- Joined
- May 15, 2010
- Messages
- 27,392
- Reaction score
- 20,164
- Location
- Georgia
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Socialist
On November 2 the Supreme Court will hear EMA v Schwarzenegger, in which they will judge the constitutionality of a California law that bans the sale of violent, and sexually explicit(games rated M, and AO) video games to minors. If the law is upheld by the court it will be an unprecedented ruling, marking the first time the government would give a privately owned, and run entity, the ESRB the power to restrict the sale of a product. While it may have popular support(72% of recently polled Californians agree with the law) many legal analyst suspect the law to shot down as unconstitutional, and thus giving video games the same protection under the law as other forms of speech.
So I wanted to know what you guys opinion on the law is? Do you agree with, do you think it's constitutional?
Personally I think it's unconstitutional, and will be shot down. The thing to remember is that the movie, and music industry's are not subjected to the same kind of laws, or restrictions. So why should video games be subject to a different standard than other forms of speech?
Here is some more info on the case
Schwarzenegger v. EMA -- Media Coalition
So I wanted to know what you guys opinion on the law is? Do you agree with, do you think it's constitutional?
Personally I think it's unconstitutional, and will be shot down. The thing to remember is that the movie, and music industry's are not subjected to the same kind of laws, or restrictions. So why should video games be subject to a different standard than other forms of speech?
Here is some more info on the case
Schwarzenegger v. EMA -- Media Coalition
Last edited: