Spokane7
50°
April 26, 2010 in Nation/World
Free speech versus kids and violent video games
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court will decide whether free speech rights are more important than helping parents keep violent material away from children.
The justices agreed Monday to consider reinstating California’s ban on the sale or rental of violent video games to minors, a law the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco threw out last year on grounds that it violated minors’ constitutional rights.
California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who signed the law in 2005, said he was pleased the high court would review the appeals court decision. He said, “We have a responsibility to our kids and our communities to protect against the effects of games that depict ultra-violent actions, just as we already do with movies.”
However, the judge who wrote the decision overturning the law said at the time that there was no research showing a connection between violent video games and psychological harm to young people.
The Supreme Court’s decision to hear the case comes only a week after the high court voted overwhelmingly to strike down a federal law banning videos showing animal cruelty. The California case poses similar free speech concerns, although the state law is aimed at protecting children, raising an additional issue.
California’s law would have prohibited the sale or rental of violent games — those that include “killing, maiming, dismembering or sexually assaulting an image of a human being” — to anyone under 18. It also would have created strict labeling requirements for video game manufacturers. Retailers who violated the act could have been fined up to $1,000 for each violation.
Lawyer Stephen S. Smith, who has represented several video game companies in court, said the Supreme Court may use this case to explain how far lawmakers can go when trying to regulate depictions of violence.
“There is a fair amount of First Amendment law in the area of sexual explicitness and obscenity,” he said. “But there is not nearly as much law on the issue of violence and what may be restricted or not under the First Amendment in that arena.”
The California law never took effect, and was challenged shortly after it was signed by Schwarzenegger. A U.S. District Court blocked it after the industry sued the state, citing constitutional concerns.
Opponents of the law note that video games already are labeled with a rating system that lets parents decide what games their children can purchase and play. They also argue that video games — which the Entertainment Software Association says are played in 68 percent of American households — are protected forms of expression under the First Amendment to the Constitution.
But supporters of the law note that the Supreme Court has upheld laws keeping minors from buying or having access to pornography, alcohol and tobacco. And the California law does not ban parents from purchasing or buying the video games for their children.
Michael D. Gallagher, president of the Entertainment Software Association, said video games should get the same First Amendment protections as the court reaffirmed last week for videos.
Given last week’s ruling on videos showing animal cruelty, “we are hopeful that the court will reject California’s invitation to break from these settled principles by treating depictions of violence, especially those in creative works, as unprotected by the First Amendment,” he said.
Leland Yee, the California state senator who wrote the video game ban, said the Supreme Court obviously doesn’t think the animal cruelty video ban and the violent video game ban are comparable. If the justices thought that, he said, they would not be reviewing the 9th Circuit’s decision to throw out the video game ban.
“Clearly, the justices want to look specifically at our narrowly tailored law that simply limits sales of ultra-violent games to kids without prohibiting speech,” said Yee, a San Francisco Democrat.
California lawmakers approved the law, in part, by relying on several studies suggesting violent games can be linked to aggression, anti-social behavior and desensitization to violence in children. But federal judges have dismissed that research.
“None of the research establishes or suggests a causal link between minors playing violent video games and actual psychological or neurological harm, and inferences to that effect would not be reasonable,” Judge Consuelo Callahan said in the 9th Circuit ruling.
Callahan also said there were less restrictive ways to protect children from “unquestionably violent” video games.
The supporters of the law say the same legal justifications for banning minors from accessing pornography can be applied to violent video games. They point to recent Federal Trade Commission studies suggesting that the video game industry’s rating system was not effective in blocking minors from purchasing games designed for adults.
But courts in other states have struck down similar laws.
The video game industry also argues that approval of California’s video game restrictions could open the door for states to limit minors’ access to other material on the grounds of protecting children. “The state, in essence, asks us to create a new category of nonprotected material based on its depiction of violence,” Callahan wrote in the 30-page ruling.
The court will hear arguments in this case in the fall.
The case is Schwarzenegger v. Entertainment Merchants Association, 08-1448.
© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Ancient Roman wrecks found in deep water 
IHike4Fun on April 26 at 1:29 p.m.
“the judge who wrote the decision overturning the law said at the time that there was no research showing a connection between violent video games and psychological harm to young people.”
Not true as he well knows. Every study ever done on it has shown a strong link.
><(((*> on April 26 at 2:13 p.m.
ummmm source?
misjustice on April 26 at 2:55 p.m.
Study source:
The effects of violent video game habits on adolescent hostility,
aggressive behaviors, and school performance
Douglas A. Gentilea,*, Paul J. Lynchb, Jennifer Ruh Linderc, David A. Walsha
a National Institute on Media and the Family, 606 24th Avenue South, Suite 606, Minneapolis, MN 55454, USA
b University of Oklahoma Medical School, USA
c Linfield College, USA
Abstract
Video games have become one of the favorite activities of American children. A growing body of
research is linking violent video game play to aggressive cognitions, attitudes, and behaviors. The first goal
of this study was to document the video games habits of adolescents and the level of parental monitoring of
adolescent video game use.
link:citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.120
misjustice on April 26 at 3:00 p.m.
citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.120
The link is for a peer reviewed article that ran in 2004 in the Journal of Adolescence…sorry it is not an ‘active’ link…it is a pdf file that must be downloaded/opened…worth the extra effort, however.
><(((*> on April 26 at 3:36 p.m.
one source to back this up?
“Every study ever done on it has shown a strong link.”
Another_Perspective on April 26 at 4:58 p.m.
Kids will get them even if they ban them. Just like alcohol and cigarettes.
I dont put much credibility in internet cut n paster’s. I prefer to do my own research on and off the web.
Concur w/phantom.. “Every study ever done on it has shown a strong link.” if your going to toss that out, shouldn’t there be a reference for “every study”?
and even some adults 3^ should avoid them too.
Nick42 on April 26 at 5:15 p.m.
The study cited establishes a correlation between violent video games and some aggressive behaviors. The authors themselves admit that the study they conducted cannot establish a causal link (i.e., do violent video games make kids behave more violently, or do kids who behave violently play more violent video games?) They hypothesize and cite studies that suggest a “bidirectional” link between the two.
I haven’t studied this area much before, but I would be surprised if anyone has established a causal link between violent video games and violent behavior. And without such a study, there really isn’t any basis for the ban, imho.
Thayne on April 26 at 6:00 p.m.
Thank you misjustice for offering some info I could look at regarding this subject. I think game producers should do a better job of informing the public themselves. When you look at the graphics on the box of a video game there are never scenes of the violent gore only sedate, “don’t freak out mom and dad” ones. I play video games and while in a store one day browsing heard a boy about 7 or 8 ask his mom to get him one of the grand theft auto releases. The mom was strongly considering it until I pointed out how violent the game actually was. Nowhere on the box except the tiny MA (Mature Audience) symbol did it show the games true colors. After mom found out the main theme of the game was lots of killing including police officers. Interactions with prostitutes and wanton destruction of property she ended up not buying the game. I’m not saying don’t sell the game just make the companies be more up front about the level of violence. Another_Perspective you again make snide comments without adding to the blog. Maybe you need to increase your prune juice and roughage intake to eliminate whatever is making you a sour and grumpy person.
SugarShane on April 26 at 6:43 p.m.
I dont believe there is a causal relationship between violent video games and violent behavior, it could be perhaps a cofactor. I would wager it has more to do with upbringing and moral character that develops on a case by case basis and is highly subjective. Thats like saying letting your little boy play with dolls and dresses will cause him to become gay, and most people agree this is nonsense.
misjustice on April 26 at 7:52 p.m.
phantom; there are numerous sources, I only did a quick google and found the one that I posted. It was very simple, sure that you could have done the same. In fact, it was so easy that even A_P could have done it.
I’m not sure that there is a cause and effect between violent games and violent people, I just listed the study for those that wanted to view it…
Another_Perspective on April 26 at 9:57 p.m.
misjustice thats called “cherry picking” in the real world.
Erik_T on April 26 at 9:59 p.m.
War is hell, and those games that depict it, show the same level of violence seen in the streets and countrysides of many a battle. War is not the answer, but as long as human nature continues the need for us to destroy ourselves (and each other), there will always exist those that oppose and those that affirm such action (and those that participate) either real world or in video games/movies.