Friday, March 04, 2005
A person may file a personal injury or wrongful death lawsuit against a manufacturer or retailer of a violent video or computer game who has distributed, sold, or rented a violent video game to a person under the age of 17 if the game was a factor in creating conditions that assisted or encouraged the person to cause injury to death to another person.
What do they consider violent? Will they spell it out in the bill? If you look at it, most video games can be considered violent. Super Mario Brother has Mario running around jumping on and flaming Koopas. Paper Boy has you busting out windows and beaming people with news papers. Zelda Wind Breaker for all its sick cuteness has you attacking enemies with a sword. Hell the only games right now that come to mind that do not have violence are Tetras and Myst, a game that created violence due to its extreme boredom and lame story.
So if a kid rents Super Mario Brothers from Block Buster, and starts throwing balls of flaming paper, to imitate Mario's flower power, and burns someone or sets a fire, then the burned person can sue Block Buster? What if the kid barrowed the game form a friend? Due they sue the friend, or the manufacturer/retailer that sold it the other person?
"If you sit up and watch this and play these games over and over again... it seems that this is alright to walk up and hit a police officer over the head with a bat," Hanson said.
Wrong Mr. Hanson, the thing that makes a person think that it is aright to hit people over the head with a bat, is that fact that they have no fear of being punished for doing it. Thanks to dumb ass bills like this, and the recent ruling from the Supreme Court regarding juveniles and the death penalty, people can get away with murder.