| Mail |
You might also like: WoW Insider, Massively, and more

Reader Comments (46)

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:16PM Ignatius said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
The ball is now in the Supreme Court's.. ehm... court.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 11:28PM Tiptup300 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Why not Rated R books? or wait, wth, why aren't books rated?
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 11:32PM Ignatius said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
'cause they're going to skip rating and go straight to burning.
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 3:33PM Ghen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
because people who read are "classier" and can tell the difference between morally right and wrong?
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:17PM StarFoxA said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Does this only affect Utah?
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:18PM Ignatius said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
State laws... apply to the state they're approved in.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:19PM StarFoxA said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I was just making sure. But thanks for making me feel stupid!
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:20PM TheDarkWayne said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
that's what the internet is for
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 11:13PM Anticrawl said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
+1 to StarFoxA for being a good sport.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:18PM reebo said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Jack Thompson?

He STILL hasn't realized he's an idiot yet?
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:53PM Riley said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
well, he is an idiot, so i guess that's why he doesn't realize it
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 10:13PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Someone needs to blow a hit in his face.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 11:15PM Anticrawl said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
@Jake B

Screw that, who wants to share a hit with Jack other than maybe Hitler.
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 2:08AM MrKlorox said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
From the creators of Napster is the new P2P hit sharing service, Hitler!
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:18PM iHavePants said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
So why are you against selling these games directly to under-age children?
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:54PM grimone said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
I don't get it either. It's illegal to sell restricted (MA15+ and R18+) media to those under age here in Australia - it's not a bad thing stopping kids purchasing this stuff. Parents who really want their kids to see it can still supply it to them.

I guess it's construed as an attack on freedom of speech. Meh... =P
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 10:28PM Sora said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Because retailers already voluntarily put this policy into place, and the policies for selling R rated movies to minors and such are broken far more often than the mature game policies. There was a Law of the Game article about it on here a few days ago that'll go into more detail, it's a good read if you find it.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 10:30PM Sora said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Okay, more like a month ago. (Wow, time goes by QUICKLY!)

Here's the link: http://www.joystiq.com/2009/02/12/lgj-jack-thompsons-utah-game-bill/
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 11:57PM cloud858rk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Basically this bill would take retailers doing the right thing and not selling underage kids M rated games, and fines them if they do, while letting retailers who do sell kids M games getting off scot free.
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 3:35PM Ghen said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
it punishes momentary lapses in good retailer judgment while letting hardcore "criminals" get off scott free.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:19PM iHavePants said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
So why are you against a law stopping retailers selling these games directly to under-age children?
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:19PM iHavePants said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Didn't click stop fast enough.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:28PM todzilla said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm not surprised that this bill passed considering the economy we are in. Anyway they can get some money without taxes is ok in their book. After all it's for the kids right
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:33PM reebo said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
THE CHILDREN!!
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:29PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Or the governor's =P
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:30PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
damn you comment system!
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:33PM MaxRukov said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
I support any measure that keeps 10 yr olds out of my voice channel in Killzone
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 10:15PM (Unverified) said

  • 1 heart
  • Report
Killzone is over rated. COD COD COD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 10:20PM Sly C said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
killzone? really? usually there are very few people talking and you can barely hear a lot of them. i find it a lot better than COD where i have to mute half the people.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 10:38PM MaxRukov said

  • 3 hearts
  • Report
Killzone as an example, I hate hearing kids in games rated M, just hate it.
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 11:09AM Kiteless said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Well at least they are suing modern games an examples. As stupid as I think this all is, I laugh when they call Doom a "Murder Simulator"!

I swear the could only get this as far as they have in Utah. Sorry Utah!

- K

Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 9:47PM PantsParty said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I'm sure the enforcement on this law is going to be super efficient and effective. Pieces of paper, pieces of paper.....
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 10:20PM John Musco said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Why exactly is this bill unconstitutional?
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 11:59PM cloud858rk said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I guess because it's censorship, but only to people under 18.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 10:38PM F1 Basu Gasu Bakuhatsu said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
FRAK!!!
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 10:40PM ncxcstud said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
I think it is more redundant than anything. Wasn't there something that showed Utah businesses already have like a 90+% efficiency rating when selling these kind of products? Meaning, they do their job 90 percent of the time (telling kids to hike it and waiting for their parents to come instead to buy it)?
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 10:42PM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Honestly, I don't see this as being unconstitutional. It is simply turning the selling of games to minors into an issue of false advertisement. If a store indeed proclaims not to sell M games to minors, then it should be held accountable when caught doing so.

However, I do not see this as a good way to enforce the ESRB rating. All this will do is make stores DROP their policy all-together, to prevent the few cases that get through from costing them. It will hurt the voluntary self-enforcement that the stores do on their own, rather than help it.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 11:27PM jah75157 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
sounds like it's being done the wrong way but something needs to be done to keep m rated games out of minor's hands. or at least promote it more so that parents are aware of the rating system and how bad shit can get. screw kids.
Reply

Posted: Mar 12th 2009 11:57PM Palmer45 said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
People play video games in Utah?!
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 1:20AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Yes. Yes we do.
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 2:02AM (Unverified) said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Ok, we all know that retailers can skate around the bill by simply ignoring the rating system. However, the rating system was put in place voluntarily to avoid government regulation. If the voluntary system is no longer enforced...things could go back to square one, and the government may decide to step in (because it's CLEARLY the most important issue to tackle at the moment).

I hate to give the guy any credit, but it makes me wonder if this was Thompson's plan all along. But then again, it's hard to nail down the thought patterns of a crazed zealot.
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 2:06AM Pohtaytoh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
spritethirstman pretty much hit the point I was getting at. Businesses will likely stop going through the steps to say they don't sell to minors in order to avoid the punishment which will likely lead to some form of regulation getting put in place by the government.
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 2:02AM Pohtaytoh said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Based on what I've read, this bill is going about it the wrong way. It only punishes retailers that say they don't sell M/R rated games/movies to minors. While those that don't make any such claims will get to continue selling to minors. It basically only punishes the businesses that are at least trying to protect the children =[
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 2:19AM (Unverified) said

  • 2.5 hearts
  • Report
Who said laws have to make sense or be not-retarded?

Clearly you've over-estimated the American legal system.
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 11:15AM FredFredrickson said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
Utah sure does like trying to make itself as irrelevant as possible.
Reply

Posted: Mar 13th 2009 2:33PM Covarr said

  • 2 hearts
  • Report
At least this law has a concrete line for what can and can't be sold, rather than using vague words like "violent" and "inappropriate".
Reply
Sorry, you must be logged in to leave a comment.

Featured Stories

Rhythm Heaven Fever review: Crazy into you

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 12:00PM

Remedy not done with Alan Wake

Posted on Feb 9th 2012 10:30AM

Engadget

TUAW

Massively

WoW