4 ms·

Here's the bill: https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=3531&GAID=16&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=132549&SessionID=110&GA=102 https://www.ilga.gov/legisla

Here's the bill: https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=3531&GAID=16&DocTypeID=HB&LegId=132549&SessionID=110&GA=102 https://www.ilga.gov/legislation/BillStatus.asp?DocNum=3531&... ("Bill Status of HB3531 102nd General Assembly") The synopsis of the bill (provided at the link above): > Amends the Violent Video Games Law in the Criminal Code of 2012. Changes provisions that restricts the sale or rental of violent video games to minors to prohibit the sale of all violent video games. Modifies the definition of "violent video game" to mean a video game that allows a user or player to control a character within the video game that is encouraged to perpetuate human-on-human violence in which the player kills or otherwise causes serious physical or psychological harm to another human or an animal. Modifies the definition of "serious physical harm" to include psychological harm and child abuse, sexual abuse, animal abuse, domestic violence, violence against women, or motor vehicle theft with a driver or passenger present inside the vehicle when the theft begins. Makes conforming changes, including repealing a Section concerning the labeling of violent video games by video game retailers. I am gonna take a atypical/non-standard opinion (for HN) on this -- I wholeheartedly support this proposed bill. We already have First Amendment restrictions when it comes to the depiction of a certain type of crime (i.e. a certain type of pornography). If that 1st Am. exemption is legal and permissible, then it should constitutional for that exemption to cover other crimes as well. I see no reason why the depiction of the commission of other types of crime should be legal, permissible, and even popular (as shown by how many buy games like these). You can still make a lot of interesting video games that don't involve gratuitous user-directed violence / other crime. Heck, I think the whole video game scene will become a lot more interesting and creative once a ban like this is put into law. One last note: I don't think this bill would lead any reduction in real-world crime. I know that was the reason this bill was introduced, but I find that kind of connection to be spurious at best. I think a real reason we should ban depictions of crimes and violence (often where the player is the one perpetrating it), is that it simply is distasteful, and if I may say so--a tad bit morally not-good.

outworlder 6y ago
There aren't many games that do not promote physical harm to imaginary entities. Even Minecraft does this, and that's a healthy game where the main focus is not even on killing, it's more on the building side. Even something like Factorio involves violence against "animals" (whatever those aliens are). Mario would be banned. This leaves Tetris I guess and puzzle games in general. Frogger is also too violent as it involves harm to an animal by motor vehicles. Pacman involves violence. Should movies be banned too? There's a lot of gratuitous violence in them. Much like movies, most games are about some sort of conflict. Sometimes this conflict is violent, sometimes it isn't. Also how does leaving people with no outlets to blow off steam helps them behave in real life? The 'video game scene' is extremely creative already, if you just move away from mainstream publishers.
- krapp 6y ago
  Even chess is simulated combat.
gareim 6y ago
> I think a real reason we should ban depictions of crimes and violence (often where the player is the one perpetrating it), is that it simply is distasteful I find this to be incredibly distasteful, but I would not advocate for speaking this aloud to be banned. You, on the other hand, might be inclined to ban your own opinions, if sufficient numbers agree with me?
LocalH 6y ago
I find it distasteful that you would basically return to the Hays Code.

outworlder 6y ago

There aren't many games that do not promote physical harm to imaginary entities. Even Minecraft does this, and that's a healthy game where the main focus is not even on killing, it's more on the building side. Even something like Factorio involves violence against "animals" (whatever those aliens are). Mario would be banned. This leaves Tetris I guess and puzzle games in general. Frogger is also too violent as it involves harm to an animal by motor vehicles. Pacman involves violence. Should movies be banned too? There's a lot of gratuitous violence in them. Much like movies, most games are about some sort of conflict. Sometimes this conflict is violent, sometimes it isn't. Also how does leaving people with no outlets to blow off steam helps them behave in real life? The 'video game scene' is extremely creative already, if you just move away from mainstream publishers.

krapp 6y ago
Even chess is simulated combat.

gareim 6y ago

> I think a real reason we should ban depictions of crimes and violence (often where the player is the one perpetrating it), is that it simply is distasteful I find this to be incredibly distasteful, but I would not advocate for speaking this aloud to be banned. You, on the other hand, might be inclined to ban your own opinions, if sufficient numbers agree with me?

LocalH 6y ago

I find it distasteful that you would basically return to the Hays Code.