Hi everyone!
I am a member of a political party here in the Netherlands.
One minister from the last cabinet, Hirsch Ballin of the Christian democrats, wanted to ban "extremely" violent games (defined the same as in germany, so counter-strike and such wouldn't fall under it, it was "a portion of the 18+ material. Probably about 12 games in total.) in general if (and only if) the retailers wouldn't start adhering the age ratings better.
the parliament raised into uproar, and also, there have since been general elections which have killed the christian democrats, they are still in the government but they don't have much to say. In total, 122 out 150 MP mordically oppose the very idea of a ban. Fail.
Since I like to play games, especially of the (extremely) gory category, and since every scientist in my country thinks banning is an extremely stupid idea, yours truly immediately wrote a nota explaining why this is cr*p, and sent it to the parliament. I have also made sure a debate with the minister is being called for so that a motion can be filled ending this debate until 2015 (next elections) and probably forever. bingo.
To make my party's text in this debate even better, I need more arguments. *Not* just why games aren't harmful, I know why they aren't, 5 psychologists have told me so including some of the so-called "opponents" from America like Bushman which are actually not against violent games, just in favour of enforcing age restrictions, -- more abstractly, why it is a bad infringement on our freedom? Isn't 1.5% more crime preferable to making 60% (a big amount anyway) of the people unhappy? Etc. That sort of stuff ;-)
I am a member of a political party here in the Netherlands.
One minister from the last cabinet, Hirsch Ballin of the Christian democrats, wanted to ban "extremely" violent games (defined the same as in germany, so counter-strike and such wouldn't fall under it, it was "a portion of the 18+ material. Probably about 12 games in total.) in general if (and only if) the retailers wouldn't start adhering the age ratings better.
the parliament raised into uproar, and also, there have since been general elections which have killed the christian democrats, they are still in the government but they don't have much to say. In total, 122 out 150 MP mordically oppose the very idea of a ban. Fail.
Since I like to play games, especially of the (extremely) gory category, and since every scientist in my country thinks banning is an extremely stupid idea, yours truly immediately wrote a nota explaining why this is cr*p, and sent it to the parliament. I have also made sure a debate with the minister is being called for so that a motion can be filled ending this debate until 2015 (next elections) and probably forever. bingo.
To make my party's text in this debate even better, I need more arguments. *Not* just why games aren't harmful, I know why they aren't, 5 psychologists have told me so including some of the so-called "opponents" from America like Bushman which are actually not against violent games, just in favour of enforcing age restrictions, -- more abstractly, why it is a bad infringement on our freedom? Isn't 1.5% more crime preferable to making 60% (a big amount anyway) of the people unhappy? Etc. That sort of stuff ;-)