Extremely violent video games have become the dangerous obsession of a significant portion of our youth, and several towns and states have passed ordinances intended to prevent minors from buying or viewing them. But judicial supremacists are striking down these laws by claiming this extremely graphic violence deserves the same First Amendment protection as Shakespeare.
In March, a three-judge panel for the Eighth Circuit unanimously held that violent video games are entitled to as much protection as the Bible. This was the ruling of Entertainment Software Assn. v. Swanson, even though one of the video games, "Postal 2: Apocalypse Weekend," boasts it will enable the user "to hack your enemies to meaty bits!"
Judge Wollman, writing for the Court, observed that "great literature includes many themes and descriptions of violence. See, e.g., Judges 4:21 (NIV) ('But Jael, Heber's wife, picked up a tent peg and a hammer and went quietly to [Sisera] while he lay fast asleep, exhausted. She drove the peg through his temple into the ground and he died.')." What Judge Wollman failed to add is that a literary description of violence in the Bible does not engage a teenager in role-playing or desensitize him to the harm.
Interactive Digital Software Assn. v. St. Louis County likewise held that violent video games are free speech because they contain "stories, imagery, age-old themes of literature, and messages, even an ideology, just as books and movies do." But so do some adult pornographic movies, and no one insists there is a First Amendment right to sell them to children.
That decision acknowledged a psychologist's expert testimony that violent video games frequently lead to aggressive behavior, yet inexplicably rejected it, noting instead that a high school principal who testified was unable to prove that violent video games cause psychological harm to teens who play them.
A similar supremacist decision by the Seventh Circuit, American Amusement Machine Assn. v. Kendrick, considered an ordinance that would have prevented arcade owners with five or more games deemed "harmful to minors" from allowing children to play the games without parental supervision. That Court struck down the ordinance, commenting that the violent arcade games in question were not proven to be similar to the standard video games that have been linked to violence, and therefore not directly proven to have harmful effects.
The decision compared violent video games to classic works of literature such as the Odyssey, The Divine Comedy, and War and Peace. There is a distinct difference between sympathizing with the committer of violence and being the committer of violence, but that difference was apparently lost on the court.
In a case involving a violent video game that shows teenagers how to kill policemen, federal district court Judge Robert S. Lasnik permanently enjoined Washington State from restricting the distribution of violent video games to minors. In Video Software Dealers Assn. v. Maleng, he quoted the Interactive Digital Software decision in ruling that "guided by the First Amendment, we are obliged to recognize that they are as much entitled to the protection of free speech as the best of literature."
These decisions ignore the way violent video games encourage role playing, making the child the perpetrator of violence in a manner that no book or movie can. It does not require a leap in imagination to see the risk of immature players transferring violent role-playing to real life.
Legitimate free speech expresses violence in a rational context, rather than displaying it graphically to evoke an immediate emotional reaction. It is not a First Amendment right to cause panic on an airplane by shouting that someone has a bomb; nor is it legitimate free speech to evoke violent reactions in children through graphic video games.
A teenager who learns how to murder and mutilate human beings in video games is desensitized to commit heinous crimes against his neighbors. Nothing in the First Amendment should prevent regulations to stop this, supremacist judges to the contrary notwithstanding.
Disclaimer: Worldview Weekend, Christian Worldview Network and its columnists do not necessarily endorse or agree with every opinion expressed in every article posted on this site. We do however, encourage a healthy and friendly debate on the issues of our day. Whether you agree or disagree, we encourage you to post your feedback by using the feedback button.
I am generally not a proponent of many forms of censorship because, as George Cancilla pointed out above, it is only a matter of time before the ability to silence people is turned against the Christian population. We are seeing this happen now with the hate-crimes legislation. I agree with George that the legal system certainly seems to have double standards right now regarding free speech that are not kind to the Christian faith. So I think we must stand for absolute freedom of speech, even if it does include things such as kkk parades, flag burning, and pornography, so long as our rights to proclaim the Christian truth are maintained. However, I think Phyllis hit the nail on the head with this comment: some adult films also contain imagery, stories, ideology, etc., yet "no one insists there is a First Amendment right to sell them to children." Freedom of speech is one thing, but there is the matter of appropriate distribution regarding age and maturity level. Our nation practices this on non-speech items such as tobacco, alcohol, and fire-arms. Also, in terms of speech-items, we limit the sale of pornography, and we even have a motion-picture rating system. Will they do away with that as well? Will theaters and rental stores be forced to allow small children to view violent and sex-filled R-rated films? I think this is a very strange decision that seems to ignore the similar restrictions placed on other speech items. Click here to reply to this post
Games are free speech
Posted On: 04/09/08 01:27:32 PM
Age 24, GA
Games are free speech. However, most gamers (myself included) are FOR the restriction of the sale of games that contain objectional content to children.
There is a ratings system in place under the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB). The ratings are
E (Everyone)
E10 (Everyone over 10)
T (Teen)
M (Mature 17+)
AO (Adults Only)
AO titles have only been published for PC. Microsoft, Sony, and Nintendo will not allow titles with that rating on their systems.
In addition to the above ratings there are content discriptors (such as Strong Sexual Content, Comic Mischief, Blood and Gore, etc) which further inform the purchaser of the content.
ESRB ratings need to be treated like movie ratings, where places will not sell M games to those under 17.
The real problem here though, is parents who allow their children to play anything and everything, and often buy them games like Gears of War, Halo, Grand Theft Auto, Bioshock, etc. Irresponisble parents are more of a problem. Click here to reply to this post
Two faced legislation
Posted On: 04/08/08 02:55:30 PM
Age 61, MO
If the judicial system wants to recognize violence or pornography as a First Ammendment right to free speech, then they at least need to be consistent when there is vocal, video, or written resistance to those things. Please don't insist that I've committed a hate crime because I've condemned homosexual behavior, violence, or pornography. Please allow me to speak out against political corruption and condemn dishonest behavior in government. Go ahead and let these violent video games be made available. My children won't be playing them. George Cancilla Click here to reply to this post
Woodrow Kroll, David Jeremiah,Sean McDowell, Josh McDowell, David Barton, Carl Kerby, Frank Harber, Kerby Anderson, and the Branson Family Reunion DVD Set! This is a $74.95 value for only $34.95! FREE worksheet with purchase!
Russell O'Quinn, Steve Saint, Dr. Michael Youssef, Dr. Erwin Lutzer, Bob Lepine, Star Parker, Kirk Cameron, Ray Comfort, and the Branson Family Reunion DVD Set! This is a $74.95 value for only $34.95!
