Michigan game law ruled unconstitutional

by Ross Miller { Apr 3rd 2006 at 9:25PM }

After being stillborn for 4 months, Michigan's violent game legislation -- signed into law last September by Governor Jennifer M Granholm (pictured) -- is now officially dead. In a ruling handed out Friday, Judge George Caram Steeh confirmed that video games are a form protected free speech, "similar to movies and television shows." Steeh further dismissed the claim that gaming's inherent interactivity somehow restricted its First Amendment protection. Steeh's decision is full of choice quotes, but the following sentence could have more long-term importance:

"The research conducted by the State has failed to prove that video games have ever caused anyone to commit a violent act, let alone present a danger of imminent violence."

A statement that strong and resolute will prove damning to the prosecutors currently involved in Alabama's GTA Cop Killer case, which contends that Grand Theft Auto trained and incited Devin Moore to fatally shoot police officers.

Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)

Jerico6 @ Apr 3rd 2006 9:33PM

OMG,A video game bill deemed unconstitutional! *sarcasm*

Sjohn @ Apr 3rd 2006 9:53PM

I wish people like JT and such would learn from this and start blaming the parents instead of the games, as it's the parents who let the kids play the games in the first place. I've played games all of my life, yet I never had the feeling to kill someone (even when angered). I know that it's wrong, and I was taught that you have to pay for your crimes and to not blame it on anyone or anything other than the person that committed the crime.

Seems like I heard once that if we really emulated what happens in games, we'd all be going around bashing our heads into bricks and eating random flowers and mushrooms. Not going on some cop killing spree, or something along those lines. People that do such things just are not fit to be among those that want to have a "free" lifestyle.

Mike @ Apr 3rd 2006 9:54PM

phoenix wright would love to kick Governor Jennifer M Granholm's ass!

jaemz @ Apr 3rd 2006 10:05PM

I would be interested in finding out how much it cost for them to try to get that law passed, and the cost to have the court overturn that law...

How many people could have been educated as better parents with that money?

Brian @ Apr 3rd 2006 10:54PM

Yeah I'm looking forward to the counter law suit so that the gaming industry can get some of their money back defending their own constitutional rights. Stick it to the tax payer one more time...Doh!

Stevie @ Apr 3rd 2006 11:06PM

Granholm is one of the worst Governors. She spends money on dumb things like getting the gaming bill passed. Michigan has one of the lowest employment rates in the nation. She doesn't know what the heck she is doing.

Todd Rabanus @ Apr 3rd 2006 11:36PM

This is great. People who have never played video games are told that they don't know a damn thing. stupid bitch! can i say that cause i did

The ZeroCorpse @ Apr 4th 2006 12:06AM

Stevie, I disagree. While I oppose Granholm on the video game bill (which she no doubt did because she's a 'concerned parent' and because she had a lot of people in religious groups feeding her very false information), she has done a FAR better job than Engler ever did--- Especially considering this employment problem is not her fault, and the state deficit was LEFT TO HER by Engler. She's done some good things, but she can't get much more done because her hands are tied by the Senate.

Michigan's unemployment rate is because we- as a state- relied too heavily on our factory industries like GM, Ford, Steelcase, KMart, and Kellogs, and when these large corporations pulled out, layed people off, and "restructured" it hit us worst of all. Granholm can hardly be blamed for GM and Ford cutting jobs.

When you look at Engler's record, Granholm looks wonderful.

As for this bill, I'm glad it got squashed. As a retailer, it's a pain when the government tries to stick people at my level with the responsibility for babysitting other people's kids. As I said, Granholm pursued it because she had "Family" organizations bugging her about it and feeding her false or misleading information. Think of a group of people who are ALL like Jack Thompson, and you'll understand how someone who doesn't know anything about video games, like Granholm, could be swayed by the lies.

She was in the wrong, but did any advocates in Michigan ever sit down with her, or lobby her as hard as the radical religious 'family' groups did? Nope. She can only act on what she's told.

Goobers @ Apr 4th 2006 1:27AM

by sjohn
"I wish people like JT and such would learn from this and start blaming the parents instead of the games, as it's the parents who let the kids play the games in the first place."

never gonna happen... simple, parents are VOTERS...

T-money @ Apr 4th 2006 1:43AM

I don�t think this is the place to get into Michigan Politics, though I would love to do it. I will just say that I have to disagree with you pretty much in entirety Zero corpse. While Granholm may have seen a few lobbyists from family groups, that doesn�t excuse her from making boneheaded decisions. What you�re saying is that because no pro gaming lobbyist talked to her she had to vote for it. It is your job as holding a political office to make informed decisions, informed meaning knowing both sides of an issue and making the best decision form that information. She has an entire staff division to research public policy. She knew as pretty much all the other governors it would be ruled unconstitutional. It was just a move to raise her approval rating and have a pro family policy to point to for the re-election, which is not looking good for her...I wonder why she just approved a huge increase in the minimum wage to come into effect just before elections....

Shore @ Apr 4th 2006 7:26AM

Once again, everyone is thinking with their heart instead of their head.

You're all right on one thing, this was a bad law and video games should not be banned, it is a Freedom of Speech issue, and needs to be addressed as such.

HOWEVER

For all of you saying "Parents need to parent better for their kids", while true, is only part of the problem. Cause you could be the best, most conscious parent in the world and keep your kid away from violent games and such and have them be an exemplary member of society.

Until someone else's kid, someone who didn't raise their kid as right, shoots your kid in the face cause they thought it was cool in Call of Duty.

If that happened, bet you'd change your mind.

People aren't in favor of bills like this because they don't know how to parent their kids. They do because they don't think YOU know how to parent YOUR kids.

And if any of you were/are parents, reading some of these comments... Geezus, I don't blame them.

Martin @ Apr 4th 2006 9:09AM

I agree wholeheartedly with Shore. Give him/her a star!

Mav @ Apr 4th 2006 9:47AM

I'm going to have to disagree with ZeroCorpse as well. Granholm did not inherit all of Engler's legacy, which, unless you were a teacher, wasn't that bad until he neared the end of his term in the first place.

The problem with Granholm is that she's worked very hard to keep up a nice image of herself, but has done very little to improve things in the state. The thing is that Michigan is not known as a gaming state, much like California with its numerous studios and publishers, or Washington with Microsoft and Nintendo being based there. So lobbyists are hard to come by. However, the 'scene' is growing and members from the local IGDA chapter went to testify against the bill when it was first formed, but they were brushed aside as "hobbyists" or what-have-you, and while they made good cases, this bill was decided upon and all the hearings on it were just for show.

Granholm has turned down items on numerous occasions that would make it easier for new businesses, high-tech businesses, to enter Michigan. In the face of a slumping statewide economy and job market, you'd think that she'd work a little more to prop up the job force wherever she could.

Instead she wastes state money on luxurious world travel and bills like this - apparently she wants to spend more time and money appealing the decision. Clearly her priorities are not where they need to be.

32_Footsteps @ Apr 4th 2006 9:47AM

Shore, there is some merit to what you say.

However, even if we somehow managed to prevent kids from getting a hold of any violent entertainment, ever, we wouldn't see a drop in violence. Violence, even amongst children, is endemic to humanity. Trying to control content of video games is going after the symptom, not the disease. And it's not even effective at defeating the symptom.

Sigh... just let me know when some clever person creates the game where you're a clear-thinking judge, trying to keep people from making unconstitutional laws about video games.

Gonzo @ Apr 4th 2006 9:54AM

Hopefully it'll be the last but it probably wont be.

Unfortunately to keep these kinds of bills off all our backs, the game companies need to hire a lobbiest to start shoveling loads of money over to these moron politicians. It's too bad but that's the only thing the d-bags in the government notice.
$!

staticneuron @ Apr 4th 2006 11:06AM

Shore, no matter what spin you put on it, to say that because "other" people don't know how to parent thier kids we should ban violent video games is ridiculous. Again it is a type of finger pointing that tries to put social responsibilty on a piece of entertainment media. How about this, since "other" people can't raise thier kids right I have alot of more mediums the should ban.

1. Art Why?- Cause alot of art contains nudity and many artist themselves turn out to be insane. Also, not to mention they become popular after thier dead.
This will teach our weak youth that puplic nudity is ok and you might as well commit suicide... cause no one cares about you while your alive. So children... Go nuts!

2. Music Why?- Every song that has violence, rape, angst against society and parents, and contain any moral flaw imaginable should be banned. Our kids listen to music and if it is everywhere it is harder to control.

3. Movies Why?- Movies are just as bad as those video games. Even though it may be subjective in certain cases the good guys are normally beating or killing the bad guys. This teaches our children as long as you believe you are right it is perfectly ok to do these things.

4. Video games Why?- To many reasons to mention. Just look up my good friend Jack Thompson to see our resaoning.

5. Cartoons/anime why?- the violence. it cannot be good. Even though Tom and Jerry com back for every episode if you hit your friend over the head with an iron mallet he might not return for the next episode.... ok kids! Oh! And stop trying to power up Jimmy no ones trying to kill you.

6. The News Why?- What is a greater source of the horrible acts of man than the news. Stories of rape, murders,stealing and fouled elections shows our kids today that no one can be trusted. And since so many of these acts are being commited there has to be some good reason for it? right?

There are alot of negative influences in the world. But I think the worst comes from other "people" themselves. Violent acts on other human beings happened long before video games stepped on to the scene. It just shows that people can inherently be violent or can be easily influenced regaurdless of a medium.

Parents need to take more responsibility as a whole and stop pointing fingers.

Stevie @ Apr 4th 2006 1:00PM

Zerocorpse-As Mav mentioned Granholm turned down many opportunities to introduce new businesses within the state. But she declined them all. Yeah it's not her fault that the motor company's lay ppl off, but it is her duty as Governor to introduce new jobs to the market to help the laid off ppl get new work.

Joe Cushing @ Apr 4th 2006 4:56PM

Granholm has had bad policy. We are a well educated state full of all the geeks that they have in CA or WA. Why then don't we have video game developers here on any kind of scale? Maybe it has something to do with the fact that we have a special tax just for the most successful job creating small businesses.

On another note I didn�t know that K-mart was a factory.

crono141 @ Apr 4th 2006 5:22PM

Nobody cares what politics in michigan is like.

Blake @ Apr 4th 2006 5:37PM

This is great news, I'm very pleased (and surprised.)

sev4 pri1 @ Apr 4th 2006 6:04PM

every new media has been blamed for the problems of youth. radio, tv, internet, movies have all been in the same spotlight. give it another 10 yrs and we'll have a new scapegoat.

reminds me of the grandma that bought her grandkid GTA, then sued Rockstar b/c it was too violent.

jack thompson @ Apr 4th 2006 6:25PM

I said four months ago, publicly, that this law was unconstitutional. I drafted a constitutional one for Delaware. Watch out.

jack thompson @ Apr 4th 2006 6:31PM

kline @ Apr 4th 2006 10:44PM

I love Jennifer Granholm, but I don't love this bill. About three months ago I had about a five minute conversation with Jack Thompson and I was shocked at the horrible things he said. He was rude, arrogant, and insulting and it amazes me that he gets the credibility that he does from people like Hillary Clinton and Governor Granholm and gets little spots on CNN.

Matt @ Apr 5th 2006 3:58AM

This is how I look at video game systems...they're the same thing as vcr's and dvd players.

Do parents let their kids watch X rated porn on their dvd players, or movies like Scarface or Casino?? Well I hope they don't. So parents need to do the same thing with video game systems and MONITOR them as they do dvd movies.

Video game consoles aren't for kids anymore, this isn't Atari or Coleco Vision from the early 1980's.
Parents and guardians need now to view and monitor these gaming systems as they would their dvd players.

mo @ Apr 5th 2006 5:57AM

I hear a lot of people blaiming the parents rather than the industry, but maybe if there were some more laws, parents would take things more seriously.

They happily buy their kids M rated games because it's only a loose advisory standard that they don't know or understand, but many wouldn'y dream of taking their kids to an R rated movie, even if that movie was less violant than the M rated game.

What we at least need is some kind of compulsory labeling system so that parents can tell what's in a game and make an informed choice.

As things stand, all that they have to go on are reviews, half of which decry everything and half of which accept everything.

SuiXide @ Apr 5th 2006 4:27PM

I believe with all the press and publicity these kinds of bills and stories are getting, the parents are either more closely monitoring what their children play or at least have had a talk with them.

I remember when I was growing up my parents didn't really monitor what I played. Why may you ask? Because they're GAMES. The 'people' you 'kill' aren't real. The situations aren't real. Heck, none of it is! It's a game!

Jack, why don't you go after movies or comics? Ask the people that act or voice act for movies and other media how they feel about their characters dying. Ask everyone else how they feel about violent movies and other media. Heck, why not go after heavy metal artist that talks about devil worship? I'm sure they'd be more than happy for the publicity.

...I wonder how much money it'd take to get Jack playing something as simple as Tetris... "No! the little blocks explode when you make a line! That's too violent!". Psh.

Raskawa @ Apr 5th 2006 5:06PM

I have a personal theory about JT's apparent hatred of gamers.. This is my theory: He is a closet gamer, who loved video games back in the day but really really sucked. After being schooled by local teenagers back in the day playing Doom, Quake, or Street Fighter, he learned to dislike gamers. Apparently, now he is blinded by misguided hatred towards gamers.

JT, come back to the fold.. I will even let you win a few rounds of BF2 to help rebuild your confidence.

-Rask

hurf burf @ Apr 5th 2006 5:20PM

This man is unequivocally the biggest tool in the history of tools. But wait: since I'm a gamer, surely I cannot have an opinion on such a matter.

SickNic @ Apr 5th 2006 6:13PM

If anyone is uneducated here, it's Jack Thompson. Sure you may have a degree or two, but you obviously are missing the main ingredient, Common sense. I'd like Jack to go to E3 this year and try and convince all the people there that they are uneducated and dumb because they play games.

nin10do @ Apr 5th 2006 6:27PM

Jack Thompson is an idiot and a loser who has time to kill by trying to kill video games

nin10do @ Apr 5th 2006 6:35PM

I say let the idiot have his day, he was unsuccessful against rap music, his video game craze will phase out and will try to move onto trying to ban porn so let the jester entertain the courts....

It's people like him, and Dolores Tucker and other idiot activists with too much time in their hands taht keep this world entertained and frankly rap music and certain video games should be thankful of their support....

nin10do @ Apr 5th 2006 6:45PM

Hey, how about a video game depicting the killing of the people who run Joystiq? Bet they'd be real interested in doing something about a certain game then. Maybe then they'd feel how cops and women feel about GTA. Oh, but that would require some actual thought, and I forgot: You're all gamers!(Big Baby Jack Thompson)

i think you've already proposed a game like that where the main character would kill game industry executives, and i read the masochist bastard backed out on his promise of donating the 10,000 dlls to any charity if the game was created...better believe this time there will not be any flowers sent to his office

Carmen O @ Apr 5th 2006 7:04PM

The thing about mr. Thompson that really irritates me, is that he calls himself a christian.... My hubby and I are christians AND avid gamers. Nowhere in the bible does it advocate the anger and insults that jack thompson flings out at gamers 24/7.... The bible is about loving one another. Golden rule anyone? He's exactly the kind of person that gives christians a bad name.

Carmen O @ Apr 5th 2006 7:18PM

Oh yeah, and I do think that parents need to take more responsibility. There doesn't need to be more laws. Parents need to READ the ESRB ratings on the games before they buy them. These ratings are there for a REASON. And if they don't know anything about ESRB, they need to be educated. There should be flyers put up around town that say "Respect the Ratings" and direct people to the ESRB's website for more information.... or something.

tweek @ Apr 5th 2006 10:46PM

"Hey, how about a video game depicting the killing of the people who run Joystiq?"

Don't you remember what happened the last time you tried using this argument?

http://www.imokgame.com/

Not only were you called out for not being able to put forth your end of the bargain, *several times*, but you've attempted (and failed) in one of your many well-publicized tirades to have people arrested for doing for you what you said you would. You've also threatened legal action against the people that acted under your orders. The developers of 'I'm O.K.' went above and beyond your original idea: they included *themselves* as characters and killed them off.

Any idea why they'd do that? Here's a hint: fiction and reality are separate. You can kill me, random college student, all you want in a video game; I won't mind.

And given the timing of your post, you probably are. What exactly does killing Joystiq operators have to do with the recently overturned Michigan law? How are you contributing to the conversation? You don't even have the pathetic excuse of defending accusations made against you this time; you're now just trolling.

Oh, and I've heard the reaction to the Delaware law. Remember, Thompson, one you hit 'post', you can't erase it, and given your high-profile trollish nature and your unique ability to attack yourself with nearly every post to random blogs that don't care much about you or your crusade, your post is unlikely to be erased. What happens when the Delaware law is voided as well, or (more likely) dies in committee? You won't be able to claim you had nothing to do with it now. Well, unless you care about consistency and a public image.