It was a year when videogames and politics were wrapped up with one another like never before. Next Generation looks at the hot issues that attracted journalists, politicians and heaps of trouble.

Quote: Originally Posted by NextGeneration When GamePolitics.com launched in March, 2005, more than a few folks were scratching their heads. “What do politics have to do with videogames?” was a frequently heard question. Quite a lot, as it turns out. Thanks to an unprecedented run of legislation and a little mix-up which came to be known as Hot Coffee, 2005 became the most politically-charged twelve months the videogame industry has ever endured. The year began with a bang as politicians reacted to Rockstar’s late 2004 release of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas. The GTA series has been a favorite of gamers as well as favorite target of game critics for years, and San Andreas seemed destined for a similar ride. Little did we know how bumpy that ride would be. Despite past constitutional failures, legislation restricting sales of violent games to minors received serious consideration in a number of states as well as the District of Columbia. In April, Senator Hillary Clinton and several colleagues called for a $90 million government-funded study of the effects of media on children. It would not be the last time the videogame industry faced the scrutiny of the former First Lady and likely 2008 presidential contender. Full story at NextGen.biz

What I find amazing about this, is that with all the restrictions put on videogames (or at least...the attempt to do that), where are the restrictions and limitations for movies and music? To me; music is a more prevelant medium to convey "bad behavior" to children and teenagers across the nation.

All you need is a crappy, 1-hit wonder CD which will cost you roughly 10-12 dollars, and a crappy CD player that may cost you 30 dollars. For a videogame, you need a $200.00+ system and a $40.00+ game.

I want the government or a private organization to a study something similar to this...

• Gather together a collection of people ranging in ages between 8-30.
• Differentiate between them those that play videogames and those that don't.
• Within those two groups, discover which ones are more prone to violent behavior or prone to non-violent behavior.
• Differentiate and DEFINE what constitutes violent behavior (smack talking is NOT violent behavior).
• Evaluate each particpant in a psychological exam
• Use that exam to determine whether the more "violent" participants are a little "messed up in the head" or are normal.

Somethign similar to the above "study" I don't believe has ever been done. I hate that politicians and the government automatically assume that games make people violent and crazy, and never fathom the idea that those people were messed up to begin with.

This crusade against videogames is eerily similar to the witch hunts against Rock Music in the 50's, rap music in the late 80's early 90's, etc... Now, that rock music is considered classic, and the rap music (though I don't like it at all, and I personally feel is "worse" than videogames) is finally becoming a legitimate musical "voice" for many people.

What makes it even worse, is 98% (just a figure I pulled out of my head, no concrete evidence for it) of the politicians who support this videogame legislation has never played a game since pong. They see a gun on a monitor or TV screen and they cry "bad, evil, deplorable." Not that I feel that all the violence in videogames is just and necessary, but how can you criticize something that you essentially know nothing about, and are commenting on hear-say?

I just hope that Hilary gets off her soap-box soon, same with Joe Leiberman (he had his 15 minutes in the 90s against Mortal Kombat...its time to let it go...). If she is elected president, it'll be a cold day in hell in my world