http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills info@washingtonwatch.com http://www.pjdoland.com/chai/?v=0.1 http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/110_SN_3315.html?rev=33496 <p>S. 3315 would prohibit the distribution or sale of video games that do not have age-based content rating labels, to prohibit the sale or rental of video games with adult content ratings to minors.</p> <h2 id="toc0"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>Video Game Rating Enforcement Act of 2008 - Prohibits shipping or distributing in interstate commerce, selling, or renting a video game the outside packaging of which does not contain an age-based content rating determined by the Entertainment Software Ratings Board (ESRB).</p> <p>Directs the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to require all retail establishments that sell video games to display information about the ESRB content rating system.</p> <p>Prohibits any person from selling or renting video games containing the ESRB content rating of : (1) &amp;quot;adults only&amp;quot; to any person under the age of 18; or (2) &amp;quot;mature&amp;quot; to any person under the age of 17.</p> <p>Treats violations of such requirements and prohibitions as an unfair or deceptive act or practice subject to a civil penalty of not more than $5,000 per violation.</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc1"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>Latest Major Action: 7/23/2008: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc2"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc3"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 33496@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 16 Oct 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_3315.html#39564 Along with being unconstitutional, this bill is almost useless due to the fact is does not deal with the issue of downloadable media or independent studios who do not possess the resources to have their works rated by the ESRB. It is the parents responsibility not the governments to choose what their children should be or not be exposed to.... 39564@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_3315.html#39543 That's exactly what it is - political pandering. The Senator would like something to point out in his future campaigns to say "See I tried to protect the children, but those nasty old liberals kept me from doing the job you fine people elected me to do!". Parents need to be responsible for what their children possess, view, and play - only THEY can keep their kids on the straight & narrow. Parents teach right from wrong - not the government.... 39543@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Tue, 29 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_3315.html#39469 The politicians work for us. We elect them, and we pay their salaries, to represent our views and positions. We do NOT pay these people to nanny everybody because some people don't know how to do something called 'parenting.' This is a very clear first amendment issue. It's unwanted (as evidenced by 97% AGAINST the bill), it's unnecessary, it's unconstitutional, and frankly I think it's absurd nanny-statism, pandering politics. I think the local residents need to give Senator Wicker a long, hard second look when he comes up for reelection. Perhaps someone else would better represent our interests than someone who would merely propose to babysit us.... 39469@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Mon, 28 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_3315.html#39386 What is different from all the other laws like this that stats have passed, and every time they've been rejected by courts as unconstitutional. Every time.... 39386@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Fri, 25 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/110_SN_3315.html?rev=28066 <p>S. 3315 would prohibit the distribution or sale of video games that do not have age-based content rating labels, to prohibit the sale or rental of video games with adult content ratings to minors.</p> <h2 id="toc4"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc5"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to update the status of the bill!)</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc6"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc7"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 28066@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/history/110_SN_3315.html?rev=28067 <p>S. 3315 would prohibit the distribution or sale of video games that do not have age-based content rating labels, to prohibit the sale or rental of video games with adult content ratings to minors.</p> <h2 id="toc8"> Detailed Summary </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to provide a detailed summary of the bill!)</p> <!--Leave in the 'summary' tags if you want the latest summary from the Congressional Research Service automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc9"> Status of the Legislation </h2> <p>Latest Major Action: 7/23/2008: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.</p> <!-- Leave in the 'status' tags if you want the latest reported status from THOMAS automatically to replace the text between the tags once it becomes available. --> <h2 id="toc10"> Points in Favor </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> <h2 id="toc11"> Points Against </h2> <p>(Log in to edit the wiki and be the first to show why the bill should not pass!)<br /> <!-- First editor: Go ahead and take out the sentence in parentheses, and this notice! --> </p> 28067@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Thu, 24 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EDT http://www.washingtonwatch.com/bills/show/110_SN_3315.html 7/23/2008: Referred to Senate committee. Status: Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. 38005@http://www.washingtonwatch.com Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:00:00 EDT