Good Sir Knight Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 They may take our lives..but they'll never take our video games. My friend from Germany came over and she bought some game that they couldn't get over there, she brought it back to her BF and he was esctatic. I would hate for that to happen in the US... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rccar328 Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 That's just funny... Maybe limited government is a good thing, after all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 Maybe limited government is a good thing, after all. The government that governs best is the government that governs the least. Unless you ask your pal George Bush. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 They may take our lives..but they'll never take our video games. My friend from Germany came over and she bought some game that they couldn't get over there, she brought it back to her BF and he was esctatic. I would hate for that to happen in the US... German censorship laws suck, they were a big reason for Indiana Jones and the Iron Pheonix being cancelled. Furthermore the German restriction on depicting Nazi's in the media is what I blame for the recent rise in Neo-Nazi numbers. If the US had a similiar law say outlawing historical depictions of slavery in US we might be prone to forget a shameful part of our history, and forget the lessons of the civil war. It happened, learn from it, don't hide it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TiE23 Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 Don't they have laws that forbid pro-nazi websites to be made or viewed in Germany? I don't see a problem with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted May 26, 2006 Share Posted May 26, 2006 I hate everything the brown shirted ****ers stand for but taking away their rights isn't gonna solve anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TiE23 Posted May 27, 2006 Share Posted May 27, 2006 This is really silly. Minor download and view porn all the time, they sneak into R rated movies, too. Hell, the more reckless even have sex! But you don't see laws being passed out punishing people with fines for doing so. "Jimmy saw Hostel yesterday." "Dear lord Jimmy, bad boy! You're grounded!" "I also saw that he was viewing a girly site, he also got a copy of Playboy." "You're grounded for a week Mister! And no allowance for a month!" "Also, he bought Grand Theft Auto 3 at Gamestop." "Arrghhh!!!!" *Heart attack* *LAWSUIT!* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted May 27, 2006 Share Posted May 27, 2006 This fits well with we're talking about http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5016514.stm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datheus Posted May 27, 2006 Share Posted May 27, 2006 "It's common, so it's a form of expression". Not. It's the entire concept of "I'm such a noncomformist, I'm not going to conform to you other noncomformists by noncomformists." Purposely not expressing anything is in fact expressing something. I'm not saying family memebers should not be unable to deman a photo be taken off the website. Would you be comfortable with Rotten if all the photos were proven to be fake? Is it the concept that bothers you or that you (or a loved one) could end up on the website? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pie™ Posted May 28, 2006 Share Posted May 28, 2006 "I'm such a noncomformist, I'm not going to conform to you other noncomformists by noncomformists." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TiE23 Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Posting picutres of graphic images of injured or dead people is perfectly legal. If you see a kid drinking beer, you scorn the kid, not the beer maker. If you see a kid smoking a cigarette, you scorn the kid, not the cigarette maker. If you see a kid reading Playboy, you scorn the kid, not Hugh Hefner. If you see a kid watching an R rated movie, you scorn the kid, not the people who made it. If you see a kid playing Grand Theft Auto, you scorn the kid, not Rockstar. There. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datheus Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Exactly what I was thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted May 29, 2006 Share Posted May 29, 2006 Well I'd rather be a crying pussy then a faggy goth kid -Butters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dagobahn Eagle Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Purposely not expressing anything is in fact expressing something.If you don't have an opinion, you don't have one. Regardless of how you twist and turn it, Mario, GTA, Formula 1 and Sonic the Hedgehog aren't political. They aren't made to express anything, but to entertain. They aren't protected by freedom of speech. I'm not saying that means they should be banned (OK, Mario has its moments, but still), I'm just saying freedom of expression has nothing to do with them as there is no expression in the first place. "It doesn't express something, so protect it since we've got freedom of expression" sounds a bit off to me, to say the least. I'm not saying family memebers should not be unable to deman a photo be taken off the website.Good boy:). Would you be comfortable with Rotten if all the photos were proven to be fake?Which they aren't, so that's a big "if". There's some good stuff on Rotten, too, though. Like the Bonsai Kitten (which is of course a hoax:)). Is it the concept that bothers you or that you (or a loved one) could end up on the website?Both. Posting picutres of graphic images of injured or dead people is perfectly legal.Didn't say anything else. I said it's wrong -to say the least, it's extremely childish, and it's got nothing to do with freedom of expression. But I didn't say it's illegal. If you see a kid drinking beer, you scorn the kid, not the beer maker. If you see a kid smoking a cigarette, you scorn the kid, not the cigarette maker. If you see a kid reading Playboy, you scorn the kid, not Hugh Hefner. If you see a kid watching an R rated movie, you scorn the kid, not the people who made it. If you see a kid playing Grand Theft Auto, you scorn the kid, not Rockstar. There. I don't know about the cigarette maker one (cigarette companies deserve all the crap they get:p), but yes. You left out about a hundred thousand things, though:p. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prime Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 I <3 Canada. i hope this doesnt get to canada. if it does, i bet there are going to be hundreds if not thousands of gamers who will sign a petition and overrule this...Indeed. We are so liberal that soon we will be pulling games that don't have naked chicks in them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Katarn07 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Regardless of how you twist and turn it, Mario, GTA, Formula 1 and Sonic the Hedgehog aren't political. They aren't made to express anything, but to entertain. Why does it have to be political? From a website I found: The most basic component of freedom of expression is the right of freedom of speech. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without interference or constraint by the government. The Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification for the interference with the right of free speech where it attempts to regulate the content of the speech. A less stringent test is applied for content-neutral legislation. The Supreme Court has also recognized that the government may prohibit some speech that may cause a breach of the peace or cause violence. The right to free speech includes other mediums of expression that communicates a message. Source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/index.php/First_amendment Movies, books, and even comics all contain graphic violence and the majority of people just blame video games nowadays. Why single these out? I think they communicate the same messages most action flicks and comics do. They might as well start banning those too and while they're at it, all violence and sex should be removed from both history classes and the Bible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK-8252 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Indeed. We are so liberal that soon we will be pulling games that don't have naked chicks in them. Go Canada! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Samnmax221 Posted May 30, 2006 Share Posted May 30, 2006 Well hopefully that will keep you Canadians out of serene Minnesota, and Wisconsin of course (smell the Dairy air?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.