#51 Posted by Fattony12000 (7929 posts) -
Released on the 5th of May, 1992...I've barely killed anyone in all that time!
#52 Posted by mikeohara (4 posts) -

I hope that his constituents stand up to him and throw his ass out of office over this useless waste of California's tax dollars, because someone with a lick of common sense should have his office anyway. He doesn't deserve it.

#53 Posted by Sword5 (153 posts) -
@hedfone said:

fuck that guy

I approve of this message
#54 Posted by Arrested_Developer (745 posts) -

Ugh, the bay area elects so many douchebags.

#55 Posted by bcjohnnie (456 posts) -

@BooDoug187: Not to stick up for him or anything, but Yee is just a state senator, representing a couple of counties. Mayor of a major city is a significant step up from that. It will be interesting to see if this crusade helps him get there.

#56 Posted by HBK619 (167 posts) -

We should kill this guy.
 
AMIRITE?!?!?!?!

#57 Posted by FlamingHobo (4769 posts) -

It's always been my opinion that age ratings should primarily act as a guidance to adults purchasing items for their children. I've been brought up with a number of violent video games throughout my childhood and I don't think it's affected me massively to a negative degree, in fact quite the opposite. Leland Yee has his heart in the right place but obviously doesn't have his head there. I'm glad that the Supreme Court does.

#58 Posted by rjayb89 (7806 posts) -

The guy's name is Leland. You know what he did to his daughter.

#59 Posted by Vexxan (4624 posts) -

Screw him.

#60 Posted by hagridore (527 posts) -

Could you pick any softer issue to base a campaign on? Cause why do you want a politician who'll talk about illegal immigration.

#61 Posted by Pixeldemon (248 posts) -

I've played violent video games since childhood and... 
 
fuck, I'm worried about what I might do.

#62 Posted by TotalEklypse (982 posts) -

Yet the people of California allow him to blow all this money to fail over and over? Or do they really support this idiot and believe they can impose their agenda on the rest of the country?

#63 Posted by Sammo21 (4123 posts) -

HEY LELAND, I GET MINE!

#64 Posted by Slaker117 (4856 posts) -

Mr. Yee, as a resident of California, please stop wasting our state's time and money. We face much more tangible and immediate issues that require serious attention. This is silly.

Online
#65 Posted by Nomin (1004 posts) -

Mario could get very violent and lurid in how he stomps around little critters into the ground and thinks he can 'grow' taking mushrooms and shoot fires with glowing flowers. 

#66 Posted by Jack_Lafayette (3797 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?

Walmart? Who's that?
#67 Posted by dbz1995 (4959 posts) -
@rjayb89 said:

The guy's name is Leland. You know what he did to his daughter.

This made me laugh a lot.
 
I played MKT when I was 6 once a week going round a friend of mine's house. And I turned out alright-I think.
#68 Edited by hermes (1734 posts) -
@MisuseOfLasers said:

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

And  pornography, don't forget  pornography...
#69 Posted by Jack_Lafayette (3797 posts) -
@atomic_dumpling said:
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?
Are you kidding? This shit is comedy gold. Our government is waaaaaaaay more entertaining.
#70 Posted by chickdigger802 (572 posts) -

@Doctorchimp said:

@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.

ahh I see.

Haven't really bought a game at retail in ages so am a bit oblivious to this whole thing. Usually just Amazon now. Easy and amazon do give a lot of benefits for preordering and what not over there.

#71 Posted by SleepyDoughnut (1270 posts) -

I really wish this guy would give it a rest. At games become more and more accepted as a part of the culture, the case against video games will become almost impossible to win, so stop now.

#72 Posted by Koobz (411 posts) -

"Unlike Saturday morning cartoons, these video games expose kids to behavior that is not acceptable in reality." Was that a slip of the tongue or did he actually mean to say that? Because that's dumb. Aren't half of Saturday morning cartoons about kids punching people in the face because they look like they might be bad guys?

#73 Posted by hermes (1734 posts) -
@George Fouras said:
Unlike Saturday morning cartoons, these video games expose kids to behavior that is not acceptable in reality.
That "saturday morning cartoons" line is comedy gold. 

Last time I check, throwing an anvil at someone's head was not an acceptable behavior either... Yet you don't see a lot of controversy around Willy E. Coyote.
#74 Posted by ArbitraryWater (12663 posts) -

 
We have to save the childrens! We can't have them see or experience anything! In fact, we should put all children into a government controlled plastic bubble until they're 18 so they'll be mentally developed enough not to rape and murder everyone from those Vidium Games!

#75 Posted by ReyGitano (2491 posts) -

The constitution, because in the hands of reasonably logical people, it still works.

#76 Posted by snetErz (127 posts) -
@atomic_dumpling said:
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?
Well it's slightly different, if I recall Germany and Australia will straight up ban games from retail for anyone of all ages. This is merely trying to limit the sale of games to minors, and it would have only applied to California (which these days is the guinea pig of crazy ideas).
#77 Posted by OldManLight (1076 posts) -

Turns out jack thompson is really a game hating demon like Azazel in Fallen who jumps from politician to politcian. Tiiiiiiime...is on my side, yes it is.

#78 Posted by damnboyadvance (4172 posts) -

He's an idiot. 
 
First of all, he fails to address the flaw in the bill; the fact that minors still have access to violent games through any adult, whether it be their parents, grandparents, or even a stranger. 
 
Second, there is no corporate company that I know of, including Walmart, that will sell violent games to children, assuming that violent games are rated M. 
 
Lastly, he has no decisive evidence that shows violent games, and only violent games, are affecting the behavior of children in a negative way.

#79 Posted by theanticitizen (296 posts) -
@rjayb89 Oh Twin Peaks reference :) though now I'm scared that he's going to kill every child in California
#80 Posted by metalsnakezero (2577 posts) -

The power of responsibly for what our kids play goes to the parents and not the government's job.  

#81 Posted by Video_Game_King (36566 posts) -
#82 Posted by InfamousBIG (3291 posts) -

@rjayb89 said:

The guy's name is Leland. You know what he did to his daughter.

Hahahahaha, blame it on the violent video games! It all makes sense now.

#83 Edited by Simplexity (1430 posts) -

Games on the same level as Cigarettes and Alcohol? Nevermind porn as I really don't think porn has a negative effect on anything, infact I think it can only be positive. Cigarettes and Alcohol on the other hand is POISON, yes POISON, that is a scientific fact, it will kill you eventually. So he is basically saying that games are poison? How is this guy in a position of power again?

#84 Posted by VisariLoyalist (3088 posts) -

When it comes to civil rights the basic factor is whether ones rights infringe on the rights of other people. Parents still have the right to tell their kids what to do. Stores still have the right to not sell certain games. Noone's rights are infringed by the current situation so why do you need to take rights away from other people. That is literally against the constitution you simply cannot start taking away rights unless they are interfering with more important rights of others.  
 
This is simply people being afraid of things they do not understand and a long list of psychopathic manipulators (politicians) are willing to feed them their own worst anxieties and promise them a solution to a problem that exists only in their minds.

#85 Posted by TheFreeMan (2712 posts) -

I'm not sure what saturday morning cartoons this dude used to watch, but the ones I did generally involved giant robots, people robbing things and beating each other up or various animals using weapons and explosives in attempts to kill eachother.

#86 Posted by Gamer_152 (14282 posts) -

Sorry Mr. Lee but "accumulating evidence" and being concerned do not constitute having evidence.

Moderator
#87 Posted by SomeJerk (3607 posts) -

Avast Yee, Bastard

#88 Posted by LoggerRythm (191 posts) -

If this guy is looking for advertisement or being a more recognized Senator through BS, mission successful. 
You can go away now man.  
I'm sure you know you're efforts are pointless and what you're doing has nothing to do with the personal pursuit to help people in any way.  
Whether you know it or not most of the people in this country aren't that damn stupid.  
So PLEASE, go the fuck away already. 
Besides, if  you're going to continue this ridiculous adventure of yours, at least make a blanket law that resonates through all of entertainment because you can't stifle one medium over another, that's just making you come off as a fucking dumb Senator.  
However, I think we can all agree though that most of the stupid people in America are Senators.

#89 Posted by sopranosfan (1965 posts) -

Who gets to decide what is bad for children?  This guy, why does he think he can do a better job of raising my child than I can and if his response is that it is for the parents that won't do as good of a job then do you think this law will effect them that much?  A parent can buy cigarettes or M rated video games for kids now but both are about the same difficulty to obtain because you WILL be carded for both.  I am 34 years old and when I go into Gamestop, Walmart, or Best Buy they card me and inform me of the M rating so I don't really see what this law is really supposed to do.

#90 Edited by Mr_Box (19 posts) -

"[...]their ability to process and make decisions appropriate doesn't occur at the ages that these children are able to obtain these video games."
 
  Wot? Apparently Mr. Yee does not believe 17 + young ADULTS do not posses the ability to make decisions for themselves as they are the only ones who can buy aforementioned games. 
  That is a level of incompetence that is not only shocking, but insulting to that age demographic. Unless he is referring to the fact that parents can buy said games for their children, which at that pont is not Mr. Yee's decision to make nor anyone else but the child's parent or guardian.
  Also, what Mr. Yee fails to realize is by trying to ban violent video games he will also be banning "violent" movies, books, art, and music along with it. 
  So, lets give Leland Yee around of applause for his lack of understand of the very thing he is trying to accomplish.

#91 Posted by GreggD (4582 posts) -

Leland, you god damned cartoon character, chill the fuck out. You lost, just let it go, man.

#92 Posted by OmegaPirate (5642 posts) -
@Icicle7x3 said:

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

What?

#93 Posted by HitmanAgent47 (8553 posts) -

Ppl who never played videogames commenting on how videogames are bad for you.

#94 Posted by StaticFalconar (4920 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?

biggest selling videogame is FN mario and Wii sports. I sure don't play the Wii anywhere as much as the other consoles, but I am sure glad that Nintendo is still around so we can all gladly say, the best selling system and games are in fact non-violent. 
#95 Posted by Max_Cherry (1209 posts) -

I don't think he has ever seen a Saturday morning cartoon.

#96 Posted by Skald (4387 posts) -

What an asshat.

#97 Posted by opivypunk (27 posts) -

All I have to say is, if this guy spent as much time worrying about his states budget instead of video games CA might not be in the absolute fiscal mess it's in right now. Politicians, gotta love em.

#98 Posted by JasonR86 (10003 posts) -

Who's protecting the children from ignorant senators?  Huh?  HUH?!?!?!?

#99 Posted by Doppelgamer (363 posts) -
@Icicle7x3 said:

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

What?

Agreed.  Also, didn't the whole Saturday morning cartoon thing stop a decade or so back?
#100 Posted by YukoAsho (2248 posts) -

Yee doesn't get it.
 
Even without Alito and Roberts siding with the majority, it would have still been a 5-4 vote against him.  Besides, the reason Alito and Roberts voted against him, even with their sympathies, was because of how vague his stupid law was.  They weren't willing to kill off Call of Duty because of Postal, and that's what this broad regulation would have done.
 
Hopefully Governor Brown won't sign the next concoction Yee comes up with.  I feel sorry for California's taxpayers.