You left the end part of the quote where he said "Ive never been in a disaster". Naturally, I expected that you were saying that the people on food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, or that are unemployed are in a disaster; that's just not true when you compare their situation to the world, though. Disaster is a very strong word. People just complain and complain and want the government to do everything for them with these programs. They don't realize how good they have it, even if it seems terrible. I don't live an isolated life, I just know what's out there, and you need to fix up your quotes so other readers can understand the context you're using.
| |
Fugsnarf wrote:
You left the end part of the quote where he said "Ive never been in a disaster". Naturally, I expected that you were saying that the people on food stamps, Medicaid, Medicare, or that are unemployed are in a disaster; that's just not true when you compare their situation to the world, though. Disaster is a very strong word. People just complain and complain and want the government to do everything for them with these programs. They don't realize how good they have it, even if it seems terrible. I don't live an isolated life, I just know what's out there, and you need to fix up your quotes so other readers can understand the context you're using. Get a hold of yourself. I knew what you were quoting. Yes, a disaster such as Hurricane Katrina. Just because you haven't been in it doesn't mean you're not going to be in one. You don't consider this current economic crisis a disaster? You have such an attitude for someone who wants less government control. Try funneling that anger into something useful, instead of leaving it to sit here on an online blog. | |
Who's angry? I had no emotion of anger in that statement, merely comments. I'm also not talking about natural disasters. We in America and other top countries are the top 10% of the world. The other 90% isn't even close to being as privileged as we are. Only 1% of the world even has a computer, so you and I are only talking to 1% of the world right now. So, I'm quite content with America right now, that's not what angers me. Believe me, I know what that other 90% of the world is like. There's plenty more things out there that make me angry, and I definitely use it constructively in all sorts of physical ways from rallies and talks for political reasons, and mission trips for world outreach. But this isn't about me, I think you misunderstood what I was trying to say a little.
| |
To be fair, I keep reading some of these articles, and wonder what all the fuss is about. The original link for example says: "It is the responsibility of the parents, not the government, to decide what games are appropriate for their children.".
Surely, by banning sale of adult material to children, this is only helping? By banning such sales from children, it is surely a lessened weight on parents, who can purchase these media for their children if they really want to, and be safe in the knowledge that these children can't buy it without them behind their backs. The suggestion that companies such as Rockstar would suddenly start removing adult content from games such as GTA, never intended for a child audience in the first place just to get a lesser rating and would then raise the price of video gaming is hilarious at best. No company I know purposely reduces the level of violence to hit European markets especially, why would they change their minds to suit California's needs >.> Someone please tell me I'm missing something, is the article supposed to be a joke? | |
Lol @ Disaster comments, the US is probably the only country in the world that has every possible natural and social disaster under the sun (and it certainly doesn't effect its financial or political capabilities).
| |
@Acebloke: We don't ban other types of violent media in the US. The only definition of obscenity the courts agree on involves porn. Minors are free to purchase anything else. This law proposes that games are a lesser medium which is not worthy of the same privileges.
As for California's importance, other states will follow if they know they can get away with it. It's also home to most of the game development industry in the US. It's where Silicon Valley is. | |
@ACWraith wrote: On the contrary, the debate is based on the fact that games, being interactive, are a greater medium and more inclined to affect the player. This whole debate is funny (in a, it has to be kind of way, or else it'll be angering) to me, considering that I just watched Saw V and wondered to myself, "and they're worried about kids playing GTA?"
Now, I can understand how this is true. Video games DO affect you differently than other media, but not necessarily more or worse. Anyone who took basic psychology can understand what a reward system does. Now, I'm not saying that if I kill a bunch of people in a game, that I'm going to expect the same reward in real life. A person who is already psychologically screwed, on the other hand... There are certain games that I don't think that minors should play, Manhunt for example. But I would let my kid play Halo. The thing is though, that it is the parent's choice as to what the children play. Children are already (usually) blocked from buying M rated games at retail stores. Making it illegal to do so is just going to make it worse because now we'll have a jury to rate every game and force stores to do something that is already store policy, except instead of firing employees when the policy is violated, they get fined $1000. The problem lies with parents. So many parents have no idea how to raise a child and never even try to learn because "mother knows best." And the children are having children much, much earlier that they should, with even less education than their own parents. The Second Law Of Thermodynamics is running it's proverbial course through our parental generations. And then we have the conservative oldbies running the system and the only solution that they can come up with is that "this wasn't here when I was a kid, therefore it must be the problem." | |
Fugsnarf wrote:
I wasn't talking about a disaster. I was talking about the many different forms of government assistance that people rely on. You must live a very isolated life.