@budash2:
Yeah! Fuck them! It's not like it's their job to get involved or anything!

gamadaya

@greyhoundbus: No, it's the Wu-Tang Clan that ain't nothin' to fuck with.

InsidiousTuna

@wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!: I agree with you to a certain extent. But what I think they are trying to do here is make an example. Not only for legislators thinking of sneaking a law of their own under the radar, but to the taxpayers as well. I'm not so sure it was a good move either, but the for all intents and purposes, the people of Minnesota should absolutely know all about this.

Also, with the recent release of GTAIV and the surrounding controversy, they probably wanted to make this victory a resounding one and stomped their feet a little too hard. Maybe? Oh well. But really, what do I know? How to speculate. Probably badly.

chuffhoncho

I think it's funny that people who went into politics as a career fail to realize that these kind of laws aren't allowed under the very document that our government is built upon. The older I get, and the more stories I hear about these laws being declared unconstitutional, the more I become thankful that we had some really smart people set the U.S. off on the right foot. Oh, and as a former Minnesotan, for shame, land of 10,000 lakes! For shame!!!

Ajax

I'm from MN, and the politics confuse me. The state manages to be both conservative and liberal at the same time :-/

Struct09

@Sparx: I will never accept Jack Thompson as my king!!!

That a terrible waste of money - wouldn't that $65,000 help speed up the process to fix the 35W bridge.

*sigh*

EndwaterAngry

"don't f*** with the video game industry"? I thought it's the constitution you're not supposed to f*** with.

greyhoundbus

@Petezah: In Minnesota? Try the entire Federal Union.

And I'm also from Minnesota, but screw the ESA. They act like video games are the most important thing in the country right now and there are, quite frankly, a lot of WAY MORE IMPORTANT things that should be brought to the publics attention.

Not whining about 6500 in taxes that Minnesotans have to pay. Which, by the way is less than 1 cent from every citizen in Minnesota.

If you think the ESA really cares about video games, guess again, all it cares about is profit, profit, profit.

budash2

Minnesotans should be outraged, yes. But speaking as a guy who grew up and used to live there, there are already so many stupid taxes in MN, I'm sure nobody even takes notice anymore.

@Sparx: Yeah, pretty much. Can you tell I'm fed up with my home-state?

Petezah

Yay, my F-ing state pisses me off again.

RomieYO

There are a lot of issues in regards to these laws. To date, not one of these laws has stood up to challenge. Most of them did go after the retailers (Wal-Mart, Target, Best Buy) for selling to underage minors. One issue is that the ESRB is not a governmental agency and the use of its ratings are voluntary on the part of the video game business.

In all honesty, if a game maker didn't want to have their game rated, they don't have to. To be played on the major consoles, yes they do, but that's a decision made by the console makers, not the game producers. The ratings are voluntary. Giving them the force of law is...tricky.

Marikir

Something tells me Thompson has found a new home in Minnesota. A place where he can be KING!

Sparx

I think it's a bit of foolishness from the ESA. Using grandstanding language like that sends the wrong message. While that particular law was unconstitutional-- as were others of its ilk-- and was certainly ripe to be destroyed, the ESA's language seems focused on doing the wrong thing, which is arming the greater community to oppose ANY legislation involving the protection of minors from 'adult' titles. I don't see there being a problem with legislators wanting to ensure children can't be inappropriate games, but I DO see a problem when they resort to bills that attempt to keep games out of the hands of minors in any way that is unconstitutional. Unfortunately, the ESA's comments are the opposite of useful in this regard-- they're less let's work together to make sure children can't play violent games without a parent's approval so we don't have to fight over laws like this and more neener neener foo-foo don't fuck with the ESA or we'll take your tax money, bitches. It's all spin instead of issues. What this is going to take is greater co-operation, education-- not only of parents, as the ESA says, but of EVERYONE in the community to understand the issues-- and compromise. We have to work together, not shit-talk each other.

Poorly played, ESA. You got a legal victory-- and a deserved one at that-- but then you spit in the face of the people you'll need to work with down the road. Smart.

wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!

@phrequency: Yes, it would punish minors who bought a game and that is not within the power of the state because of the first amendment.

It is up to the parent to watch their child and it is up to the retailer to choose whether or not to allow sale of the game to the individual. The state is trying to step in and just "make sure" people are being moral and responsible about the whole thing.

Absent Blue

@phrequency: I think, punish retailers. Not the minors themselves. I say spend the money teaching parents.

Friction

@TheAngryHeretic: The real question is how can a law be proposed to punish someone for following a non government created guideline. That's stupid. Plus that pesky freedom of speech thing.

At least it's good to hear the ESA doing something

pd771

@phrequency: From what I understand, yes. They made it so they could prosecute minors for the purchase or rental of games rated M or AO. It would be similar to arresting a 12 year old for watching the Matrix.

chuffhoncho

So if a 14 year old goes to Wal-Mart and the idiot behind the counter sells them a game rated mature, why is no one going after Wal-Mart for selling them this game?

Is it the gun makers fault that some retard uses a gun to kill someone? No, it is the retards fault. Same with Wal-Mart selling a mature rated game to someone who is under aged.

When is someone going to go after the retailers for not training their people properly?

TheAngryHeretic

this will be interesting

ZetaCrossfire

i'm a bit confused... so minnesota tried to pass legislation that was set to punish minors who circumvented the ESRB and was able to purchase/rent M/AO games?

phrequency

Now the question becomes is this result going to be repeated for the (x+1)th time in regards to the new NY State legislation.

Place your bets...NOW!

Marikir

ESA FTW!

Friction

@chuffhoncho: I agree with you absolutely that the taxpayers of Minnesota should know about this. That said, spinning it the way they did was entirely unnecessary and just looks foolish-- I'm sure you can imagine what other things the state of Minnesota wastes $65,000 on per year. Government-- even state government-- overspending is an urban legend sort of thing for a reason.

I've absolutely no problem with the ESA wanting to publicise this, but this-- doing it the way they did-- just looks like really bad judgement on their part.

wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!

I'm glad that people are finally starting to see that more than half of what our government does is unconstitutional. Now, let's work to unravel all that it has done so that all the other countries can stop hating us.

FauxVyse

@budash2: Yes, there are a lot more important issues facing the country right now...yet, said issues aren't of concern to the ESA. They should be of concern to Minnesota's legislators, but apparently they see telling people what they can and can't play as a better use of the state's money.

summerdrone

This Minnesotan is indeed outraged.

HootieMac: Section 9 Reject

@budash2: actually its a little over 1 cent, 1.2 cents. But yeah. I didn't realize there were so many Minnesotans here. Other than this, MN does kick ass.

Daymonster

I still want to see some kid sue wall mart for age discrimination when they won't sell him GTA IV.

Now there's a legal case I'd like to see. (Yeah yeah, I know. Not gonna happen. Kid can't file the suit himself, and what lawyer would take a case over a $50 game?)

GnatB

@greyhoundbus: This is actually one of the few occasions when I hear of someone actually protecting something in the constitution. Its just too bad that it has to be for something like business..to make money..

RPGJunky

Paul Bunyan must be spinning in his oversized grave

Ganglor

Man, I'd be glad, if I was a minor, living in Minnesota. But being that I'm not a minor, eh. I'm still grad it didn't go through, I'm suprised it got as far as it did. Who knows what hidden agenda those behind the bill had. Silencing all forms of art that are considered outrageous? Censoring famous works of art because it's considered "lewd"?

Talleh

@wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!:

I think the issue is more that they've tried explaining their reasoning rationally, but people simply don't care or listen to them, so they're now speaking to issues that people can sympathize with: If illegal and unconstitutional efforts are made to stifle video games, the ESA will attack the government branch that does this as a matter of course - it forces their hand - and ultimately it will cost taxpayers and they SHOULD be upset.

I think it's less grandstanding and gloating, and more "We told you how to help. You ignored and circumvented us and took illegal action. Now you're paying legal fees. This is how it happens. People should be mad you're wasting their resources like this instead of supporting the system we already made."

fuchikoma

Just kind of a point of order, it's not necessarily unconstitutional, especially if the courts interpret it to be constitutional. I'm not saying I agree with it, I'm just saying it's not objectively unconstitutional.

EmTeeZ

Having grown up in Minnesota, I'm surprised the bill ever got enough traction, the people are usually pretty progressive and anti-censorship.

Strangelove

I don't know, the only "neener neener" I see there is in the article, not in the actual press release. Comments in the press release from the ESA actually do say stop with the legislation, start with the parental education

GnatB

@EmTeeZ: Incorrect. It is objectively unconstitutional under the Brandenburg v. Ohio standard set by the U.S. Supreme Court. Unless the game is imminently inciting violence, you cannot have a law that punishes and restricts speech based on content, even if that content is inflammatory.

SWATJester

@wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!: I disagree. Content based speech restriction is censorship, and without a compelling governmental interest, does not meet constitutional scrutiny. Period. There was no way the state could legally have enacted that legislation and they knew it. Good on the ESA for standing up and creating binding precedent that will go a long way towards helping gamers in the future.

SWATJester

@summerdrone: No, true that. I just think people should be wary of the ESA and its actions.

budash2

@deathtastic:
~40 actually. According to the release, similar laws have already been overturned in 9 other jurisdictions. (My home state of Illinois being one of them... yeah, us taxpayers had the pay both sides legal bills on that one too.)

@wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!:
You're forgetting this is a democratic republic. ESA isn't dissing the government. He's dissing the idiot politicians who currently are running said government. And with any luck, the verbiage will wake up the people who voted them in to office and they will vote them OUT of office in the next election. In point of fact, he does NOT have to work with those fools. He can try to get in an entirely new set of fools.

I know that I didn't vote for a single one of the idiot Illinois politicians who voted to pass OUR illegal bill.

GnatB

now this needs to be repeated in 49 more states then retarded ass legislators will get it.

deathtastic

penalizing minors for a game? wtf. Go ESA. Just fine the retailers for selling the M rated game to minors.

zerokoolpsx

@SWATJester: I'm not at all disagreeing with you-- the ESA were perfectly within rights to challenge the law, and I'm unsurprised it was overturned. My complaint comes with the ESA's spin doctoring of the situation afterwards. Demonising someone you will have to work with at some point in the future is unwise in any business. You don't see football players in the post-game interviewing saying, man that kicker of ours, he really fucked up bad, you guys ought to hate him. Publicising your legal victory is one thing, but shit-talking your opponent-- especially when in the end the ESA and the government will have to co-operate on how to handle the issue of violent games in the future-- whether with education, a government-sponsored ratings system to replace the ESRB, or some other, unknown solution-- is quite another. But again, I'm not at all dismissive or unhappy with the ESA winning the legal challenge.

@fuchikoma: That's a valid enough way of thinking, and I like how you presented it. While I do think it was markedly more effective to couch the situation in terms the average joe can better interpret, I'm not sold on the idea that discretion wouldn't have been wiser. Let's not forget-- the ESA in June of 2008 is not the ESA of June of 2007. This is an organisation that is falling apart from the inside out-- and at some point they could very well lack the resources to successfully challenge all of these laws. If the ESA doesn't actually represent most of the industry some day, do you think pissing on the enemy at the gates is wise? At that point, do you think Mike Gallagher's really going to look back and think, hey, remember when we taunted these guys and come to the conclusion that, yeah, this was a good idea? I'm just thinking working with the states more closely might be more profitable to the industry in the long run, even if it's a more challenging, and frustrating, course of action.

wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!

@GnatB: Except that he's not highlighting the fools, and no one would possibly vote for or against a politician based on his views toward violent games. Gallagher only highlights public officials. And to be honest, you insult an office, you insult a business, you insult a community-- all of which you might consider as reasonable representations of the government of Minnesota that pursued this course of action-- and you're going to make people a bit less inclined to work with you in the future.

wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!

HELL YEAH!!

Xcite79

He's highlighting the public officials AS fools. He's not insulting an office, he's not insulting a business, he's not insulting a community. He's insulting the politicians. He's calling them out to the community, and saying here's how inept the people you elected turned out to be. Choose better next time. While I may or may not vote for a public official based on his views toward violent games, I sure as heck will vote against an official who goes ahead and passes a law when all the advisors are saying it's unconstitutional and will cost the taxpayers money... and sure enough, it gets deemed unconstitutional and costs the taxpayers money. Anybody that stupid... (or that into kowtowing to public opinion) has no business being in public office regardless as to whether or not I agree with his personal views.

GnatB

@wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!: Don't be so sure about the football players. T.O. used to do it all the time. And Pacman Jones, etc.

SWATJester

Arite, ESA finally making a move. It would have been great if they were there for JT, Mass effect, Condemned, Manhunt, Bully, and so on.

I don't know how they are making millions in subscription fees and not even making a blip on a radar for an average non-gamer Joe.

PsycheE

@SWATJester: Well, OK. Assholes do it. Good point. Cheers!

wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!

I"m guessing most people on here know this but just in case it bears repeating: Film ratings in the USA are not enforced by law.

In the USA films are rated by the MPAA which is a trade association of the film industry, not a government agency. The film ratings are enforced by the MPAA themselves not by law. States or the federal government do not enforce the ratings. There is no state or national law preventing the sale of R-rated films to minors.

This is the same situation as videogame ratings. The games are rated by the industry and enforced by the industry.

jccalhoun

@wild homes is weathering cephalopod trouble!: ...especially when in the end the ESA and the government will have to co-operate on how to handle the issue of violent games in the future

What is this "issue" you speak of? The games are rated. Parents are empowered with information. End of story. The only "issue" is inept politicians and people like you who think there's still some "problem" yet to be solved.

What is it? You tell me. Feel free to provide some evidence (perhaps scientific in nature) pointing to this problem.

a government-sponsored ratings system to replace the ESRB

What... the... fark? Wow. Yah, lets spend millions in government money to "replace" a system that is more than sufficient and works perfectly well. You sound more and more like a politician yourself every sentence.

or some other, unknown solution

Again, solutions require problems. What problem are you trying to solve?

Sorry to be blunt man, but people like you are just as much a part of the problem as these idiot politicians. You're so willing to blindly accept that there's a "problem" with violent video games - and not just any problem, a problem so large that it OBVIOUSLY requires some kind of government intervention... I mean, seriously. It boggles the mind. Scrambling for a solution to a problem that isn't even defined. It just... is. I mean, of course it is right? Some talking head on TV said so.

OneFreeMan

Sweet this is why i pay state taxes every year... F*ck!!!

warf0x0r

@TheAngryHeretic:

I didn't read all the comments, but I was thinking something more along the lines of "when is someone going to punish the parents for not teaching/keeping an eye on their kids?" I've heard quotes from anti-media-violence politicians who actually said something along the lines of "My kids play violent video games and all I can do is sit there and watch. I feel helpless."
And that makes me question the parenting skills of some of these people. I would never let my kids play Halo or Duke Nukem.(This is hypothetical. I'm only 20, so I don't have kids yet.) But as for myself, I enjoy the games.

The people who don't like this system are the same people who think video games are the reason for school shootings and the internet is the devil because of porn.

Just parent your kids! Thank you!

And sorry. I rant. I'd go longer, but I'm stopping myself.

chrisscottxd

I support the ESA for taking pride in their success, and doing what they can to protect the interest of gamers who enjoy all kinds of games. I really do read the press releases I get in my E-Mail about poltics involving gaming.

lostinseganet

@TheAngryHeretic: that "idiot behind the counter" gets canned.

andrewmedina

@OneFreeMan: Thank you, that's exactly what I was going to say! :)

Swordmonkey

i live in MN and this is so stupid, if i am correct they can go after the person who sells the game too. so stores are cracking down too. There is one store here that the guy checks your grades and if you dont have good grades he wont sell you games. It is so stupid!

bond2e2

so...we do or we dont want little kids buying mature video games?

andrethejesus

Gotta hand it to politicians making laws on content which they do not understand. Video games are just another form of media similar to movies, music, and magazines. There are already regulations put in place which they continually push to spend money on. In affect they are only paying for what the industry has already done and spending money that could otherwise be put to good use.

I for one think it is hilarious that the ESA is basically walking from one state to the next and winning cases against laws which shouldn't exist. I don't think people realize that passing these laws actually helps the video game industry because they are now racking up cases in which the ESA is winning. Not only that but the ESA could use these as a source of revenue! Though it doesn't seem that they are doing that considering it seems that all the money they are rewarded is fees and expenses, a moral act worthy of some applause. Is anyone actually going to be persuaded to vote for someone because they want regulations on video games? Even putting the fact that the regulations already exist to the side it is hard to see any semblance of logic in their actions.

Chewbenator

@Petezah:
@RomieYO:

w00t..fellow Minnesotans

ninja_warrior

Parents are at fault here. When you have young high schoolers who are working the electronics section at brick and mortar stores, they:

a) don't care about the game ratings
b) don't KNOW enough about it all
c) wouldn't know what to do to "card" a 14 year old who doesn't have any identification.

It's the parents who need to be mindful of what their kids are doing, can't blame others for being a crappy parent.

ninja_warrior