Government Regulation of Video Game Violence is Unconstitutional and Un

Breaking news tonight at 11, iii students dead, several wounded after manic depressed teen lashes discover with a handgun Americans serve witness in recent decades to this shivery yet familiar occurrence. The cause of this familiar scene is minors vile from social disorders and aggression. The major focus of blame is the entertainment industry including television, movies, books, and belatedly image seconds. The state of California decided to address the concern of television receiver game violence by passing a police forbiddance minors from buy games that are considered violent. However, the law is unconstitutional and unnecessary. The law is simple any game that humanoid characters are maimed, killed, or pain is considered violent. Labels that clearly state 18 must be placed on all games falling under this definition. The law requires that any individual purchasing a game in this category must provide demonstration of age. Additionally, retailers must obtain pro of of age before selling the game or face fines. The laws purpose is to protect minors from games that contain violence. Unfortunately, the California law ignores the Constitution. The origin Amendment covers minors rights to obtain video games, because the games enjoy the very(prenominal) protections granted to other forms of protected speech. Carmen Hoyme (2004), notes in the early Amendment legality Review that since video games share properties that other protected media forms have, the same protections are extended to video games and restrictions affecting minors access are allowable due to incitement (pp. 318-385). Holning Lau (2007), writing in the Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, explains that minors have the right to obtain verbalisms protected by the First A... ...Freedom of expression and interactive media video games and the first amendment. University of North Carolina School of Law First Amendment Law Review, 2(377), 377-402.Retrieved phratr y 22, 2014www.lexis.com Lau, H. (2007). Pluralism a principle for childrens rights. Harvard Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review, 42(317), 317-372. Retrieved September 22, 2014www.lexis.com OHolleran, J. (2010). Student note blood code the history and future tense of video game censorship. Journal on Telecommunications & High Technology Law, 8, 571-612. Retrieved September 22, 2014www.lexis.com Wood, R. (2009). Violent video games more ink spilled than blood - an analysis of the 9th term of enlistment decision in video software dealers association v. schwarzenegger. Texas Review of cheer and Sports Law, 10, 103-121. Retrieved September 22, 2014www.lexis.com