Researchers (and parents) have always been concerned with the effects of video game content on minors. Banning minors from purchasing violent video games seemed like a good idea for some, but it didn’t hold ground in front of the three-judge panel of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in California.

 

The law has never been enforced, but it would have required buyers to show ID upon purchasing such video games, and it would have punished retailers with large fines for violating it.

 

According to court documents, the lawmakers failed to provide evidence of psychological harm done to children by violent video games. Furthermore, the judges also believe the law restricts freedom of speech. The same law has been rejected in other states as well.

 

The gaming industry should be relieved to know that the law has been rejected, but it should also be aware of the fact that the author of the law, Sen. Leland Yee, is considering his options and might file for an appeal.

 

The question that truly remains here is what is the most appropriate mechanism of protecting children from the harmful influence of some games. And the place where it should all start is at home, where parents can, and should, have control over the content that reaches their children.

 

So far, it hasn’t been unanimously proven that violent video games affect children. Furthermore, protecting them from violence would actually mean eradicating violence on the streets first, which seems to be the one kids are mostly exposed to these days.