Should a child be able to slam a shovel into a girl’s face, and then set her body on fire?
In real life, of course, most parents would put a stop to this kind of behavior, something for which we all are thankful. But in video games such as “Postal 2,” from which the above scenario is taken, children can playfully wreak unspeakable quantities of havoc.
U.S. Supreme Court justices Tuesday debated the validity of a California law that proposes to outlaw the sale, to children, of video games with such digitized bloodshed. The law, passed in 2005, would make it illegal to sell violent video games, such as those with scenes of “killing, maiming, dismembering or sexually assaulting…a human being,” to anyone under the age of 18.
Children would not, however, be barred from owning or playing such games, only from buying them.
California’s law was struck down as unconstitutional before going into effect. Similar laws in other states also have been blocked by the courts.
During oral argument Tuesday, the Los Angeles Times reports, unusual alignments emerged on the Supreme Court, with conservative Antonin Scalia joining more liberal justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor in expressing reservations about the law for First Amendment reasons.
In contrast, Stephen G. Breyer, typically considered among the most liberal justices, seemed to agree with conservatives John G. Roberts and Samuel Alito that if the state can prohibit the sale of sexual content to kids, then it can do the same with violent video games.
It will likely be several months before the court makes a final decision, according to the Times.
I feel there should be specific laws regulating the sale of “r” rated video games to children under 18, and for the “Free Speech” amendment of the constitution , I feel that “speech” is just that, “speech”, and that video games that display “graphic images” as mentioned earlier in this post should not be allowed to be sold to minors as this may be corrupting our children’s future.