Human rights groups: No in-game war crimes

Here's one that will undoubtedly send some gamers into a craze. A study from two Swiss human rights organizations, Trial and Pro Juventute, has found that some video games depict war and battle actions that in real life would violate international human rights laws.

The study attempted to determine if the acts gamers engage in while they play violent titles would "lead to violations of rules of international law, in particular International Humanitarian Law (IHL), basic norms of International Human Rights Law (IHRL), or International Criminal Law (ICL)."

To find out, Trial and Pro Juventute picked up 20 games, including Call of Duty 4, Metal Gear Solid 4, Far Cry 2, and others. It had "young gamers" play the games as three attorneys watched to find actions in games that in real life would violate rules and regulations that govern armed conflict.

The organizations said the study is not intended to "prohibit the games, to make them less violent or to turn them into IHL or IHRL training tools." Instead, the groups want to work with developers to ensure that in the future, their games observe real-life human-rights laws.

After evaluating the 20 games, the group found that in many cases, "shooter" games failed to take into consideration international humanitarian law.

"The practically complete absence of rules or sanctions is nevertheless astonishing: civilians or protected objects such as churches or mosques can be attacked with impunity, in scenes portraying interrogations it is possible to torture, degrade or treat the prisoner inhumanely without being sanctioned for it and extrajudicial executions are simulated," the groups wrote in a statement. "At least a few games punish the killing of civilians or reward strategies that aim to prevent excessive damage."

Individual game evaluations were just as biting. Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare had one of the more lengthy violation sections. According to the group, the game violates several human-rights laws by allowing games to "attack civilian buildings with no limits in order to get rid of all the enemies present in the town who are on roof tops, open areas of the town, squares featuring statues, etc. Under IHL, the fact that combatants/fighters are present in a town does not make the entire town a military objective."

The group also disliked the beating of the game's villain, Al-Asad. It asserted that the "beating of Al-Asad amounts to torture or at least inhuman treatment, which are prohibited in any context, under any circumstances, whether in peace time or during armed conflict situations. Killing him amounts to an extra-judicial, summary or arbitrary execution as it falls outside the context of any legal framework."

Similar evaluations were given on the other games the groups evaluated.

In the end, Trial and Pro Juventute delivered recommendations. The groups says it wants developers to make it clear to gamers that in any circumstance, human-rights violations cannot be allowed, even in a game setting. It also requested that, going forward, developers adhere to international human rights laws when they depict war or battle in a game.

"It is regrettable that game producers hardly ever use this possibility to creatively incorporate the rules of international law or even representatives of such rules as specific elements in the course of the game," the groups wrote in a statement. "Pro Juventute and Trial call upon the producers of computer and video games to use their strong creativity and innovation for this purpose. It would mean a wasted opportunity if the virtual space transmitted the illusion of impunity for unlimited violence in armed conflicts."

The group also said that it chose video games, rather than film, because of the former's "interactive" nature.

Now it's your turn. Should games depict violence that would be illegal in real life? Do human rights laws extend to video games? Let us know in the comments below.

[shycelticwitch]

It's about time. ALL games with criminal content should be banned. Killing and carnage are not games, whether it's "make believe" or not. Ratings do nothing to keep them out of the hands of children.

[CNET editors' note: Prohibited behavior deleted.]

[agriffith96]

Why you gotta be hateful about it? I think you're looking for a fight. Maybe you should play some violent games to take out your aggression you have built up.

They could change the scoring system to reward players for taking a better human role but filter or censor the game. In real war you can't go by rules that the other team isn't following. You do what you have to do to get the job done.

[HomsarTheOriginal]

No backlash, and you are entitled to your opinion. Just curious why someone can decide what is entertainment for some should be banned when it clearly does not harm anyone or anything.

[Caffeinated85]

Banning something is not the answer. It only creates more demand.

Although, I would agree that the current Ratings system is insufficient in preventing kids from playing these games. However, that should lead to an overhaul on Ratings regulation, not a ban on certain games. You don't ban Horror movies just because children watch them, though they graphically portray crimes as well (I know movies are 'engaging', but they are entertainment like games).

Also, the fact that you obviously don't realize that games are a form of entertainment that EVERYONE enjoys (even ones with jobs, A REAL ONE). They're just as accepted as going to a movie, and recent sales of games show this (MW2 for example).

So the point I'm making is your a *****. Go home.

[shycelticwitch]

@ Caffieinated85...I don't need these games (or any others) to have a fun-filled life... [CNET editors' note: Personal attack deleted.]

@ agriffith96... Not hateful... just sick and tired of seeing 11 and 12 year olds emulating what they see on these games in our schools and neighborhoods. How many more kids have to be set on fire, or shot, before society wakes up and realizes that the more this type of behavior is glorified in gaming, the more havoc it will wreak on our children.

@ Homsar... No one will ever convince me that, real or not, killing and carnage is entertainment. It's NOT.

[Caffeinated85]

@shycelticbitch :P... You can't say that just because a kid performs any violent act that it is attributed to video games. There's a clear mental separation of imagination and reality that has to be crossed for that to happen, which takes more environmental stimulus than simply playing video games. The whole logic that video games alone caused this or that crime is completely ignorant of the environment that led up to the crime itself. You are stupid. Go home.

[Jeromy1234]

Lets also ban little children from playing cops and robbers.....or perhaps little boys from playing "play soldier". Wait, wait, wait, Lets ban the toy Nerf guns, paintball, pop cap guns....Hold on, even better. All guns, play knifes, ....Wait, Wait wait. Better yet, anything created that could be used and/or promotes the simulation of violence, killing, karnage, or anything else such as that. This should also include any sport that promotes violent activity, especially the UFC. Why stop there? Let's also ban the practice of play fighting and wrestling since that too promotes violent activity, and after we are done banning all the different things that seem to promote violence and Carnage, lets sit around and sing "We are the World". Reality check: Violence and Carnage have been around since the beginning of mankind. It did not start with video games and video games do not cause people to commit violent acts. I do agree with you that the ratings do nothing to keep the games out of the hands of children. Second Reality Check: Keeping unacceptable material out of a child's hands is the responsibility of the parent, not a regulatory panel or some rating system. If the parent can't even keep violent games out of the hands of their children, then those parents have much, much more to worry about than video games.

[b2i12]

with all of the problems in the world, why on earth would human rights groups be spending their time on this. Violent video games and what not, have been protected in the US by our constituiton. If they want to regulate the swiss citzens games by all means go ahead by it would be highly unlikely to happen in the US. i think Jeromy1234 comment puts this into perspective the best.

[Lerianis3]

Second Reality Check: Keeping unacceptable material out of a child's hands is the responsibility of the parent, not a regulatory panel or some rating system. If the parent can't even keep violent games out of the hands of their children, then those parents have much, much more to worry about than video games.
__________________________________

You are automatically assuming that all parents think that violent video games are 'bad' for the kiddies... I don't, a bunch of my friends don't, and neither did their parents.
Fact is that the usual 'violent children' come from homes where mommy and daddy are hitting each other.... or them! Not from homes where people played violent video games. In fact, they have done studies (PROPER studies from a neutral point of view) that show that..... wow..... children who play violent video games are LESS violent than other children when it comes down to it.
Why? Mainly because they work out their frustrations in fantasy land instead of real life.

[ckh1272]

@shycelticwitch--Wow, someone is sure on their high horse. Just because you don't play the games, don't get up on that soapbox and criticize those who play responsibly. If a person can't separate video life from real life, their parents are not doing their jobs. Also, it is clearly a sign of bigger issues that have nothing to do with games. Learn to separate fact from fiction!

[mike_ekim]

By your logic, criminal content in movies and books should be banned, too. Killing and carnage are not entertainment, whether it's "make believe" or not.

[kewell82]

"Cry me a river."

[jaguar717]

Seriously. These professional hand-wringers are the reason we're so over lawyered, over regulated, over banned, and now have a generation of limp-wristed, effeminate, castrated, entitled, perpetual victims.

A "study" to see if the games let you do bad things? A recommendation that games exclude crimes? That's nearly every game worth playing...the whole point is that there's a conflict between bad guys and good guys. The more realistic games offer you more choice in your actions, so you can be a white knight, an anti-hero, or even downright evil.

What next, remove bad guys and their actions from movie and TV shows? How about instead we just ignore the Nanny Statists who wake up every morning and go out looking for something to get offended by?

[Lerianis3]

jaguar717, you hit the nail on the head. Frankly, these people should be more worried about what the hell is going on in Darfur than about online videogames that allow people to 'play the dark side'. The fact is that there has YET TO BE a case where doing something 'bad' in a game made someone do something bad in real life. In EVERY case where it was blamed on violent video games..... the damned people and children in question had NO ACCESS TO THOSE GAMES!

It's about time that these people were ************ every single time they try to push this absolute bullhockey.

[fuzzybomber1]

I think people need to put in perspective of the increase of crime. Just because there are more instances does not mean that there is more crime. As the country and the world grows in population there will be more people that do bad things, it is unavoidable. People need to stop blaming video games for an increase in crime which is caused by an increase in population. Also I think that back when most kids went out with there dad's and went hunting that is more violent than the video games. I am not saying that hunting is bad though.

[redmarine]

What about sci-fiction games? They don't have to follow 'current' laws Lol.

PS: Fantasy games aren't entangled to any law as well since they're fictional and made up.

[kaibelf]

On the contrary! In most RPGs there's some general or wizard who's trying to betray the kingdom! Lock up your children, lest they commit treason after playing this!

[jskrenes]

Yeah, who knows what laws and actions will be determined humane in the future? Also RPG games occur in a fantasy world, so who knows what rights exist there? For that matter, any game occurs in a fantasy environment, so what's the big deal? Or if it's a historical game, should it be accurate?

It's stuff like this that makes me want to go out and buy these games. Maybe Jack Bauer will take these guys down in the next season of 24.

[roryk27]

wow.. can nothing just be a "game" anymore? this isn't real life so just let it go. it's not like the people who are playing these games are going out and committing war crimes.

[tylrwnzl]

It's not just a game studies have directly linked people playing violent natured video games that depict illegal activities to increased rates of violence and crime among those playing such games. Yes they may not be committing war crimes but the violent nature of the games is resulting in people going out and committing violent crimes because of what they are doing in something that is supposedly "just a game"

[Caffeinated85]

Every study linking video games to rates of violence always misses who is demanding these games. The way the studies write their results depict a scenario where gamers are influenced by the game vs the more likely scenario that people wanting violent entertainment are going to seek out these games.

I'd much rather there be no violence, but I understand that's not reality. If given a choice I'd rather the majority of violent acts be carried out in a virtual environment than on the streets.

[Proud_Geek]

@tylrwnzl

...
You're kidding, right?

[Crow120]

I agree with you roryk27.

@tylrwnzl
Give me a few minutes and I'll come up with a few studies directly linking violent video games to increased cheese consumption. Thats the thing about "studies" they're meaningless without facts and nearly all video game studies are slanted to promote whatever side of the argument paid for them.

[ryfter]

@tylrwnzl Actually, what the studies have shown, is that people with violent tendencies tend to prefer violent video games... just like people without violent tendencies enjoy the games. Causality is normally left out for political/agenda reasons.

[Lerianis3]

tylrvnzi, those 'studies' that have directly linked people playing violent natured video games to increased rates of violence and crime have been exposed as being FUNDED AND MANIPULATED by people like Focus On The Family...... basically, they did NOT adhere to the 'neutral viewpoint' that they were supposed to.

The bottom line with the OTHER, LEGITIMATE studies done by other people who have no 'stones' in this to have run over are that violent video games do NOT make people more violent or doing criminal things in real life, EVEN CHILDREN AND TEENAGERS.
In fact, the opposite is true according to the FBI and the FCC!

It's about time for people like you to realize that you are not fooling anyone out there except the stupidest of the stupid. It's like I tell people everyday: Watching Friday the 13th movies does NOT make you go out to be a serial killer.... it's not different with video games, EVEN WHEN YOU TAKE INTO ACCOUNT WHAT YOU ARE DOING IN THE GAMES.

[Renegade Knight]

@ tylrwnzl

I've never seen the reverse study. If folks prone to this kind of behavior are also prone to buy the games. Then wouldn't the argument be that if they are busy taking it out in the game, they are not taking it out in real life?

[kaibelf]

@tylrwnzl
If your child is incapable of separating fantasy from reality, that's your failure as a parent, or their genetic problem. In both cases, it's not my fault, and as a taxpaying adult, I'll play whatever the heck I want to play.

[ilsthey]

I like the tactic, as expressed in this article. They are not out to ban, these games. Just expressing a "missed opportunity". I think it could make games like this more challenging and fun, if the "shoot 'em all and let {a deity} sort them out" tactic was not such a viable and successful strategy. Don't ban it or prevent it in the game, just give some type of relevant in game consequence that is related to the real world consequences for that type of action would have in the real world scenarios these games are basing themselves on.

A also like that the choice of games over movies was addressed as that was a thought I had when reading the first paragraph. "Why not movies?"

[lfhlaw]

Exactly, Next they'll be saying Fox can't make the TV show 24 anymore, Jack Bauer does stuff all the time that is probably against the IHL. so there's goes popular viewing.

The fact that they have more time, to examine these games and even play them. I wonder who's dime that's on?

I understand that maybe it violates IHL, but at the same time it's still fictional. I mean if that's the case, should we take all the fictional books and outlaw them? Where do you draw the line? I'm sure Jason Bourne doesn't follow all the IHL.
Where exactly is that line? And really is it enforceable on a private company? Are you saying that Author's that write books should adhere to the IHL too?

Is it just a waste of Taxpayer or foundation money?

[AdelheidBernstein]

I am one of those people who do enjoy great attention to detail, and would appreciate a game that attempted to adhere to such policy - provided it didn't completely interfere with the playing of the game (i.e., no waiting months while the Commander-in-chief drags his feet making a decision). I don't think it would work for many blockbuster games, aimed at the casual or hardcore gaming audience, but surely there's still a market for realistic simulation games.

[Throgged]

Yeah, let's take the shoot now ask questions later tactic out of the game and insert a "reality" aspect. take the offender to court. Use the taxpayers money to fund their stay in jail and their attorney fees and the time wasted in court. In 2-3 years MAYBE you get to finish that part of the game. Then you can move on to the next level. "provide humane support to 3rd world countries where you battle local drug lords stealing the goods" that sounds like an awesome game to me. I'd certainly pay $60 to play that. blaming a video game for crimes commited is stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid. Also, it's stupid. While we're at it, let's ban name calling. I don't like it. It promotes violence.

[Shrrt Rver]

Its a game. People need to calm down since most of these games are geared for adults they can make the choice on how they play. Parents should know what their kids are playing and be on top of that, but let the rest of the adults play what they enjoy.

[Lerianis3]

Actually, children and teenagers can make that choice themselves as well. My children were raised on Doom and other 'violent' video games, and just like me..... LESS VIOLENT THAN THE MEAN!
At least with anyone outside of the family.... inside the family, we know how to push each other's buttons too damned well!

[kewell82]

I have played video games my whole life and I am still not influenced by them to go commit crime. The reason for that is because I was taught by my parents the consequence for such actions. The Parents these days are getting more and more relaxed in parenting and they expect the public system to teach their children right from wrong.

What kind of ideology is that? Any such crime supposedly caused by a video game should in fact be put on the parents because the parents either didn't teach them anything or because they gave their child a video game system left him alone with it for hours and hours just to keep him away so that they didn't have to do any parenting.

It is the responsibility of the parents to raise their kids to know right from wrong and the consequences of choosing the wrong. They should not leave it up to the schools to teach them and it is just bad parenting to give your child a game system and not set rules and make sure they know it is just a video game. Also the schools are available to give kids the education they need to succeed in life, not to raise and babysit them.

[Proud_Geek]

Dude you are SOOOO talking to a wall. The average American parent is caught up in themselves, paying bills, or plastic surgery and self-affirmation.

Very few parents (like me, I am not ashamed to say), spend any quality time with their kids. We sold our TV before baby was born, and now watch maybe 2 hours of toddler shows per week. Even though my wife and me work fulltime, we make serious time to just BE with our 3-year old child, be it at the park, gym, in bed reading, or even randomly dropping in at her school (that is, taking time off from work) to join her at play. Is it challenging at times? You betcha. But that's part of the package, Basically we wanted a child, and we're dedicated to being fully involved and being the best parents we can.

In contrast, most parents today are technically not FIT to have or raise children. So they pass the buck to TV, school, and Big Government.

So my point is, I agree with you 100%, but I stopped talking about this a long time ago. No one is listening to us.

Completely agree. Guidelines and ratings are tools for parents to use in their parenting, not hindrances themselves.

[Lerianis3]

Proud_Geek, the problem is that most families CANNOT DO THAT. They cannot do that while supporting their families because we have VERY lax worker protection laws and they are getting laxer as time goes on.

[kaibelf]

@Lerianis3
Nonsense. If you have too many kids and can't afford to provide for them properly, the only thing lax is your self-control. It's not up to everyone else to tow the line for your family. Use a condom, close your legs, or work toward a better job, THEN have kids, but quit acting as if having Octomom-style litters of unsupervised brats is a civil right.

[cgates13]

This is insane. Will it be illegal to write a book that includes so-called war crimes or criminal activity? Wishing something away won't make it actually go away. Should a book be banned because it contemplates a rape? How about a fight? How about a description of a fight?

By the way, I've noticed that it's impossible or illegal to do many in real-life that are de rigeur in video games - and in books. And on TV. And in film. And in traditional stories. "Rape of the Sabine Women", for example, is pretty gratuitous. And one could argue that the depiction of Hannibal's slaughter of the Roman legions at Cannae was pretty vicious too.

These people out to ban content are filled with a level of vicious stupidity that almost defies belief.

[davidmcelroy_dotmac]

I'm not a gamer, and I don't have any interest in playing games that let me kill people. But the idea that it should be illegal to take an action in some fantasy game because that action would be illegal in real life is beyond stupid. It's arrogant. It's mind control. It's all about wanting to control what people think. It's very, very wrong.

[Lerianis3]

Yes, it is..... but that is bluntly what these people wish to do: they wish to brainwash you with their viewpoints and if you don't want to adhere to their 'morality'....... LETHAL INJECTION TIME FOR YOU! I hate to say that about them, but that is the honest opinion that I have made about these people.
They either want to kill you (showing that they are NOT non-violent) or they wish to throw you in prison and throw away the key, not feeding you or giving you water either.

[GrenadierGrim]

Quite simply put, if I play the new Call of Duty I will not enjoy it so much that I go slaughtering people. If you think I will then you yourself are obviously far too easily influenced and should stay inside in a bubble. As someone else said, movies are forever crossing lines, destroying buildings of importance and more obviously with the rubbish SAW series, torturing people for "moral lessons." If movies can get away with it video games are well within reason, period.
A little preachy but inarguable I feel, even for the biggest "human rights activist"

[Lerianis3]

Quite true..... it's telling that most of the people who do these 'terrible things' like Columbine are not really...... having any access to 'bad things' like violent video games, adult books, etc.
It is the ones who have been SHELTERED THEIR WHOLE LIVES who suddenly snap and do these things...... and most of them are the VERY CHILDREN OF THE PEOPLE like belong to this organizations in the article.

[danielgrant612]

I agree with lerianis3

[Joeyskosmo]

The people that want to change the games to how they want are just trying to control more people, those people are probably control freaks that just want to ruin the fun that those games actually bring. I also should bring up the point that most people, me for example play these games to have fun doing something in the game you know you wouldn't do in real life in a video game. All the game does is give people fun. People that want to ruin that are sad. Find something else to try to change because i know they are the people they watch every little thing on the TV just to sue someone. Also the people that end up doing something similar to the game in real life are probably mentally unstable to begin with.

[Jeromy1234]

That was my thoughts exactly. Perhaps these people should concentrate on minding their own business, and monitoring their own selves and children, instead of trying to tell everyone else what to do. Anthony Hopkins stated it best in the movie, Instinct, "We have only one thing to give up. Our dominion. We don't own the world. We're not kings yet. Not gods. Can we give that up? Too precious, all that control? Too tempting, being a god? " Sadly enough, far too many people would have to answer that question with a resounding, "Yes. It is too hard to give up."

[dmingust]

What about the real world consequences of Monopoly. Or even Operation; if I go out and start pulling wishbones from people's bodies...with a tweezer...

[Lerianis3]

Extreme..... but legitimate. Monopoly could lead you to 'doing anything to get MONEY, MONEY, MONEY' so it should be banned as well. Same thing for Operation. Same thing for Hungry Hungry Hippos, which might make you get obese. Etc. etc. etc.

It's time for these people to learn that they are stupid jackasses who need a swift kick up the butt, and a one-way trip to the nearest insane asylum if they TRULY believe this bull that they are preaching.

[gerenmoor]

Monopoly has always been a nasty piece of work. You get sent to jail without trial or any evidence. You have no access to legal advisers (unless someone 'visits' you - not sure why they would want to though). Then you're sent on your way without so much as an apology. Where's the humanity in that! I'll take my chances at a G20 summit protest instead - much more decent behaviour from the authorities there. Or perhaps Monopoly's actually a game, where reality shouldn't be so silly as to try to intrude and ruin the fun. I bet you could find some human rights issue in tiddlywinks if you look closely. It looks like the legal eagles have got way too much spare time on their hands if this is what they consider important. Why not get out there and fix the real world and let gamers have their bit of harmless fun in a fantasy world. where no one actually gets hurt, and they can all come back and play again the next time. By the way, do collections of organised bytes in a game really need legal aid? Aren't they just electrical signals in a computer?

[Verbal_K]

Anyone know the human rights laws that pertain to aliens and cyborgs? I don't want to violate any interplanetary rules but...shooting those little green men is so much more satisfying when they are unarmed and pleading for their lives. What about giant man-eating insects...can we at least kill those without the fear of being court martialed?

[CodyRT]

Personally, I play video games because it is a way that I can do things that I would not be able to do in real life. Extending human rights to video games just does not seem practical or favorable. Video games are not meant to be a 100% depiction of real life.If games were to include those types of restrictions and rules, there wouldn't be much point in playing them. Video games are just a game, they do not need to have legal complications tying them down.

Also what makes movies differently than video games in this situation? Movies depict characters performing stunts and acts that could be considered in this study with video games, but they aren't.

[Lerianis3]

Exactly right. The fact is that most people who play video games do that to relieve stress that would otherwise come out in socially unacceptable ways like wife-beating, raping people (hentai games), etc.
It's time to stop being politically correct (and to lock up the people who came up with that stupidity) and just allow people to be people, even if you don't like what they are doing, as long as they are not physically harming someone else in REAL LIFE.

[dtp1111]

This makes perfect sense to me. Why wouldn't game producers want their games to be as realistic as possible. Putting in rules that reflect real-life would make these games more difficult and more interesting.

[ryfter]

Realism doesn't always make games more fun. Some games go for realism, others are "arcady" which Call of Duty 4 is one of those arcady games.

[Jeromy1234]

There are other ways to make a game more difficult and more interesting than to subject games to the whims of activist groups, such as these humanitarian groups. Additionally, I have played game that were "realistic" in the terms of "humanitarian laws" such as failing an area if a civilian is killed and I'll tell you from experience, these games are not the least bit fun to play.

[Nicholas Buenk]

You should focus on realism to reach the reality of horror, or you are trivializing death and crime.

[Renegade Knight]

Realisticly some of the "laws" get in the way of survival in combat. The rules of engagment we have to live by cost us more lives and blood in our current conflicts than we would have to spend otherwise. We pay the price for a reason, our mission is larger than just the battles. We have nations to rebuild and that won't happen if we don't follow a higher path (you can debate the success and how "high" our path is, but not really that it's the track we need to follow for success).

Also how can you show some of the enemy combat methods that utterly ignore any of the laws if you can't break the rules in the game? Last time I checked terrorism and their rebil buddies were all about those illegal tactics.

[MaggieRed]

Two words: Nanny State.

It's not real, it is make believe! Next thing you know the thought police will be here.

[Lerianis3]

We are getting closer and closer to a Nanny State and thought police/crime here.... and I don't like it in the slightest. I'm one of those 'idiots' as these organizations would call them who don't want people butting into what I do unless: 1. I am physically harming someone else or damaging property without that person/the owner's permission, 2. I am physically forcing someone to do or not do something that they do or do not wish to do, and 3. Are not stealing from someone else, unless it's my last choice between me and death.

If none of those 3 apply.... BUTT THE HELL OUT OF MY LIFE!

[mmichaels]

No games that violate laws of physics either! Also....NO TALKING ANIMALS! Way to go Switzerland!

[Verbal_K]

Anyone know the human rights laws that pertain to aliens and cyborgs? I don't want to violate any interplanetary rules but...shooting those little green men is so much more satisfying when they are unarmed and pleading for their lives. What about giant man-eating insects...can we at least kill those without the fear of being court martialed? Seriously...I agree with some of the above comments: If video games can influence you into doing something like violating human rights...anything can. Perhaps we should focus on the real world instead...

[Verbal_K]

Anyone know the human rights laws that pertain to aliens and cyborgs? I don't want to violate any interplanetary rules but...shooting those little green men is so much more satisfying when they are unarmed and pleading for their lives. What about giant man-eating insects...can we at least kill those without the fear of being court martialed? Seriously...I agree with some of the above comments: If video games can influence you into doing something like violating human rights...anything can. Perhaps we should focus on the real world instead...

[Rai07]

your right they should look at the real world
im a gamer and following a education in game design
i played a lot of games and i NEVER had the need to kill a real person
ingame you can do something you cant or wont do in real life and thats FUN thats entertainment!!!
so why can books have unlimited violence and games not?????
why can the news show terrible things on tv????
why can the movie SAW be made with torture..... isnt that agains human rights...... but nooooo thats no problem lets ban games because they are games and supposedly make us go WILD........
i dont understand that logic games are entertainment and if young kids play violent games its their parents fault
i work in a multimedia store and if a 10 year old kid wants to buy a 18+ game i dont sell it to him unless the parents say its okey!
but i do say there needs to be a better way to prevent young children from playing 18+ games

why do people want to decide whats good for us..... is it wrong to be or make choices for yourself?? inst that a human right??

[echeeseman]

I must buckle up before I drive. I must buckle up before I fly. Soon, I'll go to jail if I don't buy medical insurance. Can't I just be left alone? I'm an adult -- I don't need you to save me.

[Eddie-c]

Buckling up before driving is a legal requirement, i.e. the law. Or are you that much of a daft bammie?
Or are you saying you ignore and refute all law.

[Hernys]

You must buckle before you drive because if yo don't you are putting OTHER PEOPLE at danger of killing you in a trivial accident. Think of it this way: should you be able to strap yourself to the bumper of your car and drive it by remote control from there? It's your life after all, isn't it?
But you shouldn't be able to do so, because if you did, other people would risk killing you in what otherwise would be a trivial fender bender. Yes, you would get the worst part, being killed, but you would produce significant harm to others as well, and you don't have that right.

[Lerianis3]

by Hernys November 24, 2009 6:32 PM PST
You must buckle before you drive because if yo don't you are putting OTHER PEOPLE at danger of killing you in a trivial accident. Think of it this way: should you be able to strap yourself to the bumper of your car and drive it by remote control from there? It's your life after all, isn't it?
________________________________________

Yes, you should. As long as it is an adult doing the thing in question, I do NOT think that society should tell you that you should have to buckle up, that you should HAVE to have health insurance, that you should HAVE to do jack ****!

It's time for society to BUTT OUT and realize that if I want to take the risk of getting killed in a car by not wearing my seat belt (I don't and I always do wear my seatbelt) if I KNOW AND UNDERSTAND THE RISK or really, EVEN IF I DON'T.... it's my life and you have no right to meddle in it.

[freemarket--2008]

@Eddie-c: Laws are often passed which are stupid and immoral. It's past time to put a stop to it.