Posted by patrickklepek (3398 posts) -
Senator Leland Yee has been the chief advocate and architect of California's push against games.

If you've been following the history of Brown v. EMA, you know who California Senator Leland Yee is. Yee has been one of the most consistent critics of violent video games, and he's the one responsible for writing the law the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against this morning. Obviously, he disagrees.

"What has happened today is that the U.S. Supreme Court has decided it's going to side with corporate America and Wal-Mart against our children," said Yee, as part of a press conference held today in San Francisco. "Because of the rejection of the California law, these games will continue to be sold to our children, these games have a harmful effect to our children."

Yee is a Democrat representing California's San Francisco and San Mateo districts. He's also running for mayor of San Francisco.

Several of Yee's supporters were present at the press conference. One of the key facets of the court's decision today was its rejection of the link between games and violence in youth, finding the evidence lacking in proving games are any worse than other media.

"In the past, we've protected them [children] from alcohol, cigarettes and pornography and we felt that this was on that level," said George Fouras, MD, of the San Francisco Medical Society. "We're accumulating evidence that shows that exposure to violence does effect the behavior of children. In addition, we're concerned that the cognitive development of youth and their ability to process and make decisions appropriate doesn't occur at the ages that these children are able to obtain these video games. Unlike Saturday morning cartoons, these video games expose kids to behavior that is not acceptable in reality."

Yee said the "silver lining" in the court's decision was raising the level of public awareness on the issue. He's certainly right, in that respect. You can't go higher than the U.S. Supreme Court. Yee also noted success in getting the video game industry to better enforce the sale of M-rated video games and "has worked to clarify some of their wrongs in their ratings system."

As noted in my reporting on the court opinion, this decision does not rule out another challenge. In fact, Justice Alito seemed to explicitly map out a path to a challenge. Yee made note of that.

"[Alito] does in fact seem to be laying out a pathway to how we might be able to craft a bill that would stand the test of the First Amendment challenge," he said. "If we craft the bill differently, there may be a basis for trying to get another hearing within the Supreme Court on this particular matter."

The journey for this bill has lasted eight years, though. Another challenge won't happen overnight.

Staff
#1 Posted by patrickklepek (3398 posts) -
Senator Leland Yee has been the chief advocate and architect of California's push against games.

If you've been following the history of Brown v. EMA, you know who California Senator Leland Yee is. Yee has been one of the most consistent critics of violent video games, and he's the one responsible for writing the law the U.S. Supreme Court ruled against this morning. Obviously, he disagrees.

"What has happened today is that the U.S. Supreme Court has decided it's going to side with corporate America and Wal-Mart against our children," said Yee, as part of a press conference held today in San Francisco. "Because of the rejection of the California law, these games will continue to be sold to our children, these games have a harmful effect to our children."

Yee is a Democrat representing California's San Francisco and San Mateo districts. He's also running for mayor of San Francisco.

Several of Yee's supporters were present at the press conference. One of the key facets of the court's decision today was its rejection of the link between games and violence in youth, finding the evidence lacking in proving games are any worse than other media.

"In the past, we've protected them [children] from alcohol, cigarettes and pornography and we felt that this was on that level," said George Fouras, MD, of the San Francisco Medical Society. "We're accumulating evidence that shows that exposure to violence does effect the behavior of children. In addition, we're concerned that the cognitive development of youth and their ability to process and make decisions appropriate doesn't occur at the ages that these children are able to obtain these video games. Unlike Saturday morning cartoons, these video games expose kids to behavior that is not acceptable in reality."

Yee said the "silver lining" in the court's decision was raising the level of public awareness on the issue. He's certainly right, in that respect. You can't go higher than the U.S. Supreme Court. Yee also noted success in getting the video game industry to better enforce the sale of M-rated video games and "has worked to clarify some of their wrongs in their ratings system."

As noted in my reporting on the court opinion, this decision does not rule out another challenge. In fact, Justice Alito seemed to explicitly map out a path to a challenge. Yee made note of that.

"[Alito] does in fact seem to be laying out a pathway to how we might be able to craft a bill that would stand the test of the First Amendment challenge," he said. "If we craft the bill differently, there may be a basis for trying to get another hearing within the Supreme Court on this particular matter."

The journey for this bill has lasted eight years, though. Another challenge won't happen overnight.

Staff
#2 Posted by JoeyRavn (4946 posts) -

Cry me a river, man.

#3 Edited by Vortextk (418 posts) -

Enjoy the loss sir.

#4 Posted by hedfone (1749 posts) -

fuck that guy

#5 Posted by Agent47CSim2 (1085 posts) -

Why can't people stop interfering?

#6 Posted by Moppy (85 posts) -

Screw that guy.

#7 Posted by louiedog (2333 posts) -

I used to live in his district. I never voted for him because he believed that what he perceived as the rights of a small few outweighed the rights of everyone.

#8 Edited by OllyOxenFree (4970 posts) -

"In the past, we've protected them [children] from alcohol, cigarettes and pornography and we felt that this was on that level,"

Oh get the fuck out of here. Jesus Christ...

#9 Posted by iAmJohn (6107 posts) -

Get bent, Leeland Yee. You lost. Deal with it.

Online
#10 Posted by Icicle7x3 (1169 posts) -

"Unlike Saturday morning cartoons, these video games expose kids to behavior that is not acceptable in reality."

What?

#11 Posted by chickdigger802 (501 posts) -

now I think about it. Aren't the biggest selling games these days M rated shooters and rpgs and what not that aren't pokemon?

#12 Posted by Rolyatkcinmai (2682 posts) -

affect, not effect

#13 Posted by DEMONOLOGY_24 (521 posts) -

kids are always going to be drawn to violent things it's there parents job to help filter NOT! the supreme court
#14 Posted by Ghost_Cat (1379 posts) -

Basically he wants to ruin America.  Too bad.

#15 Posted by Vendetta (438 posts) -

As Jason Schreier put it... Leland Yee is off in a dark room somewhere shouting "And I would have gotten away with it if it weren't for that meddling first amendment! "

#16 Posted by Seedofpower (3925 posts) -

This needs to all of us a favor and shut the fuck up.

#17 Posted by Doctorchimp (4067 posts) -

He's just mad Scalia thinks he's an idiot....because he is one.

#18 Posted by Saethir (353 posts) -

From what I know, This Wal-Mart he speaks of has a policy specifically against the sale of M rated games to anyone under the age of 17. What is he blathering on about?

#19 Posted by Malphye (413 posts) -

I'm sure there are more important things to worry about.

#20 Posted by Loose (419 posts) -
#21 Posted by Blueman (753 posts) -
@Agent47CSim2 said:

                Why can't people stop interfering?
           
#22 Posted by Jeffk38uk (715 posts) -

"Noted success in getting the video game industry to better enforce the sale of M-rated video games"? Really? Cause they were doing such a terrible job before in America.
 
Oh wait.

#23 Posted by AlisterCat (5470 posts) -

@Icicle7x3 said:

"Unlike Saturday morning cartoons, these video games expose kids to behavior that is not acceptable in reality."

What?

Exactly what I was thinking. Has he not seen Adventure Time?

#24 Posted by Monkeyman04 (998 posts) -

 Who's responsible for the children? I don't think it's the game companies. I think it's a word that starts with the letter P and ends in "arent(s)".    

#25 Posted by BLipp18 (256 posts) -

"Yee also noted success in getting the video game industry to better enforce the sale of M-rated video games and "has worked to clarify some of their wrongs in their ratings system.""

uh, theres something wrong with the rating system? the only wrong thing i see is that parents are too fucking ignorant and cant bother to look at one of the MULTIPLE ratings on the box before they blindly buy it for their kid. but no, parents are never wrong and should take no responsibility for how their kids are raised. its everyone elses fault if something bad happens to their kids

#26 Posted by MetalBaofu (1344 posts) -

Who wants to bet that the most this guy knows about video games is some clips someone showed him from GTA, Doom, and Mortal Kombat?

#27 Posted by Skywarpgold (153 posts) -

@Icicle7x3: lol, exactly...dropping an anvil on someone is acceptable??

#28 Posted by BooDoug187 (339 posts) -

So he is a Senator... but is now running for mayor? Is he doing this backwards? No wonder he fucking lost.

#29 Posted by MasterVerhoffin (135 posts) -

You get NOTHING! Good day sir!

Sorry, it seemed so appropriate.

#30 Posted by DarthB (247 posts) -

I doubt Mr. Yee's intentions were to even have this pass. Even an idiot could tell it wouldn't. It was probably to get his name out and to try to get more support for himself.

What a waste of the taxpayers money and time.

#31 Posted by OllyOxenFree (4970 posts) -

@Saethir said:

From what I know, This Wal-Mart he speaks of has a policy specifically against the sale of M rated games to anyone under the age of 17. What is he blathering on about?

Blathering on about shit he does not understand.

#32 Posted by Mesoian (1572 posts) -

What a fuckin' ponce.

I mean seriously, he goes on an on about helping educate parents about the issue of violent media, then makes his point, "THEN NO ONE SHOULD MAKE VIDEO GAMES THAT CAN'T BE PLAYED BY MINORS!" If this guy believed half the swill he's spilling, he'd be calling for reform of the ESRB and a more universally understood ratings system. The last round of supreme court lawsuits over video games essentially destroyed the meaning of the AO rating to the point where if a game has it, it will not be picked up by distributors.

#33 Posted by Nonentity (233 posts) -

Am I allowed to vote for Kreayshawn as mayor of SF instead?

#34 Posted by ninjalegend (410 posts) -

California, Uber alles. LOL. As much as I dislike living in Florida, I guess it could be worse.

#35 Posted by Doctorchimp (4067 posts) -
@chickdigger802 said:

now I think about it. Aren't the biggest selling games these days M rated shooters and rpgs and what not that aren't pokemon?

And you can't buy those without a parent, just like you can't see an R-rated movie without an older person giving you the OK.
 
No laws needed. Leland is still a moron.
#36 Posted by PLWolf (919 posts) -

Mayor of SF? He better drop the Vidja Game crap and focus on cleaning up the crap. It would be nice to walk to and from BART without sidestepping 10 different drug deals going on. ugh

#37 Posted by BigChief (503 posts) -

@Loose: You beat me to it!

#38 Posted by atomic_dumpling (2453 posts) -

Interesting to see how (rightfully) alarmed you Americans are by this after years of laughing at Germany and Australia. It's not quite as funny when it is about you, is it?

#39 Posted by CharlesAlanRatliff (5374 posts) -

"Unlike Saturday morning cartoons, these video games expose kids to behavior that is not acceptable in reality."

Maybe I'm reading this wrong, but I was at a hotel on Saturday morning watching cartoons, and you know what was on? Looney Tunes. Various things I saw: Bugs Bunny tricking Yosemite into walking off a cliff, Bugs tricking a human man into shooting himself in the face with his own gun, Daffy Duck getting shot multiple times etc.

Sure, Looney Tunes presents these situations in a comical way whereas most games don't, but I'm responding specifically to the above quote.

#40 Posted by Tennmuerti (7957 posts) -

"Think of the children" - the most common scare tactic in recent years.

#41 Posted by MrMazz (906 posts) -

"Because of the rejection of the California law, these games will continue to be sold to our children,"

I don't know what store he goes to but i see people get carded when they buy a M rated game. Now if its a kid who tells his mom or dad or whoever to buy it they don't since its a obvious adult buying it. Parents actually need to you know look at what there buying there kids.

Online
#42 Posted by TehBuLL (590 posts) -

Been playing video games my whole life......I'm murdering and raping 24/7...I just wish Mr. Yee had existed when I was a kid...to prevent this horrible murder/rape spree I've been on.

#43 Posted by TheYear20XX (425 posts) -

So violent games are just like alcohol and cigarettes? Good to know.

#44 Posted by Joseppie (733 posts) -

Though thankfully it isn't as martyr-ish of a reaction as I was expecting, the amount of political chest-thumping still present is disappointing.

#45 Posted by CharAznable (773 posts) -

I just want to do the Tatanka yell with his last name:

YEE-YEE-YEE-YEE-YEE! YEE! YEE! YEE!

#46 Posted by CandiBunni (465 posts) -
@TehBuLL said:

Been playing video games my whole life......I'm murdering and raping 24/7...I just wish Mr. Yee had existed when I was a kid...to prevent this horrible murder/rape spree I've been on.

You poor, poor thing. :c
#47 Posted by WalkerTR77 (1351 posts) -

So surely this guy has to genuinely care about this issue, since literally no sensible person actually does. Most politicians probably just get handed their policy's to them by aids on a case by case basis and only really want to appease voters. Who is he winning over here? Ergo he really is personally affronted by video games; for what reason? No idea. Any takers? 

#48 Posted by Nesty1972 (17 posts) -

Remember is easy to demonize a video game instead of telling parents to be  good parents.

#49 Posted by wickedsc3 (1046 posts) -

Dude if you want to get elected why dont you quit wasting money with games, and figure out how to get that state out of its massive debt!!!

#50 Posted by QKT (248 posts) -

i forgot saturday morning cartoons like power rangers and transformers was possible IRL.