Is it just me, or was the ESRB created to keep legislation OUT of video games and hold the PARENTS responsible for what games their children play?

Apparently, it has failed, and because of dumbass parents, legislators are sticking their noses into our First Amendment rights! Anyone remember the Primal Rage incident that resulted in the game being pulled from the shelves? Stupid, especially when the kid who was at the center of that incident wasn't even old enough to play the game to begin with, according to the ESRB! It was rated 'T', and he was ELEVEN!

Parents, do your god damn job, and stop blaming games on your children's behavior!

If my next remarks do start a political debate, I apologize in advance, but what does not surprise me about this, is that the dumbass legislator trying to get GTA:SA rated AO is a Democrat. I'm not trying to slam Democratic voters on the forum, but I really think those who do vote need to make sure they take a good look at ALL candidates' records with regards to video game legislation. I think statistics would tell you that more Democrats have supported video game censorship than Republicans. In fact, the only Republican I am aware of who tried this shit was Bob Dole. The rest of the legislators I'm aware of who tried pulling off this shit, with both video games and otherwise, were Democrat. Remember Joseph Lieberman and the MK incident that led to the creation of the ESRB? Remember Tipper Gore and the PMRC?

Well, you might want to think about it. Just take cartmansp for example. Why would a guy from the US have a Mexican flag under his nationality? Think...

I say who cares what flag you use?

I say everyone gets back on topic and stays there before the mods break into the thread uninvited and close it.

Remember how I said the ESRB would respond?

Well, they did...

Click here for the update...

""Assemblyman Yee has been on a crusade for years to undermine the integrity of the ESRB, and in so doing, generate support for his legislative agenda. His latest attempt to win political points is to claim, without any legitimate basis, that a game rated for ages 17 and older, with explicit content descriptors prominently displayed on every box, has been inappropriately rated," Vance said."

Take that! Yee!

Yee = PWNED!

It should still be 'M'-rated. If the game were rated 'AO', they could not sell it at retail stores. It's a lame ploy to take the wind out of a popular franchises' sells in order to "protect the youth of our nation." Here's a bright idea: let the parents protect the youth of our nation while you focus on more important things like economic woes, crime rate, poor education, public defense and safety, etc. I'm sure one video game, let alone a GTA game, won't create wide-spread pandemonium and an epidemic of cop-hating, law-breaking junior delinquents. Only if the game is over the top violent (like the much lamented Thrill Kill) or incredibly graphic sexually (like the not-so-lamented Pleasure Island: The Legend of Long-Dong Silver) should the 'AO' apply. There are worse games out there. They're just trying to cause controversy, get public attention, and shift the blame away from the individual and their parents towards "evil corporations with the intent of creating anarchy." Yeah, right. Please. Anyway, I think it's silly, not to be taken seriously, and that the world will not be a peaceful place until politicians vent their frustrations over a death-match of HALO rather than through global wars. Oh, I'm such a dreamer. Fatality.