gamepolitics: Utah Congressman Introducing Yet Another Federal Video Game Bill

Game Politics (

gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-01-05 08:43:00

Entry tags:

congress, esrb, legislation, matheson, utah, violence

Utah Congressman Introducing Yet Another Federal Video Game Bill

Did you think a day might go by without news of another piece of video game legislation?

Not a chance.

The Deseret Morning News (Utah) reports that Representative Jim Matheson, a Democrat, plans to propose legislation in Congress which would make the sale of an M-rated or AO-rated to minors a federal offense. Matheson's bill, drafted but not yet submitted, is based on ESRB content ratings.

"The industry already has its own rating system. I'm just going to say you have to ID (the buyer) for any 'mature' or 'adult only' rated games."

The proposed legislation will also require that video games have the current rating prominently displayed on the box. (GP: isn't that the case already?)

In discussing the bill with the Morning News, Matheson expressed little confidence in the current retail system.

"You know darn well the 13-year-old is not being carded when he buys 'Grand Theft Auto 2.' You get points (in that game) for having sex with a prostitute; you get points for killing the prostitute." (GP: We're pretty sure he doesn't mean "GTA 2.")

How does Matheson plan to dodge the First Amendment bullet that has already doomed so many pieces of video game legislation?

"I stay away from that unconstitutional aspect." The Congressman told the paper that he believes basing the law on ESRB ratings avoids any government restriction of free speech.

Page 1 of 2
<<	[1] [2]	>>

(Post a new comment)

	i didnt get into gta till gta 3 but hilaryduffgta 2006-01-05 02:04 pm UTC (link)
	There were hookers in gta 2? (Reply to this)(Thread)

Re: i didnt get into gta till gta 3 but -

markusdragon, 2006-01-05 02:21 pm UTC

(Anonymous)
2006-01-05 02:06 pm UTC (link)

I'm having mixed feelings about this. Matheson certainly sounds like he's willing to at least work with the ESRB rating system, but a lot of stuff he's proposing is already in effect, as mentioned above. And again with the getting points thing... Sure, you gain health when you have sex with a prostitute, but you lose money in the process, and killing anyone (including hookers) sends the cops on you.

	I wish...Just once... goodrobotus 2006-01-05 02:09 pm UTC (link)
	That politicians would actually research and learn something before making definitive statements. They just keep showing malleable and easily led they are. (Reply to this)

	bigman_k 2006-01-05 02:13 pm UTC (link)
	...""I stay away from that unconstitutional aspect.""... Congressman Jim Matheson fails to realize that using a private rating system as law is a violation of Due Process. Of course he's from Utah so what should we expect. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	beardoggx 2006-01-05 02:22 pm UTC (link)
	Matheson's bill is similiar to Hillary's, which already is considered unconstitutional, so he's nothing more than a bandwagon jumper. Tell that moron Matheson and others of his ilk that saving Louisiana's receding coastline is considerably more important than his piece of shit bill. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	Great... jquilty 2006-01-05 02:22 pm UTC (link)
	Another misinformed dumbfuck. Really, what games besides sports games and the rare game like Meteos use points anymore? (Reply to this)(Thread)

	too much stupidity hilaryduffgta 2006-01-05 02:30 pm UTC (link)
	Im off to sleep now.this Guy Is a moron and his bill wil also fail.as for Him saying Unconstitutional Aspect i wonder if he would be saying that if someone tried to take away his first amendment rights (Reply to this)(Thread)

	Time for a Career Change. Send this man home. verbinator 2006-01-05 02:32 pm UTC (link)
	The Gentleman from Utah is up for re-election this year. Any surprise that yet another DEMOCRAT is jumping on the Fammily Values bandwagon in an election year? Vote the Government-Class-Failin' Scoundrel out of office!! (Reply to this)(Thread)

	sqlrob 2006-01-05 02:33 pm UTC (link)
	basing the law on ESRB ratings avoids any government restriction of free speech. Does this guy pay attention to anything? The equivalent for movies has already been ruled unconstitutional in several cases. "it is well-established that the Motion Picture ratings may not be used as a standard for a determination of constitutional status" - Swopes v. Lubbers (Reply to this)

	theogal 2006-01-05 02:47 pm UTC (link)
	How does Matheson plan to dodge the First Amendment bullet that has already doomed so many pieces of video game legislation? Easy, if he only goes after games like Grand Theft Auto 2... (Reply to this)

	Will These People Ever Learn.................? godofyouall 2006-01-05 03:31 pm UTC (link)
	The courts have already made it clear that giving a private party governmental powers is unconstitutional and therefore they could not give the ESRB ratings the force of law. Also this moron obviously doesn't do any research before talking about this subject. Killing Prostitutes in GTA 2 for extra points? -seriously WTF! (Reply to this)

	Jack Thompson Here (Anonymous) 2006-01-05 03:42 pm UTC (link)
	This approach is clearly unconstitutional. For those of you who are so crazed that you think I can't be fair about these things, think again. I just spoke at length with Congressman Matheson's staff person, and told them that this bill is constitutionally dead on arrival. Good luck to them, but they won't need luck if they reconfigure the bill. Jack Thompson (Reply to this)(Thread)

	ace_ofspade 2006-01-05 03:51 pm UTC (link)
	Making a game (rated M or AO) illegal to sell makes it worse than a current AO game. While the ESRB system is just a suggestion, selling these games is against the law. In effect, stores may not want to sell them. This goes for people wanting to ban "Hyper-mega-violent video games" too. (Reply to this)(Thread)

	Best dodge of 2006! jabrwock 2006-01-05 03:56 pm UTC (link)
	I stay away from that unconstitutional aspect. Translation: I don't know how to deal, so I just ignore it, and hope it goes away... (Reply to this)