The Video-Game Law Shall be Upheld by the Supreme Court

As the November Supreme Court date looms, the discussion of the California video game law reaches to a fever pitch. As most of you may know, California State Senator Leland Lee PhD authored the controversial law with Attorney General Brown and Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger appealing the a lower court's decision. The law, if upheld, will forbid the sale and rental of ultra-violent video games to children. While researching multiple news articles, video-game and entertainment outlets have deemed the law an infringement of free speech. And giving the law no chance in winning its' appeal at the Supreme Court.

We are wrong, very wrong.

First and foremost, a few Westernized countries have become more and more conservative over time. We all know about the Internet censorship in China, North Korea, Iran and Cuba, but did you know the US, Australia and the UK all partake in their form of censorship?

From the creation of free speech zones in the US, a draconian Australian Classification Board and the UK's Coroners and Justice Act 2009 are examples of such means to protect its' citizens from themselves and from obscenity. The United States has a similar law as the United Kingdom with the PROTECT Act, which is fully enforced to the letter. Just ask American Manga collector Christopher Handley who was sentenced to 6 years of prison for importing lolicon and yaoi Manga from Japan (no children were exposed to the said Manga).

The Lost Girls written by Alan Moore may be difficult to import and even own in the UK.

Many keen eye readers may notice that there is a key difference between Leland Lee's Law and the PROTECT Act, one is set to protect children from violence rather child pornography and sexual abuse. And I agree, the material is rather different, yet the process of censorship is the same, elected officials are dead set to protect America's children with an all or nothing blanket of protection. Pornography is censored on the grounds of obscenity, and now brutal-violence is under-fire.

When does the madness stop? How about, in a effort to fight child obesity, fine fast food joints who offer a toy in their meal without offering a healthy food? That law is coming soon to a city near you. Yet school yard bullying continues in the LBGT community, anchor babies are under fire and education in the US continues to be under-staffed and under-budgeted. The hypocrisy is lays thick on American culture.

There is a silver lining, of course, maybe we can start to protect our children from brutal violent movies too. Let's start with California Governor's Terminator movie. After watching the movie as a child, I was compelled to vote for him, too scared to think of the consequences if I had voted Democrat or, gasp, Green. When the video game law does get upheld, and lets just say it does, other entertainment mediums alike; film, music and comic books will come under fire.

The comic book industry has suffered these attacks as well. The Comic Book Legal Defense Fund (think of them the ACLU of comics) have come to aid of defendants when prosecutors have encroached onto the First Amendment Rights of creators, retailers and consumers. CBLDF even filed a brief on behalf of the ESA, saying the law as found on their site "would undermine more First Amendment principles in a single case that any decision in living memory." The line between art and a consumer goods are being blurred.

There is much discussion on the definition of video-games, which are popular with all ages, as a consumer product or have artistic merit like a novel or a movie. The argument is, video-games, in the creation and marketing process, have more in common with a bar of soap than a comic book. Regardless, the decision may be handed to Americans by the Supreme Court in the the ruling of Schwarzenegger v ECA.

[embed:http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQglxqoMod8 ]

Brutal Violent Scenes of Dead Space

These men and women of the Supreme Court are appointed by the same lawmakers who drafted the said video-game law. A scary thought indeed. The video-game law may be very well upheld, even after all the legal mumbo jumbo, the Supreme Court wants to protect the children from violent images and content, just like they do with child pornography.

They might argue brain maturation or how violence does indeed affect children by offer countless of medical studies that hardly make any sense. More mumbo jumbo. Or they might just upheld the previous rulings, striking down the law and say it is a Federal duty to protect the children or something to that effect. Maybe the Supreme Court Justices will amend the PROTECT Act and include violent images too. Especially if violent images are brutal, heinous, atrocious or cruel, because anyone with a law degree can tell difference.

On a second thought, we do live in a country where an Iowan Republican Congressional candidate defends his Nazi dress-up as Historical re-enactment, yet playing as the Taliban in a Medal of Honor multiplayer match is met with self-censorship. Think of the children.