USAToday has just lost a lot of my respect on CA and Videogames

"STUPID POINT 1=You can't blame parents for wanting to shield their children from these sorts of games. They should. But the legal question to be argued at the Supreme Court on Tuesday is whether government — in this case, the state of California — has a role in deciding which games ought to be banned. We think not.

LIE #2-Even assuming that some individual, vulnerable teenagers are adversely affected, it's better to rely on parents to impose limits, rather than expecting the heavy hand of government to do the job for them. The video game industry already identifies and rates the most violent games, and many retailers won't sell them to minors. 

WOW #3-The strongest argument against California's law is the constitutional one. For decades, federal courts have recognized only a handful of exceptions to the First Amendment, such as defamation and — for minors — pornography. The courts have never included violence in that short list, for good reason. That would open the door to restricting or banning violence in news accounts, movies, or even books.

California's law defines a violent video game as one that "appeals to a deviant or morbid interest of minors," is "patently offensive" to prevailing community standards and lacks "serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value." Those are subjective standards on which reasonable people could easily disagree.

LULZY #4-Guarding the First Amendment often means protecting the right of people to say or do things that most Americans find repulsive, such as Nazis marching in a Jewish neighborhood in Skokie, Ill. But the alternative is to arbitrarily pick and choose who's entitled to free expression and who isn't. In that world, anyone might be deprived of rights reserved for individuals since the nation's founding." - USATODAY full article- HERE

WOW WHAT A A LOAD OF STOOF. So imma break it downon how wrong this is.

Now many of my counter augments are similar because the flaws in their augments are repetitive. I will kepp them short though because i am tired and because I made you guys read that long string of bs above.

Stupid Point 1-
"We think not"- well you think stupidly. The state of CA enforces the law that stopped me from entering R rated movies before I was 17>. While most of these movies were rated R because of nudity- some were rated R because of VIOLENCE. Now answer me this whats worse; watching someone be killed in a movie or killing someone in a video game and then watching them die, usually in a much more graphic way. ( I mean in a movie to get shot- while in some video games you get lit on fire and then pissed on???)

My solution? To buy a M rated game you gotta be17+ to buy a E10+ you gotta be 10+ ect. Make sense? They do it to movies.

Lie 2-
So let me tell you how easy it is to buy stuff without your parent knowing....VERY EASY. I mean honestly I have bought so many things with out my Parents knowledge- from walmart, from target. Parents need as much help as they can get protecting their children.


WOW 3-
So...it constitutional to censor porn, but not violence. Lets say I agree with that for a minute. Let me show a study I have done.
STUDY-
I searched ESRB (us game rating company) for intensely violent games and I got 347 games.
I surveyed the first 50.
Care to guess how many had: either Nudity, Partial Nudity, Sexual Themes, Sexual Content ect as well as intense violence? 28/50, that's more than half that have some kind of pornography.

Lulzy 4-
Not that hard just base it off of ESRB it has a very complex and fair rating system that uses over 30 components to issue 6 ratings that range in age from toddlers to teens to adults.

Problem solved.