NB: This email and its contents are subject to our email legal notice which can be viewed at http://www.sars.gov.za/Email_Disclaimer.pdf
---- I agree with your reasonings, guys. But does any of the accessible games have a rating on it or is it not necessary? Is there any accessible games where parents must make a decision? How does a parent know what the rating of an accessible game is? -----Original Message----- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Bryan Peterson Sent: 21 September 2006 07:20 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [Audyssey] the negativity of santa claus in accessible games I agree. Another example I could use was a time a few years back when my mother, my sister and I spent some time at a downtown park in Oregon. My sister's dog was with us and, being a more aggressive breed, she was on leash. That was also the law, that all dogs in these parks must be kept on leash. Anyway, there was a guy who had a dog nearby, and his dog wasn't on any kind of a leash. Well, this dog came running up to where we were sitting, ignoring the warning from my sister's dog. Well, quite naturally this guy's dog was bitten, not severely but it was bitten. The owner said he was seriously considering pressing charges against my sister, in his words "because you don't control your dog." I'm sorry, but if you don't put your dog on a leash and it suddenly runs up to another dog, there's the strong possibility one of them's going to get bit. The same thing goes for games and the people who play them. If a parent buys a game for his or her kid without first researching what the game's about and the rating it carries, especially when the kid is known to have anger issues, then it's hardly surprising if the kid later kills someone else. Not that it's the game's fault. It'd be the parent's fault for providing the media that inspired the murder or, if the parent was unaware of the kid possessing it, it's the parent's fault for not taking a greater hand in monitoring what their child was playing, watching or listening to or reading. I personally think the whole thing is riddiculous. Companies attach ratings and warnings to their games for a very specific reason. If a parent chooses to ignore that or to ignore the fact that their child somehow came into possession of a violent game without their knowledge, then it's the parent's fault for not taking action. I'm sorry if I seem dispassionate about this sort of thing but you have to wonder what these parents were doing when these kids were doing this stuff. Granted I'm sure some of these parents did actually try to monitor their kids but obviously they weren't thorough enough. It goes back to the fact that it's not only the game's fault if someone goes out and beheads someone with a machete. It's the person's fault for being dim enough to let the game go to their head. _______________________________________________ Gamers mailing list .. [email protected] To unsubscribe send E-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] You can visit http://audyssey.org/mailman/listinfo/gamers_audyssey.org to make any subscription changes via the web.
