nothings wrong with this law and that from someone in The Netherlands......

No, it would be wrong for retailers to display A-rated games, since that's the video game industry's equivalent of an X (or NC-17) rating. M is equivalent to an R rating.

Yes, there are A-rated games. No, you will not find them being displayed in retailers.
In fact you won't even know that the store has them unless you ask for a copy from under the counter... But on the other hand, I can't think of an A-rated game that was even half decent.

The bad parts of the bill were stripped out... I don't see what the problem is about informing parents (or consumers in general) of a game's content before purchase.

Deep breaths, everyone.

Parents can allow their children to play with games that are understood as not appropriate for their age, but when you have retailers demonstrating mature games in their stores, that's wrong. The situation is as though smut shops would display porn videos to kids in the aisle of a shopping mall. The retailers must be more responsible when carrying and displaying the games in their establishments.

More and more, you're sounding like a Republican. Remember, "it takes a village." (I can't believe I'm quoting Hillary Clinton.)

I'm certainly not discounting the role and responsibility of parents. Its premium. But, not every parent is "hip" to what is in a title. Just think how many parents get a confused look in their eyes when a new rock band is mentioned. Warnings are there to catch the parent's eye.

Man, who pissed in your Wheaties today?

Jealous of what? Rolling blackouts? Drought? 7 hours to drive 10 miles?
This issue is all about a parent's responsibility. Violent video games or otherwise doesn't desensitize children. It's a lack of parental guidance that does that.
How would a child know right from wrong if a parent doesn't teach it? It's not TV's fault or a game developer's.
If a child can't distinguish fantasy from reality, then the parent has a way more serious problem than video game violence.

By the way, the sponsor of the bill, Assemblyman Leland Yee, is ... a Democrat.

Good point, deckels.

This is the type of video game regulation that we want. I don't see how anyone could argue with doing a better job of displaying ratings. The best defense against dumb lawsuits is a strict rating system that's actually enforced. That way, parents have no one but themselves to play, becuase they must have bought the offensive video game for their kids themselves.

California may have some problems, but it's a great state. I think you're just jealous.

If I was a Republican, I'd likely be making sweeping generalizations, like you.

If I was a Republican, I wouldn't support warnings.

Keep in mind we're talking about warnings, not preventing people from purchasing the product. The same type of warnings that are used in the movie industry.

For me, the issue over kids playing GTA or watching wanton violence on TV, or at the movies is NOT that they will go out and commit such crimes, but that they become desensitized to such crimes and nonreactive to the plight of their "fellow man."

Since you want facts, go look up the recent MJ case. Look at how many times that kid's parents have sued on behalf of their child. I provide you with facts and you're shooting blanks.
Yep, the typical republiKKKan.

Every single incident involving a child's stupid actions results in a lawsuit against game developers. Why?
Explain how it's the developer's fault that the parent buys their 8 yr old Grand Theft Auto and has loaded rifles all over the house?
You sound like the typical idiot republican who wants to blame everyone else for your own stupidity.
I don't expect you to respond with logic since that's too much for a moron like yourself.

...somebody's mommy & daddy didn't play with him enough.

As a parent, you could NOT buy your kids games and READ to them, PLAY with them, ENJOY your life with them.

Also, maybe Schwarzenneger should look at enforcing gun control on automatic weapons, increasing education budgets, insure a healthy environment for the future (in social and natural concerns) and stop giving breaks to greedy corporations.

Typical dumbass Republicanism at work again!

As usual, people who make huge assumptions about having children should just make this place better, and off themselves.

Sucka!

...
...
...

Having kids for those reasons must really be worth it, considering what you might end up with. Like say, some kid who grows up believing people have kids for material reasons. :sheesh:

It's typical that a stupid bill like this one would be passed in an idiotic state like California.
As usual, today's parents have kids for two reasons:
1) Tax breaks
2) Lawsuits
If you think there's other reasons, you're kidding yourself.

Good old common sense prevails.

Thank God. I hate it when people take scapegoat their poor parenting skills on the gaming industry. This is good cause it doesn't restrict the sale of games, yet it strives to help people make more informed decisions about if their kids are mature enough to play a certain game.

Huh, aren't "M" games harmful to children? The only rational for fighting such warnings is the fear of losing revenue, which only proves the need for the warnings.