Are games becoming too violent?

[Sqrl]

Wojtas said:

Sqrl said:
It should not be the responsibility or burden of the public at large to help parents raise their children. Nor should anything but the profitability of the game determine how violent is too violent. People need to start taking responsibility for their own lives, their own actions, and their own children.


2) we should not be desensitizing ourselves to this kind of violence:

The point we start making decisions for other people just because we feel we know what is best for them is the probably around the point we need to rethink our system of government. I think we are already going to far in the US when places like CA outlaw smoking bars. This is a slippery slope and its a steep slope at that. Just a little quote for some of you folks who may not have read it in a while....

"....Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it..."
-United States Declaration of Independence - Preamble

My point here boils down to this, if people don't want this kind of game then they will not buy it, and the genre will collapse and cease to exist. By banning or outlawing this type of stuff you are telling your people "we don't trust you to make informed intelligent decisions". And honestly if we are allowing people who would vote for this kind of ban into office I don't know that I could disagree with that sentiment....

Let the markets determine what is acceptable, by letting the customer decide what they want. Its as simple as that.

Dude, don't go political on this. Still i can't agree with you when you say that you need to rethink the governmental system when some of your rights are being neglected or removed. Your freedom ends there where it infringes the freedom of others. That is THE most important rule of democracy. Another thing is that I see most americans as people that have been spoiled with too much freedom. So if there are ratings that say specifficaly what kind of people have the right to play a certain game, and if the people neglect these ratings then it is only normal that governments would issue laws to make the people obey and act accordingly to these ratings.Or with any other type of media for that matter.

How can you say don't go political, this is a political issue at its core. And if you read my post I didn't say for this one issue we should rethink government, I said when we get to the point where our government is making our choices for us we should. I have read the entire document I quoted and in it you will find this line as well....

 

"...Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed...." -United States Declaration of Independence - Preamble

 

So now, tell me what freedom I am infringing apon for wanting the CHOICE to play a violent video game if I so choose? You most certainly implied that you thought my views would lead to that, so please explain, in detail how I would infringe on your rights by wanting the choice to play a video game. I don't mean this to come of as confrontational, I just cannot fathom how I violate your rights by wanting to have a choice to play a video game in my own home.

 

Wojtas said:

"So if there are ratings that say specifficaly what kind of people have the right to play a certain game, and if the people neglect these ratings then it is only normal that governments would issue laws to make the people obey and act accordingly to these ratings."

This specific quote from your post is actually sort of frightening to me. Why would you want your government to establish ratings systems to determine what you can and cannot view for entertainment? As it stands right now an organization like the ESRB can censor a game by giving it an AO rating, a lot of these games change their content and are then re-submitted but their art(that is the objectionable portion to the game afterall) has been altered because of what someone else thought it should be. Would you tell an artist that you cannot paint that, or you must remove the blood, change its color, etc...

Wojtas said:

It bubbles down to psychology as when there are certain rules that you should follow which you decide to dismiss you create a feeling, however subtle, that you are above some rules.

One more thing, if you think that the US, one of the most powerful countries of the world, wouldn't even dare to try and take control over the average Joe's behaviour, tastes etc, then you are very much mistaken.

I honestly am not sure what you are trying to say with the first sentence here, but I can tell you that anyone who feels they are above the rules and acts on that feeling would and should be held accountable for their actions. There is no way we are going to prevent people from breaking laws as long as we have laws to be broken, its human nature, if you think otherwise you are very much mistaken (to borrow the phrase ).

On this last sentence, I have to admit this is a very simplistic view of the situation in the US at the moment. But I most certainly recognize that their are elements in my government who would impose such restrictions. As for being "very much mistaken", I think it would of been a safe assumption on your part to assume that I would not have such strong feelings on the matter if I felt that it was not a real concern in my country.

Edi: PS - The most important rule of democracy is actually that the people have the power. The important rule of a free society perhaps would be that one person's rights cannot infringe apon anothers.