http://articles.cnn.com/2010-04-26/justice/scotus.violent.video.games_1_violent-video-games-ratings-system-gaming-industry?_s=PM:CRIME -----link. This case is held up in the supreme court for now. This law would call for the out-right ban of violent video games to minor's. Retailer's would get fined $1,000 for each violation. This article also goes in the legality of the law. I personally agree with this law. All it does is add more strength to the current rating system. Some places see if your over 18,but alot of retailer's still don't. This would just give parents more control over what there kids play. The parents would have to buy these video games for the minors,instead of the kids buying the games themselves and fooling the parents. I think the gaming industry is doing nothing but using scare tactics over this issue. I really don't think it would have a crippling effect on the industry,all it does is enforce the rating system that's already there.

hahaha,I win the debate. lol

Its not up to the courts to decide morality. Parents can choose whether or not to buy their kids violent video games and I think that if you look at any research, it will show that violent games actually have a cathartic effect rather than cause real life violence.

It's all a causality arguement.

I look at it this way, which of these two scenarios is more likely.

Violent Videogames make people violent

OR
Violent people like violent videogames.

I tend to go with the second.  Not saying nonviolent people can't like violent games, but if you like picking random fights, i bet you like UFC, Boxing and violent videogames, because well.... you like violence.

As for the law... eh,

Are violent videogames worse then the violence on Cable or even basic tv?   I don't think so.

Well we already have state imposed age restrictions in the UK and it kinda works (in that kids just get their parents to buy 18 games). It really won't do much except make these games more appealing to younger kids. That's pretty much what happens here. I've seen mothers queuing up at midnight launches to buy their 10 yr old GTA IV or Call of Duty.  

Not at all, but they'll argue the interactive nature of games means they're more likely to influence kids. Not sure if I agree.

This debate will never end.

I believe, like most rational human beings, that videogames do not breed killers.

Isn't it already impossible for a 12 year old to go to a retailer and buy Halo:Reach or Call of Duty from retailers such as Gamestop, Best Buy, and Walmart?

I don't see the difference compared to R-rated movies and what some places are already supposed to do. they'd just be legally obligated to card people or face a fine.

But this could cause minors to steal games more... Maybe not.

I don't think know if their fines when going into an R-rated movie, but I get carded everytime and I'm 20. and 1/2 asian :P

I Don't think videogames people make people violent.

It seems kind of redundant with the esrb in place already and if 10 year old or whatever wanted the game they would just ask there parents to buy it for them anyways. So it's the parents responsibilty in the end to decide whether to buy it for them or not.