On Wednesday U.S. District Court Judge James Brady ruled a Louisiana law which would prohibit the sale of violent video games to minors was unconstitutional. The law was passed this summer by a unanimous vote of both houses of the Louisiana Legislature and signed by Gov. Kathleen Blanco. At the time, none of those elected officials thought it prudent to vote against banning the sale of violent video games because it violated the First Amendment. More disturbingly those same officials thought it prudent less than one year after Hurricane Katrina to spend state time saving our youth from the life-threatening dangers of animated characters on a television screen. Ultimately everything from the bill’s conception to its passing was a waste of time and the paper it was printed on. The decision by Brady was the correct one, and the power of the First Amendment prevailed. But why was debate over this law even taking place? Shouldn’t our state legislature and governor have better sense than to pass a law which so flagrantly flaunts our most sacred and protected right? Violent video games may be offensive to some, but there is no evidence that they lead directly to violent behavior. Moreover, just like movies and books, video games are speech and are entitled to the same protections under the law. Thankfully the courts finally injected some sense into the whole controversy surrounding this law. Prior to the Louisiana law being passed, Illinois, Michigan and California courts had already overruled similar laws. Even proponents of the law have admitted it had little practical value. East Baton Rouge Parish Attorney Doug Moreau told The Daily Reveille on July 11 that the law could not be enforced. “It’s unenforceable, but it’s not unconstitutional,” Moreau said. Thankfully, as it turns out, the law is both.
—–Send letters to the editor to [email protected]