![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=91.6){kind=small}
NOTE: This story was originally broken by GamePolitics last night. Because of its importance and because we now have additional information, we are bumping it into today's coverage.
The website of Oklahoma Governor Brad Henry (D, seen at left) indicates that the Governor has signed into law HB3004, video game legislation proposed by Rep. Fred Morgan (R). Henry had until today to take action on the bill, and aides had indicated to GamePolitics that he was likely to approve the measure.
The Oklahoman has a brief mention on the new law. Gov. Henry's short, official press release can be seen here.
In his statement, the Governor said, "The violence in videogames has grown to epic proportions. Some video games glorify violence to a degree seldom seen in even the bloodiest movies. While parents have the ultimate responsibility for what their children do and see, this legislation is another tool to ensure that our young people are not saturated in violence. This gives parents the power to more closely regulate which games their children play."
The new statute, scheduled to take effect on November 1st, would include violent video games among items defined as "harmful to minors." (and therefore unlawful to sell or rent to minors). Oddly enough, the measure also includes unrelated language added by the Oklahoma Senate regarding signage around strip clubs and porn shops.
Rep. Fred Morgan, the bill's sponsor, is running for Congress and faces a July primary.
Oklahoma thus becomes the eighth U.S. jurisdiction to enact such a law. Previous statues in St. Louis, Indianapolis, Washington State, Illinois, and Michigan were found unconstitutional. California's video game law is currently under review by Federal District Court Judge Ronald Whyte. Minnesota's governor signed that state's bill into law last week. A lawsuit has already been filed there.
Although no official ESA comment is yet available, a video game industry source told GP today, "ESA and EMA have vigorously responded to each of these laws that has been enacted, and they have been successful in every case. No one should expect a different course of action or result in this instance."
Want to talk about it? You can discuss this story via the "comments" feature (click below), or in the new GamePolitics Forums...
June 10 2006, 00:50:19 UTC 5 years ago
We all know it will be found as unconstitutional, when are they actually going to try talking to people instead of this attitude of 'Big Brother knows best'?
June 10 2006, 01:08:26 UTC 5 years ago
A sponsor of a video game bill has political aspirations? ZOMG! I am SOOOOO shocked.
June 10 2006, 01:18:25 UTC 5 years ago
June 10 2006, 02:18:52 UTC 5 years ago
::Shrugs::
Meh. 1st Amendment fight, law gets overturned on the Federal level, yada yada yada. Summer reruns come early this year, it seems...June 10 2006, 09:08:53 UTC 5 years ago
What's a governor to do?
You veto a bill and you're called "anti-children" or "pro-violence"....This says it all and explains why videogames are the new oil or tobacco industry: "Rep. Morgan is running for Congress and faces a July primary." What a better way than to tell his constituents he authored a bill to "protect the children..."
June 10 2006, 10:42:40 UTC 5 years ago
Re: What's a governor to do?
yes, that and the fact that it passed both the OK House & Senate unanimously makes it even more difficult, politically.OTOH, if he truly objected he could have signaled that through intermediaries a long time ago.
June 10 2006, 12:02:03 UTC 5 years ago
June 10 2006, 20:05:14 UTC 5 years ago
It didn't matter
It would have been twice the good PR for their congress if he hadn't signed cause then they get to be the people who overturned the govenor's veto to 'protect your children'.June 11 2006, 02:48:55 UTC 5 years ago
June 11 2006, 10:52:10 UTC 5 years ago
Thx much!
June 11 2006, 12:06:14 UTC 5 years ago
Is he going on hearsay
Or has he actually seen the games in question?"Some video games glorify violence to a degree seldom seen in even the bloodiest movies."
In my short time on this Earth, I have played the Grand Theft Auto series, Postal 2, the Carmageddons, and many of the other often cited violent games. I have also seen the movies Saw, Suspiria, and Braindead to pick three off the top of my head.
Whether any of these glorify violence is up to the viewer. Now, if you showed a young child scenes from each of these examples, which ones do you think would have the biggest effect?
The level of graphical violence shown in even the bloodiest of games doesn't compare with the trailer of Hostel.
June 13 2006, 01:00:27 UTC 5 years ago
"[The definition for 'inappropriate violence'] considers inappropriate any game which “lacks serious literary, scientific, medical, artistic or political value” and which features glamorized or gratuitous violence; uses that violence to shock or stimulate; features violence that is not contextually relevant to the material; has violence so pervasive that it serves as the thread holding the plot of the material together; trivializes the serious nature of realistic violence; does not demonstrate the consequences or effects of realistic violence; uses brutal weapons designed to inflict the maximum amount of pain and damage; endorses or glorifies torture or excessive weaponry, or depicts lead characters who resort to violence freely."
I love the line, "violence so pervasive that it serves as the thread holding the plot of the material together." By this definition, a digital version of the boardgame Clue would be considered hardcore pornography in the state of Oklahoma.