Under a new bill introduced in the New York State Legislature, Governor Elliot Spitzer has targeted the sale of violent video games, restricting their access under similar rules restricting those under 17 in movie theaters.

Spitzer said he will soon provide a bill that would target the ratings of video movies and video games “that are often violent and degrading” and can hurt children who repeatedly use and view them.

Under Spitzer’s proposal, retailers who sell violent or degrading videos or video games to children contrary to the rating would be sanctioned.

Earlier this year, Hillary Clinton supported two similar measures, proposed by Keith Wright and Aurelia Greene, to restrict access to violent videos and video games.  Governor Spitzer’s bill is also similar to the previous two and he has outlined details in his targeting of those who sell the games to minors.

Again, we have the government raising our children because parents are, apparently, too damned lazy to regulate what their children can and cannot see.  While the very idea disgusts me that the government is telling people what is and isn’t good for you, parents today are more and more irresponsible in raising their own children.  They haven’t a clue, and are happy that way, in what their children are seeing, reading, and learning.  Everything is left up to some state agency to be responsible for their children instead of stepping up to the plate and being an adult themselves.

Children today rail against their parents because they won’t give them a cell phone, GTA San Andreas, or let them run the streets whenever they want.  Parents give in, out of frustration, stupidity, or sheer exhaustion from arguing.  Parents are the adults in these situations but they simply lack the parenting skills to tell their child “no” and enforce that statement.

As the adults, what the parents say should be law.  They shouldn’t care how they look towards other parents.  They shouldn’t feel guilty for telling their kids no.  They should be more involved, making sure that they are raising happy, healthy, and well-adjusted children.  They should not allow their children to browbeat them into submission.  But they do.  And that is why we end up with silly legislation such as this.

Another factor to consider in this law is that all ratings systems are currently voluntary and extremely subjective.  What is considered violent to one, isn’t to another.  If such a law is to exist, it should be for all forms of entertainment and there should be strict guidelines spelled out so that there isn’t the appearance of flip-flopping from one item to the next.  The current ESRB rating system is also far stricter than those of the movie industry.

It will also be difficult to pass this law and, then, keep the law on the books.  Louisiana just lost such a case.  In fact, the judge berated the state for not paying attention to what has happened to similar laws in other states.  Still, the group said they were not deterred and that they were going to try again, wasting millions of dollars more on something that most stores already voluntarily do.

Mississippi’s proposed law died in committee.  Utah teamed up with nutcase Jack Thompson but their proposed law died in committee after everyone realized that the law might be unconstitutional, was poorly written, and would be difficult to defend in court.  Indiana’s bill was initially welcomed and had fines detailed for retailers who would break the law, but, after some discussion about its constitutionality, it was tabled to a committee for further study.

Now, state lawmakers are more cognizant of the constitutionality issues at stake. The judicial landscape is littered with the charred husks of laws passed by Illinois, Washington, Michigan, California, Louisiana, and others. All of them tried in some way or another to regulate the sale of violent video games to children, and all of them were struck down on First Amendment grounds.

The New York law only legislates parents further than they do now.  Any discipline enacted against a child could bring social services running to “protect the children.”  We have become far too accustomed to allowing the government to legislate how we should raise our children that we can no longer decide for ourselves what is the proper course of action.

In the 1980s, when I was a teenager, if you walked to the corner store and said, “Dad needs a pack of smokes,” it was no problem.  Everyone knew it was for your father.  You could see R rated movies as a teenager and there wasn’t a problem unless you caused a ruckus in the theater during the movie.  When your family had a party, you were allowed a drink or two because your parents, aunts, uncles, and older cousins made sure things didn’t get out of hand.  When you wanted to go hunting, you often carried your rifle with you.  You knew the safety precautions and were responsible with the weapon.

You simply cannot do these things today because of the fear of repercussions from the State.  Even if you play it straight and do what the State says, if your child does something wrong, you’re still responsible.  You’re somehow a horrible parent, even though the state has regulated to death what you can and can’t do and how your child should behave.

Instead of “thinking of the children” by protecting them from video games, maybe they should pump all that money into creating better health care and education for the children.  That way, the parents will be able to make these decisions for themselves and the government won’t have to legislate entertainment.

We also need to better educate parents on how to be parents.  Again, as a child of the 80s, my parents simply would not give me money for such violent games.  In the past, parents would self-regulate such items, including movies.  Many would check out the movies or video games first to see if it was appropriate for their child.  Our society today has moved towards a more lenient attitude of letting everyone do whatever they want, whenever they want.  Accountability for one’s actions has shifted to the government, or whomever else can be blamed at the moment, leaving once common tasks, such as conflict resolution and decision making, an antiquated ideology.

If no one will take responsibility for their actions, the only recourse is for the government to make the decision for you.  Unfortunately, parents are far too concerned with their careers, images, and having more stuff than their neighbors.  They no longer take the time to be fully involved with their children.  What we end up with is the State telling parents that they are too stupid to raise their children and the State knows best.

Yes, violent video games may trigger violence in an individual but that violence was  already in the individual.  If family and friends pay attention to the individual, then they would recognize the behavior and, possibly, be able to prevent such actions.  Then again, that would require others to stop paying attention to themselves for a moment and focus on someone else, something today’s society is utterly lacking.

We are full of self-indulgent gluttons, from Joe Average to the White House, who would rather get what they want than be responsible for raising the next generation of Americans.  Instead of improving the quality of life, we are diluting it with too much of a garbage-in garbage-out culture, leaving the next generation lost and confused in the world.  This is a generation of parents who dealt with constant attacks to their music, having it banned in some places.  You’d think that they would be smarter than to just accept what the government tells them is true.