ESA urges 18-29 year-old gamers to vote

Do you mean that I have to put down my controller and actually go somewhere? Not gonna happen.

In all seriousness 18-24yr olds should be voting for a whole lot of stuff not just video game related issues. Right now the country is being run by a bunch of old monkeys who don't care about or don't know the values and beliefs of our generation. They know that most 18-24yr olds don't care about politics and they will pass any law that lets their money grubbing corporate benefactors screw us out of our money and rights. (RIAA)

Drew is absolutely correct on this one.

Umm, I got nothing else to say, thank you and goodnight.

damn, you know your too old in gaming when you are considered over the video game voting range. i'm 33, i'd like to vote for anything that relates to video gaming.

Yeah lets get young americans voting on really important things like video game ratings, rather than trivial things like the massive debt, or the bloodsoaked foreign policy, the debacle 'liberation' or iraq, or unflinching support of zionism.

Look I'm all for gaming but there are far more important issues at stake now than which politician 'understands gamers'.

azn... Well said by the guy whos number one goal in life is to make sure people know how crappy the Xbox 360 is.

What is wrong with unflinching support of zionism? I thought the Matrix was awesome!

The ESA is just a group of corporations that want to be able to sell their product to the largest market out there, that includes selling violent videogames to minors.

The ESA trying to get us to vote on their behalf is a JOKE. ARS Technica labeling this a "grassroots" effort is a slap in the face of anyone whose done any real political activism.

Very funny,very funny indeed.

Freedom of speech and civil liberties (which is what stupid videogame/copyright laws are usually about) ARE FAR MORE IMPORTANT than "massive debt, or the bloodsoaked foreign policy, the debacle 'liberation' or iraq, or unflinching support of zionism."

They are infinitely more important than safeguarding children from offensive material. Thats the parent's job and the parent's job ONLY. It doesn't matter how many stupid ratings and laws you come up with, lousy parents will still buy M-rated games just to occupy their brat children so they can avoid real parenting.

I agree that there are many more pressing political concerns than that of video games... however, the problem with politics and people's disinterest in them is partly because people find very little in politics that they relate to personally and have connections with. Many young voters don't like politics simply because they find the only thing affected by politics are things they don't care for, don't understand, or simply don't know about. By getting young people to be involved in politics through a venue that makes sense to them and that they can relate to (like with video games), that should help introduce them to politics, and they can become part of the system. At that point, they'll find their way into other demographics affected by politics from there and see that a lot of things can be affected by how we vote. Simply not voting because we think the only things worth voting for don't matter is a serious concern for our country's democracy. Exercising your right to vote, even if it is for your interests in video games, gives you something to vote for that you care about and can relate to, and is much better than not using your right to vote at all.

Good point Struan, I guess I forgot that since the innocent kids that die "over there" by the tens of thousands aren't american, their lives are worth less than the right of american kids to buy grand theft auto without producing ID.

That's like Jack Thompson asking me to come in and play Bully.

I'm 27, and I hate to see people not being active politically. I'm doing my part. I vote Libertarian, and even if they don't win big election, it sends a message to those that do win that they're fostering some very ill will in their contituents when they pass law after law impugning our 'inalienable' rights as they do every single day just so it looks like there's a reason they should be in office.

If I could ask every senator and member of the house one question, it would be: When do you think we'll have enough laws? And no I won't take any BS about changing world situations and junk like that. Terrorism has been illegal for nigh on forever, and making it 'more illegal' doesn't help anything. If you're going to argue some freedoms must be impinged in order to protect people from terrorism, or whatever your fear du jour is, how about telling us when you think it might STOP? Are there ANY limits they see?

Right now, as far as I can tell, everyone in Washington is 100% concerned with remaining in power, protecting their status as oligarchs, and amassing as much control and power as possible. At this point, Democrat or Republican does not matter. They have both assessed the situation and determined that if the Republicans take away a freedom today, that's power the Democrats will have once they get elected. And the same applies in the other direction. The only threat to them is 3rd parties, and only if they see 3rd parties gaining strength might they start backing off and realizing there are still people who value their freedom. Right now to them it doesn't look like they can do any wrong. Keep gathering power, and incumbents have nothing to fear.

If you want to learn more about the Libertarian Party, the one party that doesn't care what you do if you're not hurting anyone else, check their website http://www.lp.org .