First came the OpEx piece then came this in response
Seems simple enough, Rep. Jeff Johnson, R-Plymouth, wants to restrict kids under 18 from getting their hands on violent and sexually explicit video games.
Danny Glass, Misguided-Minneapolitan, thinks such restrictions are a violation of the “pesky” First Amendment.
Nice try, Danny, but your ignorance is showing. Does the phrase “prior restraint” mean anything to you?
(Danny pauses to scratch head and wipe the drool from his chin)
I thought not.
Let me explain: The government cannot stop video game companies from creating and selling their wares. That would be prior restraint and violation of the First Amendment.
Representitive Johnson is not proposing such a thing, on the contrary, he wants to keep games -already rated for mature and/or adult audiences out of the hands of kids.
And your claim that “video games are multiple forms of art” and therefore minors’ access cannot be restricted is laughable. Would you say the same go for pornographic magazines and movies, or do you think government is stomping on the first amendment rights of minors by not allowing them to purchase such crap?
You may prefer the Constitution to be a living breathing document, meaning whatever you want it to mean in order to fit your life, but even you can’t stretch it this far.
Think again, Danny.