California Senator Wants Fewer Guns in Games

[frigidmagi]

Escapist

Senator Dianne Feinstein has suggested the government should pass in-game gun restrictions if the game industry doesn't self-regulate.

Late last year, the tragic massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newton, Connecticut shook the country to its core. It's an event that spurred new debates on the issues of guns and violence in the United States, and will likely continue to ignite passions for years to come. As often happens in the wake of such events, videogames have fallen back under the scowling gaze of those who believe them to be an instigator of violence in our society.

Speaking to a crowd of five hundred in San Fransisco on the subject of gun control, California Senator Dianne Feinstein leveled criticism at the game industry, suggesting that the government should consider taking action to reduce the presence of guns in videogames. According to Feinsten videogames play "a very negative role for young people, and the industry ought to note that. If Sandy Hook doesn't do it, if the knowledge of these videogames this young man played doesn't, then maybe we have to proceed, but that is in the future."

Feinstein is not the first government official following the events in Newton to push for new restrictions on videogames. In early February of 2013, State Representative Debralee Hovey introduced a bill to the state legislature that would have levied special taxes on violent videogames in the state of Connecticut. That same month, again in Connecticut, state senator Toni Harp pushed a motion to make it illegal for minors to play arcade games involving fake guns.

It's important to remember, of course, that videogames, thanks to the Supreme Court's decision in the 2011 Brown vs. EMA case, now enjoy the same first amendment protections as books, music and film. Even if a measure were passed by the government in an attempt to restrict the content of games, there would be tremendous legal precedent to help opponents strike it down.

Yeah because life was so non-violent before video games... Seriously maybe it's just me but between this and her almost laughly badly written assault weapon ban she doesn't come off as a thoughtful critic of gun violence or private gun ownership. She comes off as someone who wants to ban guns and keep them out of media because they're loud and scary.

[rhoenix]

*facepalm*

This nonsense again. It's hilarious to me when I see loud accusations at something being the source of evil in humans, when it was created by humans.

[Batman]

This is a brilliant idea. I mean no violence is ever done in video games that doesn't involve a gun. No hacking people to pieces with bladed weapons, no explosives or running people over with cars, it's all guns. And we all know it's rock-solid documented that violence in video games is to blame for pretty much everything that went wrong since video games exist, since before video games, the world was all fun and roses.

[Josh]

First she came for the ARs and I didn't speak up because I didn't own one. Then she came for Borderlands 2 and oh shit, it's on.

[rhoenix]

First she came for the ARs and I didn't speak up because I didn't own one. Then she came for Borderlands 2 and oh shit, it's on.

Yeah, I know I freaked out about the whole gun issue not too long ago - however, the discussions here were enough to talk me down.

Besides, I've never played Borderlands or its sequel. ;)

[Josh]

I wasn't even pickin' on ya, Tyson.

After you've just admitted to leading such a sadly deprived life like this I couldn't even find it in my heart to kick you no matter what you got hung up on.

[LadyTevar]

I will like to remember the Good Senator we had GUNS long before we had VideoGames, and people were killing each other with them then.

[Hotfoot]

Look, could we have less violence in videogames? Sure, absolutely, and I support any developer who makes a game that isn't based around violence. There are plenty of fun, enjoyable games that involve explorations into a myriad of other themes, ones I've even enjoyed myself. That said, it's not like violent video games are a problem. If anything, they've been shown to be helpful in managing violent tendencies, and calming in and of themselves. Sure, the argument can be made that some of them make violence more acceptable or downplay its severity, but they largely do that in the realm of the game world itself. For example, Marcao is willing to talk big and violent in games, but in the real world, he's a teddy bear who doesn't even feel comfortable eating food with bones in it. The two things are not directly transferable.

If a lawmaker wants to provide incentives for gaming companies to make non-violent games, I'm okay with that. This, however, is ludicrous.

[RogueIce]

DOOM let us have six guns at once.

Modern Warfare 3 only lets you have two.

Mission accomplished already, Senator.

[Batman]

*clonk* No you're not going to, Master Bruce.

[Josh]

Honestly, I've wondered how many aspiring Napoleons we've already lost to RTSs.

[Batman]

I believe Master Bruce would take exception to there being such a thing as a real time strategy game, but you two seem to be in general agreement over the fact that in strategy games, the player tends to kill people by the truckload.
I mean seriously. Let's take Star Wars games. A single Star Destroyer blown up means 37,000 people dead.

[General Havoc]

Hell, there's games out there where you can death star entire planets.

[Batman]

At least one of those games was a Star Wars game. Star Wars:Rebellion, anyone? The Master of Orion family of games comes to mind. But naturally, killing billions of virtual people by blowing up their ships/space stations/planets doesn't count, killing people in computer games is only bad if you use a handgun to do it one at a time.

[Josh]

Hell, there's games out there where you can death star entire planets.

By accident, even.

You know what I'm talking about.

At least one of those games was a Star Wars game. Star Wars:Rebellion, anyone? The Master of Orion family of games comes to mind. But naturally, killing billions of virtual people by blowing up their ships/space stations/planets doesn't count, killing people in computer games is only bad if you use a handgun to do it one at a time.

Let's also include such classics as Sword of the Stars or Sins of a Solar Empire. SotS did eventually include a mechanism by which a world could surrender without being bombarded to rubble, but in the vanilla game it was just like Sins, when you wanted the world you had to glass it first.