The Hall of Shame 01.30.08: Anti-Gaming Politicians

Posted by Vincent Chiucchi on 01.30.2008

When it comes to these guys, it was better if they kept their mouths shut about it

The United States Government has to put up with a lot of bullshit in this country. When you have the job of running a country that a lot of the world hates and is full of retards who call themselves "9/11 Truthers", it's really hard. So you'd think with all the serious issues in this world, they wouldn't waste their time with such trivial nonsense such as how violent video games are supposedly making our kids shoot schools and the supposed sexual content you can find, right?

Unfortunately, they do, and even worse, they don't even do a good job of it. Trying to find a senator or congressman or someone of that ilk that actually knows what they're talking about and try to do good is like trying to find a licensed TV/Movie game that doesn't suck. Occasionally you'll find one, but it's surrounded by a heaping pile of unholy crap.

In this Hall of Shame, we induct the people that need to get out of Washington DC not only for the sake of gamers, but for the country. If they can't even get trivial, easy-to-research information about video games right, can you trust them on even greater issues like taxes and war? Because compared to the guy we had over the past 7 years, we definitely can't.

Byron Dorgan (D-North Dakota) – Night Trap beats up kids

Joseph Lieberman is a hit or miss guy when it comes to video games. Sometimes he'll be a hit when he says the ESRB has a great ratings system, while sometimes he'll be a miss when he starts sponsoring new bills like the Family Entertainment Protection Act, which fines and jails anybody who sells M-rated games to minors. Lieberman is a big name when it comes to video games, because it was him along with Herbert Kohl who held a congressional hearing in 1993 about the violence in video games, mostly due to Mortal Kombat and Night Trap. This hearing is what eventually led to the ESRB, the game industry's way of regulating content so that the government doesn't.

Even though Lieberman and Kohl were the ones who set up this hearing and set a couple of wrong things to describe the games, the one I have the problem with the most is Bryon Dorgan. Here's a statement he made about Night Trap:

"Shame on people who produce that trash, it's child abuse in my judgement."

So Byron Dorgan thinks that playing Night Trap was as bad as getting beaten by your parents or school bullies. I'm not a child psychologist, but I don't think watching something as violent as Night Trap (and it was barely even violent to begin with) is as mentally scarring as getting beaten every other night by a drunken father. But does at he least gets the goal of the game right?

"It's an effort to trap and kill women."

Funny, I thought the game was about trying to SAVE these women. The only possible way to purposely trap and kill the women is to basically keep switching channels until one of them gets trapped. I would say you can just put the controller down and watch it play itself, but you get a game over in the intro scene if you do that. (For more information on Night Trap, see my Night Trap induction)

Overall: They kept talking about how horrible Night Trap was and what was in it, but none of them actually played the game. Lieberman even admitted it himself according to Tom Zito, CEO of the company that made the game. Starting a congressional hearing over something you don't even know 100% about? But in the end, at least it was all for the best because we have the ESRB. Unless you work for/support Rockstar.

Joe Baca (D-California) – Loves the kids, hates doing research

Joe Baca loves kids. At least, I think he might since his official website has a "Kids Zone" on it and he says he's concerned about the dangers that the World Wide Web pose to children. Baca was also concerned about the video games that get into children's hands, as back in 2003 he made a press release stating how he was going to introduce a new bill called the "Protect Children from Video Game Sex and Violence Act", an act that will...well, it's obvious. But why the need for such an act Baca?

"By introducing the new and improved Protect Children from Video Game Sex and Violence Act, we're sending a loud and clear message to the video game industry and retailers: parents will decide what games their children should purchase and play, not you!"

Yes, because GOD ONLY KNOWS that American parents just don't have the power necessary to decide what kids play. For years kids have been forced to play M-rated games by those bastards working at GameStop, while the parents could only stand back and realize just how powerless they were in making their children not play video games! Next thing you know, these kids will be forced to drugs and alcohol, and without any sort of bills stopping them, what can parents possibly do?! OH THE HUMANITY! Do something Baca!

Aside from his asinine bill making, in the same press release he points out some of the games that led him to making that bill. GTA of course tops the list, followed by State of Emergency, then "Max Pain", a terrible misspelling of Max Payne. Then comes DOA: Xtreme Beach Volleyball. Huh? I know the game was more about looking at hot chicks rather then playing volleyball, but what's so controversial about it?

"[DOA Xtreme Beach Volleyball] allows players to create female characters with full control over breast size and the option to have the character appear topless."

Ah yes, the whole "characters can appear topless" crap. You see, when the game came out a lot people who apparently never heard of hentai wanted to know how they can get to see the characters nude. In April 2003, EGM printed a fake code where you can see the characters topless, and apparently it wasn't only gamers that fell for this trick. Although, I don't know where Baca got information that you can have full control over the characters breasts.

Overall: Baca seems to have his heart in the right place, but he can't get facts straight and this bill seems more like a parent substitute, because I'm pretty sure parents were always able to decide what games kids can purchase and play. As for the act, it looks like it died down because I've haven't seen any updates about it since 2003.

Ed Perlmutter (D-Colorado) - Video games rape kids

In September 2006, Perlmutter ran for U.S. House 7th District, and in his political ad he mentions violent video games. Unfortunately the ad formerly on YouTube has been taken down, but one quote from the ad has stuck out:

"In Congress I will fight to pass laws protecting kids from online predators and violent video games."

And I thought Byron Dorgan was bad. Perlmutter apparently thinks that violent violent video games are as dangerous as child rapists. Considering that child sex offenders can face times of 14 to 20 years, that is a VERY exaggerated comparison. Should a GameStop clerk really spend 20 years in prison for selling a violent game to a kid? Sadly, if people like Perlmutter are elected into congress, that could be a possible future.

Wait...you mean he actually WON the Colorado congressional district election?! OH FUCK!

Overall: Ed Perlmutter needs to get his priorities straightened out. Seriously, putting online predators and violent video games in the same category? You might as well put petty larceny in the same category as mass genocide.

Sam Brownback (R-Kansas) – Does not really know the video game industry

Oh Hot Coffee, how you've changed the video game world. Thanks to you, a lot of people think that the ESRB can't do a good job on rating video games, all because you had to hide yourself and thought no one would find you. Senators have been trying to pass bills and laws nearly every month since then to control the violence in video games. One of those bills being the "Truth in Video Game Rating Act." Why does Brownback think this bill is necessary?

"The current video game ratings system needs improvement because reviewers do not see the full content of games and don't even play the games they are supposed to rate. For video game ratings to be meaningful and worthy of a parent's trust, the game ratings must be more objective and accurate."

So what exactly does this act do?

1: Makes the ESRB play every video game they get completely
2: Have the FTC specifically define parameters for describing game content
3: A Government Accountability Office will determine the efficacy of the ESRB

The problems with this bill are overwhelming. First of all, if the ESRB were to play every single video game completely, that would take WAY too long to get anything done. Either that or they start hiring the same amount of people that there are games released per month, which would mean they need at least 50. Yes, it may come as a shock to you, but every month there are 50 or more new video games released, and a majority of them aren't the triple A franchises (or even single A) that he's obviously trying to target.

Secondly, what about games that technically have no ending, like MMOs? How do you fairly rate a game like that? Then what about mods of video games? Or how players decide to behave online? Plus the ratings technically isn't even in control of the ESRB, since the bill also states that the FTC will defining the parameters of game content. God forbid the FTC decide to define parameters such as sex the same way Fox News does, or consider games like Super Mario Bros to be extremely violent because of all the enemies you technically kill. Then to top it all off, the whole thing will be watched over by the Government Accountability Office to rate the performance of the group and look into alternate game ratings. So really, the ESRB doesn't have any actual power in rating these games. They'll only be forced to play it and then be ignored by everyone.

Overall: Sam Brownback doesn't know a whole lot about the video game industry and this bill is so horrible I pray that it never passes. He, like many others, thinks it's all Grand Theft Auto and Manhunt.

Andrew Lanza (R-Staten Island) – Only murderers are good at GTA

Why is it that the politicians only want to point out how the violent games make us violent people? There are plenty of stories that come out about how people save each others lives because of something they learn from video games, but those stories always seem to get overlooked by these people. However, Lanza here takes it to a new level by assuming we're already violent people to begin with. Back in April 2007, Lanza decided to create a senate task force, a group that will explore legislation to tighten age restrictions of video games. When talking about the "culture of violence", here's what Lanza had to say about the game:

"You win by killing New York City police officers. You score points for picking up prostitutes. The better a mass murderer you are, the better you do at the game."

Take a close look at that quote. He doesn't say if you're good at the game you'll become a killer. He says the better you are at killing someone in real life, the better you are at playing this video game. So basically, if you're good at playing Grand Theft Auto, then congratulations, you're a serial killer. I don't know if this guy got his words mixed up or what, but either way, Lanza is an idiot.

Overall: Considering that he made this statement sometime after the Virginia Tech Massacre, which I listed as the most shameful moment of 2007 for people assuming Cho was a gamer, Lanza is even more of an idiot. I would love to kill this guy, but unfortunately I sucked at GTA: Vice City, so I guess this means I'm not a good murderer.

If these politicians are going to get themselves involved in the issues of violent video games, is it really so hard to ask that they at least get all the facts and their priorities straight? Or better yet, how about staying away from the issue altogether? That would actually work out a whole lot better.