Since all of the other threads concerning this issue haven't been closed, I'm going to take my turn and step up on the soap box.

Has anyone taken a step back from the situation and looked at the big picture yet? States make up progressive or crazy laws (use whichever term you like) all the time. Usually a law is created strictly as a reacive measure to make a politican look better, or to make a sate look like its ahead of all the others, which can sometimes have the oppisite effect. Our law books are so stuffed with reactive laws like these that nobody can possibly know/understand all of them. Can somebody tell me why I can't buy stike-anywhere matches in New Jersey? Are there more idiots here that light them on their teeth and burn themselves than in Pennsylvania?

Anothner point I would like to make is that government likes to make laws that control things that they actually have power over. Sure, you can fine someone for selling/buying a game, buy they have no control over who plays it. If they wanted to do something that would actually accomplish something they would make it like the drinking laws here, if they see a minor even touching an empty beer can the person gets arrested. New Jersey doesn't have a law about games like Georgia does, but the local EB still turns away kids trying to buy GTA3.

If the government really wanted to stop violence they should look to a source that is proven to be a source and is already a large problem, drugs. Who do you think is more likely to commit a violent act, an 8 year old who has been playing quake 3, or some 14 year old trying to get some drugs? It really sickened me when some 14 year old would up to me in school with shaking hands and begged for drug money.

I have absoultely no problem with regulating the purchase of violent games to children, but I do have a problem with the priorities of the government. Are politicians really ignornat, or are they just trying to look good by being progrsssive?