According to The Salt Lake Tribune and other Utah news sources, Rep. David Hogue's (R-Riverton) violent video games legislation (HB 257) has moved forward after being passed overwhelmingly (56-8) by a vote in the Utah House of Representatives yesterday. The bill, which seeks to put violent games in an existing statute that protects children from harmful material such as pornography, will be examined by Utah's Senate next.
Even though there's still no evidence of a direct link between video game violence and acts of violence committed in real-life, Hogue suggested that playing violent games leads to "automatic learning of aggressive behavior," and that violent games have played a role in school shootings. "Would these same kids have done this anyway without watching violent videos? Maybe not," he said, referring to the Columbine massacre.
Hogue also took issue with Take-Two Interactive's upcoming game, Bully. "You can get even with bullies. You take a baseball bat and beat up their heads," he said. "It is going to show kids how to respond in school. Is this what we want our kids doing?"
Other politicians, even those who are against violent games, have questioned HB 257's constitutionality, however. Orem Republican Margaret Dayton said that Hogue's bill is "frustrating" because violence has certain constitutional protections that pornography does not. "That's why we can have pictures in the Bible, battle scenes or war movies," she said.
Added Rep. Ross Romero, (D-Salt Lake City), "Although violence may not be what we should be looking to have our kids look at, it does have certain constitutional protections, unlike pornography."
Hogue and other politicians believe that the bill has a good chance of standing up in court nonetheless. Rep. Lorie Fowlke (R-Orem) pointed out that HB 257 is the most narrowly defined legislation of these kinds of violent games bills. "I think it is worth a try," she said. "Otherwise we give up and say the court will always determine our values."
For more on HB 257, check out our previous coverage.






Reader Comments (0)