Obviously, the irony that many stores are, out of fear for losing custom, maintaining a "responsible" sales policy despite there no longer being an obligation to, is not lost on this man.
It sort of puts into disrespute the need for such laws in the first place.
Ok, I mean it IS lost on him. Damn.
Well, they know that even a slight indication of disagreement will just open them up to attack. Corporatism at its finest.
I'm trying to put together a Cats post about this thing. The Act, introduced by Graham Bright MP, was a classic rightleft puritan stitch-up. The Commons Debate on its introduction is a classic example of how shit the Commons is, and always has been. it's just a circle jerk. Some nice quotes include, from Graham Bright-
R(18) material applies to the blue movie. Whether we like it or not, many people enjoy watching such films. I had never watched a blue movie, but I must admit that when I was in Sweden I was led astray by some Swedish politicians and I did not enjoy the experience at all.
What kind of a pathetic git is this man?
And this odious example of what has been so very wrong with our polity for a very long time-
As my speech continues, the hon. Gentleman will realise that in no way is the state involved in censorship. That is why the Secretary of State will appoint a designated authority to do the job. We are not in any way going down the path of Government censorship.
That's how we do it here. We pretend the government isn't censoring because they empower a quango to do it.
Some people may argue that the Bill should provide instead for the establishment of a statutory body to classify video works. I do not think that that would be appropriate. In my view, censorship is not a proper function for a Government body. If a statutory body were established, the Government could scarcely help being drawn into controversies about whether the classification of particular works was correct. I do not believe that that would be healthy.
Nice quango, at arms length, far from democracy, can't blame the government, nothing to do with us that you can't watch a movie, we're a free country, it isn't censorship!
Makes my blood boil, it really does.
ELSPA? But videogames were never covered by the act anyway, and until now it was always opposed to compulsion. What is it up to?
Droll.
I did enjoy the Times' headline:
Error leaves children unprotected under 1984 Video Recordings Act
"Quick Mildred, lock the children in the cellar until they are protected again!"
Sam Duncan,
Actually it is a terrible muddle, the VRA probably does apply to some games, and you can be prosecuted for selling a game that has been voluntarily submitted to the censor to someone under the age the censor decrees the game is suitable for.
The industry is protecting its lobbying position, and has been sucking up to compulsion for some time now, in aid of ensuring that the compulsion is of a preferable variety, i.e. to use PEGI.
A bit of context:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/06/18/game_age_limits/
Ah. It looks like I'm a bit behind the times regarding ELSPA's position, then.
This thread makes me want to sell cigarettes and CDs of Half-Life (or better yet, Strip Poker for the Commodore 64) to small children.
I see this occurred under the Thatcher government. It may not have been an accident, I always suspected old Maggie of being a closet pron-monger.
What's interesting about this spat is the reason why this law is unenforceable: apparently it's a technicality caused by some apparatchik back in John Major's time failing to get the correct permission from the Supreme Government in Brussels before passing the law.
Kind of shows you who's really in charge, doesn't it?
How do we get rid of them? You don't.
It reminds me of the drug companies in the United States supporting (indeed spending millions of Dollars in ads for) Comrade President Barack Obama's health care take over.
The one true thing the left says is that many businessmen are greedy cowardly pigs - who can be made to support anything via a mixture of promises of special favours and (even more) out of FEAR.
Not all business people are such "pragmatists" out to "make a deal" (out of a mixture of greed and fear) - but far too many are.