British Parliament grumpy over Modern Warfare 3

[Shane for Wax]

I don't know if what you'd call what's in this thread a spoiler but... just in case spoiler alert? I guess...

www.parliament.uk/edm/2010-12/2427

The motion reads:

That this House is deeply concerned about the recently released video game Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, in which players engage in gratuitous acts of violence against members of the public; notes in particular the harrowing scenes in which a London Underground train is bombed by terrorists, bearing a remarkable resemblance to the tragic events of 7 July 2005; further notes that there is increasing evidence of a link between perpetrators of violent crime and violent video games users; and calls on the British Board of Film Classification to take further precautions when allowing a game to be sold.

Tom Watson (who confesses to playing video games himself), however has proposed this amendment instead:

[that this House] notes that the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) gave the video game Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 an 18 classification, noting that `the game neither draws upon nor resembles real terrorist attacks on the underground’; further believes that the game has an excellent user interface and challenges the gamers’ dexterity as well as collaborative skills in an outline setting; and encourages the BBFC to uphold the opinion of the public that whilst the content of video games may be unsettling or upsetting to some, adults should be free to choose their own entertainment in the absence of legal issues or material which raises a risk or harm.

Source: www.geeksaresexy.net/2011/11/23/politicians-split-over-modern-warfare-3/
------
I admit to lacking more than a rudimentary knowledge of UK politics, so if anyone more knowledgeable would like to chime in on what exactly this could mean for controversial games, please do so.

[Doctor Fishcake]

It doesn't really mean a lot. The self-regulatory PEGI (Pan European Game Information) ratings are legally binding in the UK, the BBFC as of 2010 is no longer involved in rating games. (EDIT: well that was the plan it seems, but the actual situation is far more muddled.)

And besides, an early day motion is of little importance: it's just something an MP has decided to speak their mind on, most of them don't lead to full debates.

[shadowpanther]

It's a motion tabled by Keith fucking Vaz. AKA, the British Jack Thompson. Nothing to see here chaps.

[MaybeNever]

I'm particularly fond of the line "there is increasing evidence of a link between perpetrators of violent crime and violent video games users". I wish that political documents had to undergo proper peer review for content, or at least cite their sources. We appear to hold our political leaders to less accountability for intellectual honesty than our college students.

[katsuro]

Nov 27, 2011 21:33:24 GMT -5 MaybeNever said:

I'm particularly fond of the line "there is increasing evidence of a link between perpetrators of violent crime and violent video games users". I wish that political documents had to undergo proper peer review for content, or at least cite their sources. We appear to hold our political leaders to less accountability for intellectual honesty than our college students.

Seeing as the games industry is nearly as big as Hollywood these days I'd say it's a safe bet that someone who commits violence has likely played a violent game at some point. They've also probaly brushed their teeth, worn shoes and eaten fast food. So of course all these things must cause violent behaviour.

God I fucking hate politicians.

[MaybeNever]

BREATHING AIR LEADS TO VIOLENCE LET'S BAN AIR