Violent Videogames My ASS, MOTHERF*&KER!

I mean, uh ... I was reading this article about video game violence, and this guy said something I thought was an interesting take on the argument over restricting the sale of "violent" videogames:

Others in the video game industry argue that there are no laws restricting the sale of R-rated DVD movies and that the same standard should be true of video games.

"Why single out games?" said Jason Della Rocca, executive director of the International Game Developer Assn. "No other form of entertainment is regulated in this way."

Part of the problem, Della Rocca said, is that games are seen as children's toys, not as an entertainment medium for a broad range of audiences, including adults.

"If your mental image of a game is that of a toy and you're presented with 'Grand Theft Auto,' it's understandable that you'd be shocked," he said. "It's as if you expected TV to be 'Sesame Street,' and you're shown 'Sex and the City.' But that would be absurd.

"Likewise, no one in the movie industry expects children to watch 'The Godfather' or 'Kill Bill.' It's the same with 'GTA.' It was never created for children."

What was particularly interesting was the woman who took GTA: SA from her 16-year-old son. He's sixteen! He's DRIVING NOW and in two years he'll be VOTING, for fuck's sake! If she doesn't trust her son to make the distinction between real world and fantasy world, perhaps I don't want him fucking DRIVING on the same roads as my family and I, nor do I want him VOTING for the LEADER OF THE FREE-FUCKING-WORLD.

This argument is summed up nicely by the professor from the U. of Il.:

"There are about 30 studies in all that look at this issue," Williams said. "That's really not a lot of studies, and they don't all agree with one another."

He's right. Everyone is going fucking nuts in Congress and all over the country in other political arenas, trying to be the first to shove half-baked arguments harkening back to darker times when comic books and Elvis Prestley were evil influences on "children" (the broad word used to describe both five-year-olds and sixteen-year-olds, apparently) into the eyes and ears of parents who want only to do right by their children.

Parents, if you want to raise your kids right, don't steal away the things that might influence their behavior. Don't just spank them or send them to their room. TEACH THEM that there are CONSEQUENCES to their behavior and that they will PAY THE CONSEQUENCES for doing BAD THINGS. It's not a hard concept - it's one you learn fairly quickly if your parents are willing to make the effort - mine were, and I'd say getting me through high school without my shooting any of the other students is a solid mark of success in defense of that style of parenting.

As with any argument about protecting children, it really comes down to this - PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. You can hide your child from the games or the games from the child, but they're going to find them - at a friend's house, at a cousin's house - and they're going to play them, and they're going to do it BEHIND YOUR BACK, and you will NEVER KNOW. And they'll NEVER KNOW the CONSEQUENCES of their behavior. Because you thought you were "protecting your child."

It's very easy to take something away from your kid. It's even easier to call it "parenting." But it's not parenting - it's policing.