IncarnatedDemon
Well-known Member
Yes or no, vote.
Its not a jail setence, just a appropriate punishment.
Its not a jail setence, just a appropriate punishment.
Should parents who buy mature games for their kids be punished by law?
- Thread starter IncarnatedDemon
- Start date
Demi-fiend
Metempsychosis
No.
DragonMaster2010
Don't Let the Fall of America be Your Fall
That depends on what the child does. If the parent buys the kid GTA 5 and that kid implements what he/she has seen on the game that could get you arrested, then I believe both the child AND the parent should be punished. But if the kid doesn't do what he/she sees from the game and realizes that its only a game, then it should be okay. However that parent should tell that kid all about how what's done in a video game shouldn't be done in real life. I remember I had to have the same talk with my little brother the first time I let him play PROTOTYPE. Constantly reminding him that he can't surf on people's corpses, and that he can't pick up taxi cabs to throw at helicopters.:lol:
IncarnatedDemon
Well-known Member
I dont think people will be as responsible as you.
Demi-fiend
Metempsychosis
You can't?? :'(
DragonMaster2010
Don't Let the Fall of America be Your Fall
Demi-fiend
Metempsychosis
DragonMaster2010
Don't Let the Fall of America be Your Fall
Yeah, and I wish parents would do the same for anime so that we can avoid things like this;
Or this;
IncarnatedDemon
Well-known Member
I heard of a kid killing himself after hearing Itachi had died. Very horrible thing,b ut gotta say...what a stupid thing to die for.
Itachi is quite boring...
Itachi is quite boring...
DragonMaster2010
Don't Let the Fall of America be Your Fall
IncarnatedDemon
Well-known Member
Jiriaya...is 10x more awesome.
I liked Itachi to begin with but eventually author turned Itachi into a fap fest. Jiriaya i like alot!
Awesome guy.
Chancey289
Fake Geek Girl.
No. That's ridiculous.
Maxman
Well-known Member
Yeah, but I see lots of young kids(And I mean reeeeeeeeaally young) playin' GTA 4 here, I dont see them actin' any wierd :troll:
Loopy
Devil hunter in training
I'm undecided. One on hand, children should not be in posession of mature games. They are rated that way for a reason. Adults should be responsible for recognising this and not give in to the demands of their child.
However, in some cases, the adult can't always stop their child. The child might play the game at an older friend's house.
I would just hope that if a parent sees their child playing a mature game or buys one for them, that they have the sense to explain the difference between games like that and real life.
Besides, if a child really goes off the rails and takes a gun, kife, any weapon, to their sibling, parents or other people as a result of games, then that is punishment enough for the parents. It would be hard enough punishment knowing a parent somehow raised a dysfunctional public menace, and an even bigger punishment if the child actually killed them or a sibling or other people.
But really, there only seems to be a tenuous link between gaming and violence in children/ teenagers. So long as parents explain and put into context what happens in a game, and the child is not too underage to play the game, then no punishment should be needed.
However in a rare worse case scenario like killing, attacking or raping as a result of being exposed to mature games, then yes, there should be punishment for the child and parent.
The only case I've ever heard of where a teenager killing someone was linked to a game was when Manhunt came out and one kid hit and stabbed another to death. However, I think that kid had other problems and the game just tipped him over the edge.
I think that sort of thing is very, very rare. I don't even think parents realised that their child could be capable of killing when he played Manhunt...no parent wants to think they've raised a socially maladjusted freak. Plus, we don't even know if the parents bought the game, knew he was playing it, or knew their son was that kind of person if they did buy it.
However, in some cases, the adult can't always stop their child. The child might play the game at an older friend's house.
I would just hope that if a parent sees their child playing a mature game or buys one for them, that they have the sense to explain the difference between games like that and real life.
Besides, if a child really goes off the rails and takes a gun, kife, any weapon, to their sibling, parents or other people as a result of games, then that is punishment enough for the parents. It would be hard enough punishment knowing a parent somehow raised a dysfunctional public menace, and an even bigger punishment if the child actually killed them or a sibling or other people.
But really, there only seems to be a tenuous link between gaming and violence in children/ teenagers. So long as parents explain and put into context what happens in a game, and the child is not too underage to play the game, then no punishment should be needed.
However in a rare worse case scenario like killing, attacking or raping as a result of being exposed to mature games, then yes, there should be punishment for the child and parent.
The only case I've ever heard of where a teenager killing someone was linked to a game was when Manhunt came out and one kid hit and stabbed another to death. However, I think that kid had other problems and the game just tipped him over the edge.
I think that sort of thing is very, very rare. I don't even think parents realised that their child could be capable of killing when he played Manhunt...no parent wants to think they've raised a socially maladjusted freak. Plus, we don't even know if the parents bought the game, knew he was playing it, or knew their son was that kind of person if they did buy it.
IncarnatedDemon
Well-known Member
Be realistic guys when we speak of parents, we speak of parents, not gamer parents.
Do you really believe they will be responsible ?
Hell no. No responsible parent would buy a adult game for a kid.
Do you really believe they will be responsible ?
Hell no. No responsible parent would buy a adult game for a kid.
Maxman
Well-known Member
Well, I was just trolling
VineBigBoss
GGXRD <3
No, i think that parents should take reponsibility on what their child does, not exactly be punished by law because they've let their children play Mortal Kombat or GTA; but they could be punished if their children does hurt or offend someone in reality infIuenced by a game or not. I play Mortal Kombat since i was a child, i mean, i've started playing it very early in my life (like with 2 years old playing with the pad in reverse, i don't even know what i was doing by that time). MK2 was the first game i had along with Super Mario World, so i don't think it's that dangerous to let kid be exposed to that kind of violence if you teach them that's it's essentialy wrong to hurt people for nothing; that was basically what my parents did and it worked out.
Chancey289
Fake Geek Girl.
No. Like I said, it's ridiculous. It's not the government's job to tell you how to raise your kid. If you want to get your kid GTA V, so be it. If the kid starts to do what he sees in that game in real life, then that kid had some issues.
The media is basically teaching people to be dumb nowadays. And all you people here that would actually somehow agree with this wacky proposition are only contributing to the argument that "violent media makes you violent" and I thought a while back for the most part none of you agreed with that.
Thing is, I think we also don't give kids enough credit nowadays. I was a kid too once and I grew up watching rated R horror movies and playing M rated games. My parents didn't shield me away from that stuff for the most part because they gave me and my brother enough credit to separate reality from fiction.
I'm 21 now and do you see me going around on killing sprees just because I grew up on mature material? No. This is a pretty dumb thing to come up with to be honest. I've bought mature stuff for my younger cousin (with my Aunt knowing of course) and what, you think I should get in trouble?
The media is basically teaching people to be dumb nowadays. And all you people here that would actually somehow agree with this wacky proposition are only contributing to the argument that "violent media makes you violent" and I thought a while back for the most part none of you agreed with that.
Thing is, I think we also don't give kids enough credit nowadays. I was a kid too once and I grew up watching rated R horror movies and playing M rated games. My parents didn't shield me away from that stuff for the most part because they gave me and my brother enough credit to separate reality from fiction.
I'm 21 now and do you see me going around on killing sprees just because I grew up on mature material? No. This is a pretty dumb thing to come up with to be honest. I've bought mature stuff for my younger cousin (with my Aunt knowing of course) and what, you think I should get in trouble?
Angel
Is not rat, is hamster
I vote no. Because it is a stupid thing to waste time and public money on. It is one thing if there is a DEFINITE link, without conjecture, between the actions of someone and a video game that does not also come down to psychiatric problems. But why fill the courts with parents who made a mistake (le gasp! parents make mistakes!) as opposed to proper criminals? The legal system is already struggling without adding more pointless red tape and time-wasting charges.
My stance on gaming has not changed since the last time we talked about ratings and kids and the like. Parents should be in the know about modern cultures/subcultures that are likely to affect their children - it doesn't take much effort to read up on a game or find out about the content. I am firmly a believer in case-by-case - everyone here knows my daughter plays games above her age rating such as Fable, Skyrim and L4D. She also watches films above her age rating. But the onus is on me if it goes badly for her as a result - it's not the fault of the media she has used, it is mine alone. Having said that, she is not permitted (in our home, at least) to watch or play anything above a 12 rating unless myself and Steve have seen it first. We take the content advice seriously and are very careful to ensure that if Jess is going to play a game intended for 16+, then we play it through completely first. And I mean completely. She sometimes tries to convince me she can handle such and such but I'm not an idiot and so far she has never gotten her own way.
What she does outside the home, however, is out of my hands. I can't stop her from watching an 18 film or playing a game that is full of sex, violence and drug use. All I can do after the fact is talk it through with her if she has been adversely affected by the content - having certain images burned into your brain can be punishment enough, I reckon
Age-ratings are strictly adhered to when we have guests over, however. Just because I allow my child to play and see certain things does not mean I think all children should. With one of our children being disabled and very keen on visuals, we have to be extremely careful about what is being viewed by the family - Jake is affected greatly by what he sees and as he cannot process information the way we can, if he sees violence or gore or sexual activity...well, it's pretty much going to melt his brain, I reckon. So for his sake if nothing else, nothing is shown above a PG rating - and even then, we have to check it first to make sure it's not frightening for him.
I am intrigued, however, by what would be considered an appropriate punishment? I know that if someone in the UK sells an age-rated product to someone not of that age, they face a fine and MAYBE criminal charges if they persist - but what exactly would be considered fitting for parents? And how would anyone find out? Would other parents be snitching on them? Or a disgruntled kid who isn't getting their own way? I mean, after all, it sounds like one of those things that no one ever really grasses anyone up for anyway - is it even worth enforcing it in this way?
My stance on gaming has not changed since the last time we talked about ratings and kids and the like. Parents should be in the know about modern cultures/subcultures that are likely to affect their children - it doesn't take much effort to read up on a game or find out about the content. I am firmly a believer in case-by-case - everyone here knows my daughter plays games above her age rating such as Fable, Skyrim and L4D. She also watches films above her age rating. But the onus is on me if it goes badly for her as a result - it's not the fault of the media she has used, it is mine alone. Having said that, she is not permitted (in our home, at least) to watch or play anything above a 12 rating unless myself and Steve have seen it first. We take the content advice seriously and are very careful to ensure that if Jess is going to play a game intended for 16+, then we play it through completely first. And I mean completely. She sometimes tries to convince me she can handle such and such but I'm not an idiot and so far she has never gotten her own way.
What she does outside the home, however, is out of my hands. I can't stop her from watching an 18 film or playing a game that is full of sex, violence and drug use. All I can do after the fact is talk it through with her if she has been adversely affected by the content - having certain images burned into your brain can be punishment enough, I reckon
Age-ratings are strictly adhered to when we have guests over, however. Just because I allow my child to play and see certain things does not mean I think all children should. With one of our children being disabled and very keen on visuals, we have to be extremely careful about what is being viewed by the family - Jake is affected greatly by what he sees and as he cannot process information the way we can, if he sees violence or gore or sexual activity...well, it's pretty much going to melt his brain, I reckon. So for his sake if nothing else, nothing is shown above a PG rating - and even then, we have to check it first to make sure it's not frightening for him.
I am intrigued, however, by what would be considered an appropriate punishment? I know that if someone in the UK sells an age-rated product to someone not of that age, they face a fine and MAYBE criminal charges if they persist - but what exactly would be considered fitting for parents? And how would anyone find out? Would other parents be snitching on them? Or a disgruntled kid who isn't getting their own way? I mean, after all, it sounds like one of those things that no one ever really grasses anyone up for anyway - is it even worth enforcing it in this way?