Posted on October 5, 2007,

Violent Video Games on Idaho Attorney General's Radar

esrb_ratingsymbols.jpg

This is actually a good thing when it comes down to it. It’s definitely better than an outright ban on violent video games.

Idaho Attorney General Lawrence Wasden just announced he has joined the Electronic Software Ratings Board in a campaign to raise awareness about the ESRB rating system.

“Some games contain graphic violence, language and sexual material that are simply not suitable for kids. I know this is a concern for many parents, because I’ve been asked about it many times,” Attorney General Wasden said in a press release. “But, with 1,000 new games released every year, how are parents to make, and help their kids make, good choices? The video game rating system is a good place to start. It includes age appropriate ratings, along with information about what’s actually in the game.”

And to help guide parents, a leaflet with the oh-so-difficult to understand ratings on them explained, from E for Everyone to the unheard of Adults Only rating. Too bad about that last one, though–I think some awesome games should come out for adults that Walmart should be forced to carry.

Join the Conversation   

* required field

By submitting a comment here you grant GameFront a perpetual license to reproduce your words and name/web site in attribution. Inappropriate or irrelevant comments will be removed at an admin's discretion.

8 Comments on Violent Video Games on Idaho Attorney General's Radar

havoc of smeg

On October 5, 2007 at 6:36 am

i think kids should be kept from most violent games.
but an all out ban on them for everyone? i dont think so. it just takes a whizz on the freedom we all know and love oh so much.

micky

On October 5, 2007 at 7:20 am

isn’t the us violent enough????? in europe they play violent games to but in the usa you have the weapons availeble to make it real.
so ban all weapons and violent games will not be such a problem anymore

Daniel

On October 5, 2007 at 7:21 am

@havoc: Did you read past the first sentence? Lawrence isn’t going to ban any video games, he is just raising awareness of the different ESRB ratings to parents who may not know what the different ratings stand for.

I don’t see why it could be so hard to make an educated decision on video games. The rating on the box explains what it stands for and what kind of content is expected in the title. Plus, I’m sure if you ask the employee if the game would be suitable for your tot, I’m sure they’ll help you find the right game for you.

Suzie

On October 5, 2007 at 8:09 am

Of course, if your parents refuse to buy you 15+ games you can just go to a friends house and play it.

It’s a good thing from a “hey they aren’t banning violent games!” pov, but I don’t believe that age-rating has ever really worked.

If you want to stop violence, you need to deal with domestic abuse, and the easy access to weaponry that the depressed, mentally unstable and violent people have.

Ron Whitaker

On October 5, 2007 at 8:56 am

@micky: Banning weaponry doesn’t curb violence. It never has. The CDC conducted a study back in 2003 that showed that there was no evidence to suggest that gun laws reduces crimes with guns. The fact remains that regardless of gun laws, folks who want guns for criminal purposes will still be able to get guns illegally, just as they do now.

@Suzie: The above, plus this: Even if a child is at a friend’s house, their parents should STILL be aware of what they are doing. If they are not, they fail at being parents. Sure, there will be things that your kid does you don’t know about. But, if they are at a friend’s house with your permission, it’s your job as a parent to know what goes on in that friend’s house.

All out bans of anything have never worked in this country. Since Prohibition, people have tried banning this and that, and those who want the banned item can still acquire it if they want it bad enough.

The ESRB is fulfilling its mission, and doing it well. It’s up to parents, who are ultimately in control of the games their kids play, to make sure they aren’t providing inappropriate games to their kids. Blaming a game developer or publisher for a kid playing violent games is like blaming Ford because someone got drunk and ran over you with an Explorer.

havoc of smeg

On October 5, 2007 at 10:10 am

@daniel
i know, i was just agreeing with it.

@all
rons right, you can take away the gun, but he will probably just find anouther way to kill.

i also think suzie might have a fairly good point. kids would evently find a way to get these games, even if they have to ask older people to go in the store and buy it for them and keeping it hidden away from there parents, for example

Michael

On October 5, 2007 at 11:29 am

The guy’s probably up for re-election and wants to be seen to be doing something without appearing too draconian.

Obviously no major social problem has a simple one-size-fits-all solution, or it would have been long since solved. But every little bit helps. The ratings system isn’t going to please everyone or solve all problems with violence; it was never meant to do so. But it helps to inform people, and raising awareness of it certainly can’t hurt. Plus, this sets a precedent for other states to follow.

Jerad

On October 5, 2007 at 5:23 pm

On a side note that I’ve been trying to figure out for a while; why won’t walmart carry AO games, but they have no problem with unrated versions of movies?