New York tests limits of game legislation with felony bill
by Alexander Sliwinski 
{ May 30th 2007 at 10:15AM }
The latest bill proposed in New York would actually make selling or renting a game to a minor which has "depraved violence and indecent images" a class E felony. What is that exactly in prison time? According to New York penal law, "For a class E felony, the term shall be fixed by the court, and shall not exceed four years." However, it must be over one year imprisonment to be considered class E. But wait, it gets better. "Depraved" is defined by the bill as anything showing "rape, dismemberment, physical torture, mutilation or evisceration of a human being." So, many M rated games would fall under this category. Boiled all the way down, this new law would have a kid working at Gamestop, Best Buy, or the local Blockbuster potentially get sent to OZ for 1 - 4 years because he sold or rented a minor an M rated video game. With politicians like these, who needs Jack Thompson?This bill, A08696 by Democrat Assemblyman Joseph Lentol will have to share the spotlight with a similar bill proposed by Sen. Andrew Lanza (R), which is backed by Senate Republicans. All of this is about Gov. Eliot Spitzer's promise to legislate video games. According to GamePolitics, the enforceable parts (the Class E felony) would go into effect 120 days after the bill passes. The State Assembly goes into recess on June 21, so this bill needs to be on the fast track to make it. New York is getting really creepy with this game legislation.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Walking Contradiction @ May 30th 2007 10:23AM
Get sent to jail for selling a M rated game to a minor? What is this world comming too? I wonder is people put any thought into these bills. I can get caught with a ounce of pot and not go to jail for that long. lol Dipshits
dontlikeitmodit @ May 30th 2007 10:26AM
Stiffer penalties have a way of enforcing most laws. I can't see many people selling games to kids if they can go to a pound-you-in-the-ass prison for at least a year. Not to mention a felony conviction turns you into a second class citizen.
Is it fair or just? No. But it sounds like it will work.
Walking Contradiction @ May 30th 2007 10:30AM
dontlikeitmodit
Why do they need to be enforced? I see more violence on tv then on a game! Gamers don't shoot up schools, Crazy ass mental people do. Regulating mature videogames will not make society better.
sheppy @ May 30th 2007 10:37AM
You know the TRUE problem, right? Politicians and generally bitchy people finally won their war against smoking. There is no more battle there so now they have to attack the next vice.
Mitochondria @ May 30th 2007 10:39AM
And besides, making stiffer laws will own hurt the gaming industry, either that or I don't know just get these stupid parents to get the games for these kids. I swear I run into so many game with this little kids playings it and I'm like your not even in high school. When I was their age I was playing outside, well thats after the rower rangers went off. lol
CowboyGA @ May 30th 2007 10:40AM
"Stiffer penalties have a way of enforcing most laws."
Where did you get that idea? Stiffer penalties have not been shown to be successful. It's great PR for a hack legislator, but it's futile for resolution. All this will do is stir the stupidity pot.
Greg @ May 30th 2007 10:41AM
Sell Elder Scrolls 4 to a 16-year old? Go to jail for a year.
Sell 64 oz of Jagermeister to that same 16-year old? Lose your liquor license, pay a fine.
Fatass of Kickassness @ May 30th 2007 10:42AM
One step closer to becoming New China.
Dave @ May 30th 2007 10:45AM
That's odd--I thought violence and torture were exactly the sort of good-old-fashioned values politicians wanted to instill in our youth.
AirIntake @ May 30th 2007 10:46AM
"rape, dismemberment, physical torture, mutilation or evisceration of a human being."
Sounds like most every episode of CSI
Savok @ May 30th 2007 10:48AM
I love this shit. The liberals bitch and moan about how the right is taking away their freedom in the name of anti-terrorism, then they pull something like this.
What's this in aid of? Controlling what we think and do. It is not, and should never be a mandate of the government to make your life "better".
Jonathan Tran @ May 30th 2007 10:52AM
I can't imagine this bill will actually pass. If it does... probably will get overturned at some point.
Considering this penalty is worse than most random horrible crimes...
Also, is there a similar law for selling rated R movies to kids?
Greg @ May 30th 2007 10:55AM
@11- Or the 6 o'clock news.
Here are some examples of readings I did as part of my public high school education (all read while I was a minor)
Rape - I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings - Maya Angelou
Dismemberment - A Tale of Two Cities - Charles Dickens
Physical Torture - The Pit and the Pendulum - Edgar Allen Poe
Mutilation - Moby Dick - Herman Melville
Evisceration - The Telltale Heart - Edgar Allen Poe
Walking Contradiction @ May 30th 2007 11:02AM
We lose are freedom through ignorance and lack of responsibility.
Chomper @ May 30th 2007 11:06AM
I really don't see this law as a bad thing. I mean, don't movies already have laws like this attached to them? I'm pretty sure if a guy at Blockbuster was to rent and/or sell an R or X rated film to a minor, there are legal consequences. So again, yeah, I don't really see why this is a problem for people.
What I'm against is the mad men who want to ban games and take out violence all together. The people who rant over games like Bully (a game with PG level violence you could see in most cartoons), yet let other forms of media, like films, with much more vile depictions of violence pass by unnoticed (like Turistas, or Hostel).
I'm not saying either should be banned, or censored, merely that regulations like this already exist for other forms of media. So I'm not sure why we all get so up-in-arms over the same standard being applied to video games. If anything it's society finally recognizing video games as a real medium instead of some children's novelty.
But again, the double standard is what really gets me. Because somehow the pseudo-realism of Grand Theft Auto that shows nothing more than BLOOD (and what kid hasn't skinned their knee and seen that anyway?), is somehow worse than the realistic and graphic depictions of physical torture in Saw? That just makes no sense.
Jonathan Tran @ May 30th 2007 11:08AM
Rape: The Color Purple
Dismemberment: Star Wars, war journals of Civil War
Torture: The Count of Monte Cristo
Mutilation: FGM (World Health studies: Africa)
Evisceration: Jurassic Park (book, read for 7th grade book report to no objection)
Phranctoast @ May 30th 2007 11:11AM
16. not true. they cant go to jail.
Phranctoast @ May 30th 2007 11:11AM
16. not true. they cant go to jail.
Jack @ May 30th 2007 11:14AM
To label someone a felon is a huge deal. This supposed law goes tooo far.
Think of it this way:
Its like selling a rated R movie to a teenager and then going anywhere BETWEEN 1 and 3 years to butt raping prison. THEN try finding a job. 90% percent of employers aren't "felon friendly".
Greg @ May 30th 2007 11:33AM
@16- As far as I know, there are no laws banning the sale or rental of R-Rated films to minors.
And this DOES lead to a "banning" of content. If it becomes legally dangerous for a retailer to handle M-rated media, they won't- this is why GameStop recalled all copies of GTA:SA when Hot Coffee appeared. So, if nobody wants to sell viiolent games, developers won't make them.
This is what happened when the PMRC initiated the Parental Advisory sticker on CD's. Wal-Mart made a point not to carry any CD's with the sticker- which forced artists and labels to either 1.) self-censor, 2.)produce an edited version, which is expensive, or 3.) not have their album carried at the nation's largest retailer. And this is without ever making it a crime to sell them. Imagine if it did.
It's backdoor censorship, and it's unacceptable.
Pag @ May 30th 2007 11:25AM
"I really don't see this law as a bad thing. I mean, don't movies already have laws like this attached to them? I'm pretty sure if a guy at Blockbuster was to rent and/or sell an R or X rated film to a minor, there are legal consequences."
There are no laws for movie ratings -- it's self-regulated by the movie industry, just like ESRB ratings are in gaming.
Sending someone to prison for a year seems a much greater evil than selling a violent game to a minor. What will cause the greatest problems to someone: playing a violent videogame while being a few years too young for the official rating (like millions have done in the past), or being sent to jail for a year and get a criminal record? This legislation proposes punishment that's completely disproportionate to the "crime" commited.
A minor would likely be less punished for stealing a violent game than the store clerk would be for selling it under this law. How does that make sense?
jduke @ May 30th 2007 11:46AM
As much as I want to side with the games industry, I can't help but notice hypocrisy. The rhetoric I constantly hear is that games ultra (insert cultural taboo here) are only marketed toward adults, and that there in no interest in selling games to minors.
If that is true, it seems like this shouldn't be a big deal. I understand the arguments of protecting liberty, but if the games industry were truly not interested in minors buying their games, the savings of not having to shoot down these stupid bills would put them at rest.
I know the whole issue is a lot more complicated than I am making it, but I just feel that as a gamer, I'm often more willing to call anyone who inhibits my hobby in anyway the bad guy than I am to see if everyone deserves a cut of the bad guy title.
James @ May 30th 2007 12:06PM
The reason they are doing this bill is because they want to show that they are working and deserve a 20k a year raise that they are pushing for. Here in NY they always come out with something to fool you while they are doing something else thats more creepy
Digital Fox @ May 30th 2007 12:04PM
Or maybe they should actually enforce good parenting, as that's the only reason that children are getting their hands on "mature" games, anyways, right? Because the parents aren't paying attention to their damn kids.
This is really just another example of adding to the problem, rather than actually attacking the problem itself.
Greg @ May 30th 2007 12:11PM
@jduke -
Is this your argument? - The game industry says that they don't want minors to buy adult games. But the game industry gets upset when legislation prohibits sales to minors. Therefore, the game industry must actually want adult games to minors. Therefore, this legislation is just.
In fact, this legislation is not just. This states that selling an adult game, as defined by NY politicians, not experts, to a minor is worse than selling them alcohol or cigarettes. It is worse than driving 150 mph through a school zone. It is worse than driving drunk.
Chomper @ May 30th 2007 12:18PM
In reply to all those who said that movie sales aren't bound by legal consequences, I'll take your word on that.
However, from first hand experience, when I was younger I needed proof of ID to rent/buy an R-rated movie, or M-rated video game (which is funny, since it means the "law" is technically already being enforced even though they don't *have* to).
What I'm getting it is why would they say "You need to be in order to rent/buy this product", when if what you guys say is true, there were no consequences in doing so? There must be some sort of restrictions in place, otherwise they wouldn't have to say that.
I sincerely doubt the teenagers working at said rental places cared at all if someone underage is renting unrestricted yet unsuitable material. I also doubt that the guy with the skull tattoo on his neck cared if I was rotting my mind or not. Bottom line: why ID if you have no obligation to do so?
Diskoboy @ May 30th 2007 12:27PM
Bloomberg and Spitzer are facist liberal cunts. I haven't been back to New York since they were elected into power, and never plan on going back, ever again.
New York voters, you have no one to blame but yourselves for this debacle.
Greg @ May 30th 2007 12:32PM
@Chomper-
I can think of 3 reasons, off the top of my head, why retailers would ask for ID, without a legal obligation. And since most retailers DO have a policy to ask for ID for M-Rated games and R-Rated movies, they must have some justification.
1.) To prevent this sort of bullshit legislation. If our industry can regulate itself, we don't need ignorant politicians coming in and making things into crimes.
2.) The guy with the skull tattoo on his neck carded you because he didn't want your mom coming back in 2 hours to yell at him for selling you a copy of GTA3.
3.) Some corporations might feel a social responsibility to card people, even if it isn't the law.
Eon @ May 30th 2007 9:06PM
There is one reason why this sort of legislation is being enacted. The games lobby/companies are not funding political campaigns.
A few years back there was lots of talk about enacting laws that would affect the silicon valley IT companies. In record time, politicians were being invited to silicon valley and donations made to the parties. Not a lot of talk recently about moderating the computer industry is there?
These politicians are slime.
bounchfx @ May 30th 2007 1:05PM
ITS A FUCKING GAME.
If ANYTHING send the fucking kids trying to buy it to jail, or just take it away from them. People make mistakes, as it's already policy to NOT sell them M rated games. How much more shit do you want to do? Ugh
Evan @ May 30th 2007 1:40PM
@Greg and @Jonathan Tran
Most of your books deal with those topics differently than video games. There's a huge difference between a respected book's portrayal of rape as the devastating act of violence that it is, and a hentai-video's portrayal of rape as unconsequential and acceptable. Violence in video games is like porn - created just for the excitement of the viewer without any underlying sensivity or emotion. And that - the way violence is portrayed - is what makes video game violence much more harmful to youths than any respectable book.
Greg @ May 30th 2007 2:11PM
@Evan-
Bullshit. Have you ever played a video game?
Some game violence is gratuitous, but by no means do video games hold the monopoly on gratuitous violence. If you want to make that claim, you'd better start making a case against movies, TV, books, magazines, comic books, music, the internet, and conversation, too.
The real question is, who are you to decide what is a respectable portrayal of violence? Who has that right? Would you give it to politicians?
Who do you trust to interpret art for you? Who do you trust to tell you what is and is not acceptable for you or your children?
And maybe you should point out how video game violence was harmful to me. I've played games all my life, and many of them have been violent, many gratuitously so.
Please, Evan. Tell me how they harmed me.
420sniper @ May 30th 2007 2:46PM
I blame George Bush.
oh...wait.. thats right...
New York is a liberal state with a democratic controlled legislature and a liberal republican govenor and two liberal senators one of whom is probably going to be the next president of this country.
polly @ May 30th 2007 3:19PM
420sniper,
You think only the democrats are putting asinine gaming regulation bills out there? Wrong. It's both parties doing it, trying to court the "family values" and "protect the children" votes. Both parties do it and both are huge hypocrits for doing so. The dems because they usually try to defend civil liberties and the republicans because they traditionally stand for less government intereference in our daily lives.
retodd @ May 30th 2007 3:41PM
Why single out video games? If they are going to push this legislation, then it should be for all media not just video games.
A class e felony in New York is a joke. If you are a first time offender, it will typically be reduced. I was charged with a class e felony in NY as a minor and walked away with 40 hours of community service and my case was dismissed after keeping my nose clean for 6 months. You will NEVER see anyone locked up for this unless they have a prior conviction.
Abscissa @ May 30th 2007 4:24PM
I've said it before and I'll say it again: New York is an overrated shithole.
John H. @ May 30th 2007 5:12PM
This would not survive the courts, but until someone strikes it down, it could do some real damage.
sleeptastic @ May 30th 2007 5:11PM
This law is going to be kicked out by the courts. I don't think speech restrictions due to exessive violence have ever been held up in court.
Selling rated R movies to kids is not illegal anywhere in the US. The only movies that can't be sold to kids are porn. I think the exact reasoning is that sex occurs in private and so public displays can be considered obscene, while violence is a part of life and is often public (just turn on the news) and so cannot be considered obscene.
Evan @ May 30th 2007 5:55PM
@Greg
I'll take your bait... Yes, there are movies, books, and comics filled with mindless gratuitous violence like video games, but those books aren't studied in school, and those movies aren't winning film festivals. The books studied in school (mentioned in #13) and the films winning film festivals are the ones with purpose and meaning behind their violence, purpose and meaning that is lacking in video games.
CNash @ May 30th 2007 7:00PM
The UK's system is a pretty good implementation of this kind of policy that's been going strong for decades now. It is illegal to sell games rated "18" to people who aren't 18, and so on for 15 and 12-rated games/movies. If you do this, and you're found out, your place of work could be banned from selling games or movies, and there will usually be a fine. No jail time, though - that's where this new law goes off the deep end.
Snipehunter @ May 30th 2007 8:25PM
If a law is neither fair or just, it is not a good law as it fails to serve the purposes of the law of this land. If you don't want your children to have access to M rated games, then police your children. It's really that simple. You don't need to go restricting the 1st ammendment rights of the devs who create M games, nor do you need to restrict the same rights of those people who choose to sell such PROTECTED SPEECH. Just watch what your kids play and prevent them from playing anything you don't agree with. Is that so hard?
Apparently it's so hard that the state of new york thinks it needs to step in for you. I guess those ditech commercials are wrong; people aren't smart.
Patrick @ May 31st 2007 4:34PM
Should people be punished for selling M-rated games to minors?
Sure.
But should that punishment include jail time?
Hell no!
This is completely ridiculous, and yet I have no doubt that it will pass and be signed into law. Going to jail for selling a game, surely they should see the insanity in that, right?
James @ May 31st 2007 10:52PM
So, this either leads to a shortage of people dumb enough to risk pound-you-in-the-ass prison for 6 bucks an hour, or "Yeah, I'm not willing to sell you this game because you don't look 30, and that could be a fake ID" (because they're not willing to risk PYITAP).
override367 @ Jun 2nd 2007 6:24PM
I work retail electronics and the reason we ask for ID is because the register screen prompts us to, because retail chains want to appear to be morally responsible.
It's not rocket science, it doesn't keep games out of the hands of minors - parents generally buy it for them.
I've screwed up and sold M rated games to minors, infact I'll admit I knowingly sold God of War 2 to a 17 year old I know.
So I should probably be reprimanded right? I should not go to prison, that's fucking absurd. I can sell a copy of Saw 3 or A Clockwork Orange to a minor with no legal problems in any state, but "Halo 2" will get me in jail? Go fuck yourself if you think that's fair.