Rhode Island Representative calls for "special tax" on video games....

[ItsMitch]

Just to make it very, very clear, I'll be staying away from politics the best I can, discuss the actual topic on hand and steer away from your Republican and Democrat fantasies to fucking /r/politics, thanks

Story is coming in from PC Gamer and a Rhode Island representative is calling for a extra tax on video games in wake of the horrific school shooting (and no I won't go into details on the shooting) and he requests that the tax from the video games would go into mental health hospitals and programs....... Right.

Source: https://www.pcgamer.com/rhode-island-rep-calls-for-special-tax-on-violent-videogames

 

Quote

 

Rhode Island Representative Robert Nardolillo has announced plans to introduce legislation that will add a ten percent tax to all M-rated (or higher) videogames sold in the state. Under his proposal, revenues raised by the taxes would go into a special fund for school districts to support counseling, mental health programs, and "other conflict resolution activities." 

"There is evidence that children exposed to violent videogames at a young age tend to act more aggressively than those who are not," Nardolillo said, without actually citing any supporting evidence. "This bill would give schools the additional resources needed to help students deal with that aggression in a positive way." 

 

"Our goal is to make every school in Rhode Island a safe and calm place for students to learn. By offering children resources to manage their aggression today, we can ensure a more peaceful tomorrow." 

 

I find his statement a joke, there's no conclusive evidence to support that video games increases your violence at all, there has been studies in the past to prove against his points. Adding extra tax on video games because a person thinks they increase a person's violence. 

 

Quote

 

There is evidence of a link between violent video games and aggressive behavior, but the question of what it actually means is far from settled. The American Psychological Association noted in 2015 that different approaches to research and "a lack of precision in terminology" has resulted in debate about the actual effects of videogames: "All violence, including lethal violence, is aggression, but not all aggression is violence."  

 

The question of causality is also a factor: Western Michigan University associate professor of sociology Whitney DeCamp told CNN in 2016 that the reported connection between the factors could indicate that kids inclined to be aggressive are more likely to play violent videogames than those who are not. The same report also noted that "238 scholars asked the American Psychological Association to retire its 'outdated and problematic statements on video game violence'."   

 

While the article goes on to say that there is an evidence of link, but it lacks exact terminology and there's no concrete proof that video games turns people into fucking monsters. I've played video games for all my life and I'm not a monster nor am I mass murderer.

 

For the whole tax on video games is just crazy in my eyes, there's no need for any kind of extra tax because he thinks that there's a "link" to video game violence without linking any up to date sources of evidence. 

Videos that are accurate to this topic: 

 

[NMS]

So I've been playing Overwatch for 2 weeks now and feel this urge to visit the Horizon Lunar Colony just to check on the monkeys, if there are any left.

Is SpaceX sending any rockets there soon? Because I would love to buy a ticket!

[aisle9]

There are far fewer M-rated games out there than all other ratings, but they make significantly more per game in most cases.

 

Hmmmm. I wonder what the real motivation here is.

[ItsMitch]

Just now, NMS said:

Is SpaceX sending any rockets there soon? Because I would love to buy a ticket

I wouldn't mind chilling in a rocket and blasting off this damn rock at this rate. 

[captain_to_fire]

I wonder if Angry Birds is included since it involves flightless birds committing suicide to kill green pigs?

 

 

/s

[PCGuy_5960]

Quote

"There is evidence that children exposed to violent videogames at a young age tend to act more aggressively than those who are not," Nardolillo said, without actually citing any supporting evidence. "This bill would give schools the additional resources needed to help students deal with that aggression in a positive way." 

 

"Our goal is to make every school in Rhode Island a safe and calm place for students to learn. By offering children resources to manage their aggression today, we can ensure a more peaceful tomorrow." 

Here we go again with this "video games cause violence" bs.

 

No, video games do not cause violence

 

Edited February 23, 2018 by PCGuy_5960

[ItsMitch]

Just now, PCGuy_5960 said:

Here we go again with this "video games cause violence" bs.

"THE MILITARY VR SIMS ARE TEACHING KIDS TO SHOOT GUNS!¬!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

/s

[handymanshandle]

1 minute ago, SC2Mitch said:

"THE MILITARY VR SIMS ARE TEACHING KIDS TO SHOOT GUNS!¬!!!!!!!!!!!!!"

/s

Time to go play some Insurgency even though I'm not great at it. /s

[dalekphalm]

So, as noted, the very slim association between aggression and violent video games is correlative, not causative.

 

Furthermore, M-Rated games are not to be sold to people under the age of 17. If a store is selling a game to someone under 17, they are breaking the rating system. I don't know if the rating system is legally binding in the US, but it should be.

 

If a parent decides to buy their kid a rated-M game? That's alright - it's totally up to the parent to decide what kind of mature themes their child may play.

 

But this is ridiculous. If they're gonna tax violent things, they should tax all violent things, including movies, TV, books, the news, etc. But no, don't do this either. Both are a bad idea and won't solve the problem.

[Sauron]

Taxes are taxes and what a state chooses to tax depends on a variety of factors - by itself, the idea of taxing mature rated videogames is not that insane, just like many countries tax owners of a TV. The only "problem" I see with it is the reason given; if they claimed it would help the state fund something useful to everyone without being too much of a hit on the consumer's wallets I would be just fine with it (with the difference between mature and "normal" games being that adults can usually afford to pay a little more for their entertainment). While offering counseling and mental care for children is important, I don't think mature rated videogames increase the associated costs in any way, and if this representative claims otherwise he'd better have some solid evidence to back that up. With this sort of presentation the proposal just comes off as the typical lazy strategy to get some cheap votes from an uninformed crowd.

[Sauron]

9 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Here we go again with this "video games cause violence" bs.

Meanwhile you can bring kids to the shooting range whenever you wish...

6 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

But this is ridiculous. If they're gonna tax violent things, they should tax all violent things, including movies, TV, books, the news, etc. But no, don't do this either. Both are a bad idea and won't solve the problem.

That depends, if the line is drawn based on the target audience it could make sense to only tax some violent things, but of course the stated reason would indeed bring in pretty much everything. I think the issue is the idea that M rated games are going straight to kids and that they should be taxed as a deterrent of sorts, which gives in to the tired stereotype that only kids are into games and that all games are aimed at them.

[handymanshandle]

4 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

So, as noted, the very slim association between aggression and violent video games is correlative, not causative.

 

Furthermore, M-Rated games are not to be sold to people under the age of 17. If a store is selling a game to someone under 17, they are breaking the rating system. I don't know if the rating system is legally binding in the US, but it should be.

 

If a parent decides to buy their kid a rated-M game? That's alright - it's totally up to the parent to decide what kind of mature themes their child may play.

 

But this is ridiculous. If they're gonna tax violent things, they should tax all violent things, including movies, TV, books, the news, etc. But no, don't do this either. Both are a bad idea and won't solve the problem.

Yep...

 

a kid 10 or older can play a M-rated game if their parent thinks they're mature enough.

 

But like in the case of the shooting in Parkland, Fla. there's no evidence saying he was a gamer. So frankly the idea that video games are evil or that violent games cause school shooters is still as ever an absurd perspective.

 

Being 18 myself, I don't really understand why I can't get a handgun until 21 but I can get what is colloquially called an "assault rifle". It should really be the other way around.

[Master Disaster]

 

Is it coming up to election season? Does this dude needs votes or just a new pool for his mansion?

 

[handymanshandle]

I really think this is part of the problem with violence in the country https://www.nationalreview.com/blog/corner/yes-theres-war-boys-schools-caroline-kitchens/

that and the erosion of the family.

[handymanshandle]

Just now, Master Disaster said:

 

Is it coming up to election season? Does this dude needs votes or just a new pool for his mansion?

 

Probably both.

[dalekphalm]

9 minutes ago, Sauron said:

Meanwhile you can bring kids to the shooting range whenever you wish...

That depends, if the line is drawn based on the target audience it could make sense to only tax some violent things, but of course the stated reason would indeed bring in pretty much everything. I think the issue is the idea that M rated games are going straight to kids and that they should be taxed as a deterrent of sorts, which gives in to the tired stereotype that only kids are into games and that all games are aimed at them.

Here's the thing though.

 

Rated-M games are for adults. Like me. Just like rated NC-17/R movies.

 

A kid will definitely play some Rated-M games. Just like he'll see some Rated R movies. I don't have any stats on this, but I would be surprised if kids played a significantly more number of Rated-M games vs watching movies above their rating too.

[Sauron]

3 minutes ago, dalekphalm said:

Here's the thing though.

 

Rated-M games are for adults. Like me. Just like rated NC-17/R movies.

 

A kid will definitely play some Rated-M games. Just like he'll see some Rated R movies. I don't have any stats on this, but I would be surprised if kids played a significantly more number of Rated-M games vs watching movies above their rating too.

Exactly. The whole premise of this "proposal" is that these games are going straight to kids and that's just not true. Besides, many M rated games don't actually deserve it in my opinion; Call Of Duty, for example, is almost cartoonish in its absurdity and there is a clear divide in what is violent but blatantly nonsensical and what might (hypotetically) scar a sensitive kid for life - sort of like the difference between a Tom & Jerry cartoon and Watchmen. I think the strictness of the rating system might end up making it less significant given how wide the range of what can be considered "M rated" is.

[yian88]

Not only this is retarded and evil, but it serves no one having this tax, it certainly doesnt help with mass shootings and gun violence.

How about tax the stores that sell guns to anyone under 25 years old by 500%? there you go now you have some money to steal, the cash wont go to help programs anyway.

How about punish the schools/teachers/students who neglect bullying? that is an overlyaccepted thing in schools all around the world, opressive violence between students that lead to depression, self hate, society hate and sometimes individuals who burst out all their sufferings against society.

 

The link between a despressed 19 year old shooter(his mother just died and he was bullied in school?)  and videogames is childish and irresponsible, showing a clear political agenda behind such a law. 

I dont live in the US and i dont care, but such laws echo across the world, and other dumb governments sometimes pickup these sort of ideas and voila before you know i have to pay 25% more for my games in east europe because some dumb politician in US, sigh.

[Shreyas1]

50 minutes ago, PCGuy_5960 said:

Here we go again with this "video games cause violence" bs.

 

No, video games do not cause violence

 

From what I've read, the worst is a slight CORRELATION between temporary, mild aggression 

[dalekphalm]

13 minutes ago, yian88 said:

Not only this is retarded and evil, but it serves no one having this tax, it certainly doesnt help with mass shootings and gun violence.

How about tax the stores that sell guns to anyone under 25 years old by 500%? there you go now you have some money to steal, the cash wont go to help programs anyway.

How about punish the schools/teachers/students who neglect bullying? that is an overlyaccepted thing in schools all around the world, opressive violence between students that lead to depression, self hate, society hate and sometimes individuals who burst out all their sufferings against society.

 

The link between a despressed 19 year old shooter(his mother just died and he was bullied in school?)  and videogames is childish and irresponsible, showing a clear political agenda behind such a law. 

I dont live in the US and i dont care, but such laws echo across the world, and other dumb governments sometimes pickup these sort of ideas and voila before you know i have to pay 25% more for my games in east europe because some dumb politician in US, sigh.

I actually think taxing gun sales itself would be a much better offering, and having those taxes go directly into Mental Health healthcare.

 

It would be more relevant, and there's a lot of money in there to be made via taxes.

 

Yes, that means law abiding citizen gun owners are going to get taxed because of mass shooters. But hey, if you can figure out how to stop it from happening, maybe they can remove the tax eventually?

[Derangel]

Video games are a protected form of speech, covered under the 1st amendment and guaranteed by the Supreme Court. An additional tax focused specifically on them is Unconstitutional and would be shot down in court like every single other attempt has been.

[asus killer]

I honestly don't know if there is cause between violence and videogames. These are the days that in the US someone says whatever comes to his mind as a fact no matter if it really is true or not, so i just descredit everything i hear from US politicians. If he says so, it's a 50-50 chance that is true.

 

Regarding the elephant in the room. It's disgusting that these people, politicians, that should act responsively prefer to blame videogames instead of facing the gun problem in the US. It could be real the violence and videogames link, still the association of videogames to the recent shootings is sickening. Forget about the fact that numbers speak, the US is not the only country in the world and what is probably the most videogame obsessed society that is Japan does not have this problem but then again to get a gun there is really hard. 

So... do as those kids and start by asking for a change in US.

[Zodiark1593]

How would a tax on free/free to play games work btw? Yandere Simulator is an especially violent game that would pose a giant middle finger to such tax.

[ItsMitch]

6 minutes ago, Derangel said:

Video games are a protected form of speech, covered under the 1st amendment and guaranteed by the Supreme Court. An additional tax focused specifically on them is Unconstitutional and would be shot down in court like every single other attempt has been.

This is from their press release, source is http://www.rilin.state.ri.us/pressrelease/_layouts/RIL.PressRelease.ListStructure/Forms/DisplayForm.aspx?List=c8baae31-3c10-431c-8dcd-9dbbe21ce3e9&ID=13482&Web=2bab1515-0dcc-4176-a2f8-8d4beebdf488 

Quote

Funding to be derived from the sale of violent video games

STATE HOUSE -- Representative Robert Nardolillo III (R-Dist. 28, Coventry) will introduce legislation to increase mental health and counseling resources in schools by implementing a tax on video games rated “M” or higher.

“There is evidence that children exposed to violent video games at a young age tend to act more aggressively than those who are not,” stated Rep. Nardolillo. “This bill would give schools the additional resources needed to help students deal with that aggression in a positive way.”

Because states cannot ban the sale of certain video games to minors, Rep. Nardolillo’s proposal would instead allocate money to counteract the aggression they may cause. The legislation would levy an additional 10% tax to video games sold in Rhode Island with a rating of “M” or higher. Revenue generated by this tax would then be placed in a special account for school districts to use to fund counseling, mental health programs, and other conflict resolution activities.

“Our goal is to make every school in Rhode Island a safe and calm place for students to learn. By offering children resources to manage their aggression today, we can ensure a more peaceful tomorrow,” said Rep. Nardolillo.

So I'm guessing they'll argue that it's for the safety of the children will trump First amendment rights

[ravenshrike]

42 minutes ago, Sauron said:

The whole premise of this "proposal" is that these games are going straight to kids and that's just not true

Point of order, while the idea that violent media is connected to the rise of school shootings is absurd(Of course, so is the idea that guns are responsible since this thing never really happened when teenagers on a fairly regular basis took guns to school up till the early 80's, hell my high school had a pistol range in the basement) there are PLENTY of kids playing mature rated games. Most of the parents I've met can't be fucking bothered to screen what their kids do.