Selling R18 games to minors

[Marked 197]

I recently saw a tv show discussing stores selling r18 video games to minors(or under 18 years old). A lot of them did sell the games to the minors.

 

This topic is about the consequences of doing so. In NZ, these are the penalties:

Anyone who supplies restricted games or movies can be fined $10,000, or imprisoned for three months, and their employer can be fined $25,000.

 

These values are in NZD, so 10,000NZD = 6,752USD.

 

Okay, are these penalties too high? Are they too low? Is possible imprisonment necessary or even an appropriate penalty for selling R18 games to minors?

 

Since the majority of users are from america, does anyone know the penalties there?

 

Discuss....

[Wyzrd 12]

I do not know the penalties here. But I do believe it doesn't matter if the games are sold to the kids or not. If they want the game, their gonna find a way to get it one way or another.

 

Perfect example. http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2008/12/bo...hot_dad_ov.html

[LovePhoenix 3]

Agreeing with Wyzrd. There are torrents and hacks and other ways kids can get those games. And I personally don't think there should be a penalty for those who sell R18 games to minors. When a little kid comes to your store and asks for some adult game, you'd give it to him. It's not really your business what that kid would do with it anyway.

 

@Wyzrd: Oh my gosh, that is really one disturbing article, even if it's old. O.O

[rgangsta 43]

The penalty is too high. It should be at most 800. Although, violent games do influence kids to go do stupid things.

[Nisage 31]

Penilty is to low, and kids shouldn't get games if they are to young to play them. This is why games have ratings, to make sure kids dont play any/all games that are not appropriate for them.

 

@LovePhoenix: It should be their buisness, they shouldn't sell kids adult games, period.

[Wyzrd 12]

Agreeing with Wyzrd. There are torrents and hacks and other ways kids can get those games. And I personally don't think there should be a penalty for those who sell R18 games to minors. When a little kid comes to your store and asks for some adult game, you'd give it to him. It's not really your business what that kid would do with it anyway.

 

@Wyzrd: Oh my gosh, that is really one disturbing article, even if it's old. O.O

That article is less then a year old, so not really that old.

 

The penalty is too high. It should be at most 800. Although, violent games do influence kids to go do stupid things.

So from what your saying, we should penalize kids for watching TV too? Just as much violence in kid's cartoons nowadays.

 

Penilty is to low, and kids shouldn't get games if they are to young to play them. This is why games have ratings, to make sure kids dont play any/all games that are not appropriate for them.

 

@LovePhoenix: It should be their buisness, they shouldn't sell kids adult games, period.

Sure maybe kids shouldn't get ames. But in this generation kids are gonna get them anyways regardless of the rating. I remember back when Grand Theft Auto: Vice City came out. I really wanted it but I wasn't old enough to get it, and my mom wouldn't get it for me. So I just asked my grandma and she got it. Hell, my grandma even plays it. This a little off topic but its kind of to prove a point. Playing video games you shouldn't is like have sex when you shouldn't. It keeps getting younger and younger all the time. It's not going to stop either, unless you have the time to stand over the kid's shoulder all day every week.

[Nisage 31]

That is sad really :(

[Wyzrd 12]

It is, but unfortunately it's reality. Sooner or later everyone has to wake up to it.

[CrimsonInferno 35]

The penalty is too high. It should be at most 800. Although, violent games do influence kids to go do stupid things.

No it doesn't. What influences the kid, is if he/she has a sick mind. I never wanted to go kill people when I played GTA locked version (brother hacked it so he cut out all the hookers and stuff. I was only allowed to run people over and beat them) and I never, ever had that feeling and I was younger than the boy who killed his mother.

Its strange to see people thinking it will make kids do something so fucking stupid when they won't.

 

Have you've guys watched the Penn and Teller show? They proved that kid with a sane mind would not do such things. They got a boy to play GTA and shoot down some people. Than, they gave him a gun to shoot at the targets in the woods. You know what he did? Shot it and missed. He broke down in tears for firing that damn thing. He was so sick with himself for firing it, he started to cry. Normally sane kids will NOT have the problem they claim.

 

Children will not emulate what they see or hear or do on video games, its retarded. I see it happening more with adults than kids! <_< :angry:

 

The penalty is set TOO high. Children will find a way to get those games, even if they have to pay an adult to get it for them. It'll happen. Just don't let children with weak, not so stable minds go anywhere near such games.

 

Also, that article is very sad indeed. I heard about it a while ago, fresh. My mother was creeped out.

But, like I said. Look at the boy...I wouldn't have gotten it for him either, because it looks like he has a weak mind, which is what snapped and made him kill his mother.

[LovePhoenix 3]

It's really the kids' fault, not the games' or those who sell it. If they know it has a specific rating, why do they play it? And like everyone said, sane kids wouldn't go copying what they see in the games and doing it in real life. Only those children without a stable mind should be prevented from playing. Hell, I am 13 and I did play R18 games. But it's because I know I can never do violent stuff or anything like that.

[Wyzrd 12]

Also, that article is very sad indeed. I heard about it a while ago, fresh. My mother was creeped out.

But, like I said. Look at the boy...I wouldn't have gotten it for him either, because it looks like he has a weak mind, which is what snapped and made him kill his mother.

I agree with everything you said except above quote. You can not look at someone and tell if they have a weak mind or not.

 

It's really the kids' fault, not the games' or those who sell it. If they know it has a specific rating, why do they play it? And like everyone said, sane kids wouldn't go copying what they see in the games and doing it in real life. Only those children without a stable mind should be prevented from playing. Hell, I am 13 and I did play R18 games. But it's because I know I can never do violent stuff or anything like that.

I disagree with the sane thing. A perfectly sane person could commit acts of violence if pushed far enough, or under certain situations. I consider myself sane and I have done plenty violent things. But does that make me not sane. NO!.

[LovePhoenix 3]

I am pretty sure that a sane person, who knows right from wrong, would not do such a thing like that boy, though. I wouldn't kill my parents just because they prevented me from playing a video game.

[Enigma 10]

Well, the whole rating thing is really bad way to judge maturity. But its the only feasible way to do rate things by maturity. When someone becomes 18 they don't magically mature. They are just by law in america allowed to live on their own. It should depend on the parent.

 

:mellow:

 

Honestly, I might sound a bit in left field when I say this, it should be parents discretion and the rating act as a warning to parents. If the parent doesn't think their child is mature enough to handle games, they should either check their ratings, or not buy them the game in the first place, internet can be parental controled so that they aren't allowed to get it online, and console games or computer games are generally feature the most mature content and can only be played at home, in control of the parents, Parents who feel their children are responsible or don't simply think games could harm them would let the children have leeway.

 

:huh:

 

In my opinion if people who sell r18 games to minors should be fined, so should people who let underaged children watch r18 be fined as well, same thing with Tv-14. Honestly, I like destructive games mainly because Its an outlet for my destructive side. There is a difference b/w running over some halo dude who can respawn at any point and curse at u later, in game players are invincible, or can die an infinite number of times. Real life however is more precious. Video games and other forms of entertainment shouldn't be a blame for violence. Instead of wasting money to catch ppl selling r18 games to minors, it should go into schools so that their will be less REAL Violence on the streets.

 

<_<

 

Video games is just a scape goat. Its used to hide weakness in society. I mean seriously, the majority of people who commit crimes don't play video games before it. Furthermore, criminal activity as been around alot longer than videogames. The Crimewave of the 1980 or 1970 didn't have much but pong. Unless of course Pong did contain all that stuff in a hidden level. The parents are also at fault, being to god damn lazy to watch their kids play the game or read the god damn back of the cover or even the front cover for that matter. I mean the infrastructure is their, all 6th generation systems have parental controls, and all 5th generation systems have 200+ E or E10 Games, I DONT EVEN HAVE 100 Games for my ps3, wii, xbox, ps2, and game cube combined. Its because they aren't trying.

 

:angry:

 

That's not always the case though, if it gets to an extreme case like in the article, they should get counseling or even cut off the internet if thats bad, if they had set the parental controls his 360 wouldnt be able to play halo 3, it was also the parents of the his freind for allowing their child to play or let the boy play the games with out his parents consent. If they had asked if whether his father approved or not, if his father said no, he would have never played the halo series in the first place.

 

 

-_-

 

EDIT: :ph34r: :D Sorry for the text CHUNK, when I type about things that intrest me I forget to format(Smileys added )

[CrimsonInferno 35]

I agree with everything you said except above quote. You can not look at someone and tell if they have a weak mind or not.

 

Yes, yes you can. Or I can at least. I live around mental unstable people. I saw my neighbor ONE time to know she's unstable. My mother said she wasn't, but you know what she's done since than? Poison and kill all my cats and poison her son and killed him for setting on the house on fire on 4th of July. She got away with it.

Mentally unstable! She also screams to herself....mentally unstable! I can tell :S

 

I disagree with the sane thing. A perfectly sane person could commit acts of violence if pushed far enough, or under certain situations. I consider myself sane and I have done plenty violent things. But does that make me not sane. NO!.

 

Who said they couldn't? 76% of the people who murder are not sane, Wyzrd. The rest are people who are sane and either enjoy doing it or had to to protect themselves.

[Marked 197]

The difficulty here is whether you guys believe that these video games influence the player or not.

 

I take developmental psychology at university and here is a quote from my course reader:

the researcher in the TV-violence investigation is unable, for ethical reasons, to manipulate the amount of violent TV viewed by the children. Suppose there was a very strong tendency for those who watched more violent TV to commit more aggressive acts. It would be tempting to conclude that watching violent TV was the cause of aggressive behavior. However, there are problems in drawing conclusions from the correlational studies. It may also be possible that situations at school invite aggression excite children to watch violent TV as a release. It is also possible that watching violent TV has absolutely no effect on the incidence of aggressive behavior. Both may be caused by a third variable, such as a child's personality or socio-economic status. Those who are aggressive by nature may be attracted to violent TV.

 

Going back to the original post, I can't really make a decision whether the penalty is too high. At first I thought so, but then I thought about the purpose of parliament when they made this law. The purpose is obviously to prevent selling R18 games/movies to minors, and would a smaller fine or no prison term "scare" them into obeying these rules as much as the current penalty does? And keep in mind, these are the maximum penalties that can be given.

 

As for the halo article... he clearly has psychological issues. For a start, if you kill you parents for taking away a video game, it is immediately obvious that you will no longer be able to play it for a very long time as a consequence, excluding the time immediately after you kill your parents.

 

@enigma: you may want to paragraph your posts if they are going to be so long or condense them. In my experience, very little members will take the time to read the long posts, unfortunately.

[Enigma 10]

@Marked: Ur right

 

I don't even think he was rationally thinking straight

 

 

Because he couldn't do simple cause and effect

 

Kill Parents---->Get In Big Trouble-----> No Halo 3

 

Many people lose their rational thought when they get angry, regardless of what the supposed influence may be.

 

BTW for those of you who didn't want to read my block of text, its now been fixed into user freindly format :D

 

SO READ IT NOW!!!!! :angry:

[Zeriab 9]

It sounds to me like they are trying to remove the commercial advantage stores can get from 'illegally' selling mature video games to minors.

If that indeed is the idea then the size of the fines makes perfectly sense. You must be able to hurt the stores financially to have any effect. If they can earn more than what it can cost them they will just continue.

I am all for the fines if they are aimed at preventing an 'illegal' unfair advantage.

[CrimsonInferno 35]

@Marked:

I for one, love to read long posts. It shows that person is intelligent, or...they post whole bunch of gibberish. Although, short posts with a lot said in it, is way better than a long post with nay a thing said in it.

Uh...forget it! lol

 

The prices are set way to high. I've already stating my opinion on this and if anyone would like to read it, can go back...unless I can say it again lol

 

It just shouldn't be that high; the kids are going to get it anyway.

[Marked 197]

@Marked:

I for one, love to read long posts. It shows that person is intelligent, or...they post whole bunch of gibberish. Although, short posts with a lot said in it, is way better than a long post with nay a thing said in it.

Uh...forget it! lol

Thats good to know, but I find that most will skip over it and ignore you completely. I dont necessarily agree that length shows intelligence though, but its true in some cases.

 

It sounds to me like they are trying to remove the commercial advantage stores can get from 'illegally' selling mature video games to minors.

If that indeed is the idea then the size of the fines makes perfectly sense. You must be able to hurt the stores financially to have any effect. If they can earn more than what it can cost them they will just continue.

I am all for the fines if they are aimed at preventing an 'illegal' unfair advantage.

I never thought about commercial advantage. They do teach us in economics to assume business entities' primary goal is to generate profit.

 

I actually should not have made my last post because it is, in a way, off topic. We have to ignore parliamentary purpose and assume it is the same purpose as restricting something like alcohol(which is 18 here, i think it used to be 21 at one stage). So the question is, does the punishment fit the crime?