I find this quite disgusting and a huge waste of time. A video game is no more "potentially dangerous" than a toaster. If I throw a toaster at you hard enough, or hit you repeatedly with it, it will cause far more damage than a video game.Article wrote:Congressman Joe Baca (D-Rialto, CA.) introduced a bill that mandates that "all video games with an Electronics Software Ratings Board rating of Teen or higher" must be sold with a health warning label. The bill is called "The Video Game Health Labeling Act of 2011" and would create a new rule within the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC). The label would read:
"WARNING: Excessive exposure to violent video games and other violent media has been linked to aggressive behavior."
"The video game industry has a responsibility to parents, families, and to consumers – to inform them of the potentially damaging content that is often found in their products," said Rep. Baca. "They have repeatedly failed to live up to this responsibility. Meanwhile research continues to show a proven link between playing violent games and increased aggression in young people. American families deserve to know the truth about these potentially dangerous products."
It's really hard for me to believe that there was violent crime 30+ years ago. Marilyn Manson (et al) and "violent" video games didn't exist back then. Hey wait, maybe the issue is that instead of parenting, people are throwing video games and other distractions at their children. In that case, I could see how the game is incorrectly determined to be the precursor to violent behavior. But, a closer look should reveal crappy parenting is to blame.
Thoughts anyone? Is this as much of a waste of time as I think it is? Is this even comparable to the SG warning on cigarettes (though I don't feel that needs to exist either)?
