In today's roundup, GamePolitics finds editorial boards around the country weighing in on Louisiana's video game law. Much of the interest appears to have been sparked by the recent preliminary injunction blocking the Jack Thompson-drafted statute from taking effect.
The Prescott Daily Courier (Arizona) supports Judge James Brady's ruling, saying, "Once again, politicians are pretending unsuccessfully to be morally superior to the rest of society."
The paper added, "Judge Brady's decision makes sense... These bans unfairly limit our right to free speech... The entire idea that one type of media increases violence while others don't is hypocritical... And to the judges who continue to protect our constitutional rights, thank you."
Meanwhile, North Carolina's Henderson Dispatch sees things differently:
"...we think the courts have been consistently wrong, or at least wrong-headed. Violence continues to erode the quality of life in the United States... at least the Motion Picture Association of America makes some attempt at self-policing... Games have a rating system, too, but it is a sham and unenforced."
"It might help our attitude if the game-makers showed some interest in being good stewards of the media as it impacts children. Apparently even that is impossible for them."
"In criticizing Louisiana... ESA President Douglas Lowenstein invoked the name of (Hurricane Katrina)... we are outraged that many gaming companies seem to operate without a conscience, or - so arrogantly voiced by Lowenstein - even a sense of dignity."
Finally, Louisiana's own Daily Advertiser reminds readers of parental responsibility:
"...For those genuinely fearful of the effect of the games on our kids, the ruling is a severe disappointment. Although the courts and the cops may not prevent the sales, however, there are still people who can play a key role in keeping them out of the hands of our young people. They're called parents... This is a parental responsibility."