Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

This is in PDF form and is rather entertaining, but too long to do a cut-and-paste:

http://www.supremecourt.gov/oral_arg...ts/08-1448.pdf

More or less California, Shwarzenegger, Yee and this dumbass law are going to get blown out of the water. The justices have already showed just how flimsy the basis of this law is. That's not to say the ESA doesn't have some tough questions to answer, but I think its safe to say the First Amendment

A big problem this law has is saying what level of violence is "wrong," really. The representative from California wanted to say many games went beyond "established norms" but they consistently don't give a solid example of what that is. Then he says some but not all M rated games would go beyond established norms and devolves into "its like porn," basically.

Now excuse me while I go shoot some people in the face over the Black Box in Goldeneye online.

[Malacite]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

lol.

The ESRB is kinda tricky anyway. I mean, it's there as a guideline, and that's it. While I'm typically against minors playing M Rated games, there are going to be some kids 15+ who are actually quite mature and can handle it. The irony of course being that the reverse is also true, and far more prevalent - There are more adults than I personally care to deal with who are completely immature and total asshats online playing these games.

tl;dr - User discretion is advised.

[Raydeus]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

It's always funny how sex and the naked body rank waaay higher as a threat over violence and murder.

[Grizzlebeard]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

It's always funny how sex and the naked body rank waaay higher as a threat over violence and murder.

Clearly an indication of the chokehold religion has on a nation when violence is acceptable but swearing, nudity, and homosexuality are taboo.

[Malacite]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

And this surprises people?

Crusades - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Neverslip]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

Khitan General: Wrong! Conan, what is best in life?

Conan: To crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and to hear the lamentations of their women!

Arnold vs Violent Entertainment seems more like it should be a punchline....

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

Kinda funny that just as this goes to the Supreme Court to debunk, its now the health nazis in California taking their turn at "protecting the children."

They have implemented a law that bans the sale of toys with happy meals unless it has healthy food in it.

A "healthy" happy meal is just going to be more expensive and McDonald's has a dollar menu full unhealthier things. Turns out people pinch pennies more quickly than drop pounds. What do you think Mom will do?

Of course we're talking about California here, after the voted for a dipshit like Shwarzenegger, they follow up by electing a dumbfuck like Jerry Brown again. We may not have to wait for the Big One to hit California, its destroying itself pretty good.

[Malacite]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

They have implemented a law that bans the sale of toys with happy meals unless it has healthy food in it.

I'm actually in full support of this notion, as well as Bloomberg's initiative to get junk food excluded from food stamps. If you think about it, the happy meal is really just an underhanded method for companies like Mc Donalds to hook more customers. Get 'em good and addicted when they're young by drawing them in with free toys (to which end they'll nag their folks for it - I remember doing so as a kid myself waaaaay back when they had the super mario 3 toys) and then the hope is they stay on as loyal customers well into their adult lives.

This is by no means a guaranteed thing, but the numbers (and waistlines) speak for themselves.


If you want something you should actually be upset about, how about how prop 19 failing 54 to 46? Good job there guys, keep listening to all the bullshit lies about how it's somehow worse than Alcohol or Tobacco, and keep giving the drug cartels more power. I don't use the stuff myself, but I know plenty who do and I'm sick of hearing about the ridiculous lies that it's "far more evil" than alcohol and leads to more violence. Yeah ok, when has anyone ever seen someone get violent while high on MJ? Oh right, it doesn't happen because it's an inhibitor and it calms you down.

What is so hard about the following? - Legalize it, Tax it, regulate it (as in, being high in public = public drunkenes = jailed). It's less time & resources wasted by law enforcement, the judicial system, more money for a state that has always had major budget problems, and it takes away a lot of the influence from the Mexican drug cartels.

[Raydeus]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

They should stop selling weapon ammo unless it contains a healthy amount of blanks.

So people doesn't die as often.

[Omgwtfbbqkitten]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

I'm actually in full support of this notion, as well as Bloomberg's initiative to get junk food excluded from food stamps. If you think about it, the happy meal is really just an underhanded method for companies like Mc Donalds to hook more customers. Get 'em good and addicted when they're young by drawing them in with free toys (to which end they'll nag their folks for it - I remember doing so as a kid myself waaaaay back when they had the super mario 3 toys) and then the hope is they stay on as loyal customers well into their adult lives.

So you can claim that its the parent's responsibility to decide what video games their kids can play, but the state should be able to parent the child when it comes to food and just totally take that out of parents' hands?

mmmkay

[Murphie]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

Advocating the elimination of unhealthy food options from food stamps is not the same as feeling that a parent has the right to decide what sort of media their child engages with. It's perfectly reasonable to have different feelings about different issues.

[Mhurron]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

but the state should be able to parent the child when it comes to food and just totally take that out of parents' hands?

When someone else is paying the bill, you eat what they tell you to eat. Don't like it? Don't use food stamps.

You can't buy alcohol with food stamps, OMG ITS THE DEATH OF RESPONSIBILITY!

[TheGrandMom]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

They have implemented a law that bans the sale of toys with happy meals unless it has healthy food in it.

And parents will just buy the toy separately and give it to the kid with the unhealthy Happy Meal. It means absolutely nothing.

Good eating habits start in the home and parents are the ones that instill this in their children, not the government. I mean they've been teaching the god damn food pyramid and whats the right food to eat since I was in school. Look where thats got us, we are one of the fattest nations in the world! Go government for wasting billions of dollars on something that failed and just keep shoveling more money into it. PARENTS HAVE TO SHOW KIDS WHATS RIGHT TO EAT AND THEN STICK TO IT IN THEIR OWN HOMES AND WITH THEIR OWN HABITS!

If you're baby spits out the peas, you shovel them back in. If he gags then you mix them with some apples/pears/peaches (I used peaches since they are the strongest flavored fruit) but you keep giving them to him. You gradually decrease the fruit until he's eating the peas.......TA DA he likes peas! As he grows you keep making dinners with vegetables and you offer vegetable snacks too. Alternate the snacks with fruit or include both but do whatever it takes to get those veges into kids. I used to trick my kids and grate veges up and put them in things I cooked and baked for that extra punch of veges. (Grate carrots really fine and simmer them in your spaghetti sauce. They will basically dissolve and you have extra vitamins in your sauce.....and it actually helps the sauce taste great too. FYI, they put carrots in the sauce in Italy.) P..A..R..E..N..T..S.....thats who needs to lay down the fucking law, not the government!

And don't give me this "I can't afford good food" shit either. I've been on welfare and given my kids healthy meals. One of the things people don't realize is portion size is WAY over the size it should be in this country. If you use the correct portion size when feeding your kids on a budget, there is plenty to go around.

[Ufgt]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

I got a Star Wars watch from Burger King when I had a kids meals. I was in college. I still have the watch, it hasn't failed me yet.

In short, more toys for more kids.

[Malacite]

Re: Schwarzeneggar v. EMA - Nov. 2nd Supreme Court Transcript

And don't give me this "I can't afford good food" shit either

Eh, that's not entirely right TGM. A big part of the problem is that (at least in the U.S.) Junk Food is cheap and tax-free, while organic foods are expensive and taxed. That is fucked up. Healthy food is still more expensive here in Canada, but we don't tax it - we tax shit like pop, candy & chips instead which makes way more sense.

I agree that it's a matter of individual responsibility and no one wants a nanny-state, but I also feel it doesn't hurt to have the govt step in on some occasions and give a little nudge in the right direction. It's not like they're banning happy meals altogether, just trying to kill some of what I feel is purely evil marketing to children. The guys @ Mc D's know damn well that the toys are gonna entice children and that's why they do it.

Now, you could possibly make a loose argument with regards to first amendment rights (advertisements and such) but I don't think that would fly too well. Like TGM said, it's ultimately up to the parents, but it'd probably be a hell of a lot easier on folks who want to keep their kids away from that junky food (or at least minimize how much of it they eat) if their children weren't being overwhelmed by their kids requests for it.

I don't have kids, but I do know what I'm talking about here - my mom ran a daycare from the time I was born until about 3~4 years ago, and it doesn't take much to gets to go "OMG I WANT THAT! MOMMY CAN WE GO TO <insert store/restaurant here> PLEASE?!

I never really thought about it that much before, but I'm starting to notice just how awful & disgusting a lot of marketing really is with regards to younger demographics...