtitles and has a sex scene with the girl still in her underwear.

edited 21st Mar '12 12:45:24 PM by Fighteer

I don't mean adopt their entire ratings system, just the letter grades. EC and E would become G, E10+ would be PG, T would be PG-13, M -> R, and AO -> NC-17. It's just a matter of clarity; I'm certain more Americans are aware of the MPAA ratings scale than they are of the ESRB's.

edited 21st Mar '12 12:35:56 PM by MrDolomite

This... debacle, for lack of a better word, does not surprise me in the slightest.

Then there's the ESRB's website and the writeups it contains.

Really, the message the Moral Guardians should be sending is that the parents should look up the game they're planning to buy little Johnny on that website before they do, and generally do the fucking research.

Sadly, they can't send out a message like that because it'd be hypocritical. You can't tell others to do the research if you haven't done it yourself.

HEY PARENTS! A big black and white "M" label on a video game box does not mean "Mommy-approved"!

edited 21st Mar '12 12:48:16 PM by Fighteer

From my point of view, people don't become violent from video games. It usually stems from emotional trauma from real problems like abuse or neglect from other people.

Rather then address the true source and trying to resolve these issues, congress blames everything else for this, and nothing gets solved. It usually gets worse, since failing to deal with the problem at hand usually leads to these violent outbursts.

You don't see me stomping on turtles or slicing people up with a katana in real life. Although the mentally disturbed may have games, books, movies, music that fit their personality, it's either how other people initially treated them that sparked it, or it's an unfortunate case of having a disorder like that regardless of the action taken.

The boxes even say what the rating stands for right on the front of the box.

Huh, weird. My games have a pegi rating, which has the appropriate age instead of Mature or whatever.