Ratings on games and movies should not be enforced, but used as a guide line
Debate Rounds (4)
Home video game systems have moved past my first system in the early 1980's, the Atari 2600 with revolutionary graphics for Pac-Man, Missile Command, and Space Invaders . Mine still works by the way. Now, video games are much more sophisticated and look very real, and the system for rating video games is the ESRB.
The ESRB "is a non-profit, self-regulatory body established in 1994 by the Entertainment Software Association …. ESRB assigns computer and video game content ratings, enforces industry-adopted advertising guidelines and helps ensure responsible online privacy practices for the interactive entertainment software industry."  The industry self regulated; this rating is not from a law enforcement body. Every industry has the right to self regulate, but should this one? Yes; otherwise we would not have the video games at all due to lawsuits from overzealous interest groups and unconstitutional laws from state legislatures. The ESRB may be the only reason any of our favorite games are available!
The ESA, Entertainment Software Association, is an organization which banded together to PREVENT the state from going after video game makers. Here is a list of many attempts to violate our First Amendment rights by state legislatures  here is a great summary of many of the cases so you don't have to sit through Sherlockmethod legal analysis. 
The ESA formed an agreement with video game sellers urging them to abide by the new rating system, as the rating system showed the industry is taking positive steps and these steps hold the sycophants at bay. They also issue this statement in respect to retailers, "Although it does not have the legal authority to implement or enforce retailer sales policies with respect to computer and video games, the ESRB works closely with retailers and game centers…." 
The rating system is in place to ensure all of us have games. I urge enforcement of the private policy requiring that only persons of appropriate age purchase a rated game so as to prevent interest groups from banning them altogether. The ESRB is our friend in this one and I urge an enforcement of their policies, contrary to Pro's position.
The rating system for movies in a theatre coincides with those sold at retailers with the exception of X films. X films were simply movies that did not get a rating through the MPAA, originally. Now they are NR (Not Rated). If my opponent wishes to support a position that persons of any age should be able to purchase pornographic films, I wish to see his argument prior to addressing the point. The MPAA is, much like the video game industry, voluntary. The enforcement policies stem from movie makers, theatres and, now, retailers (Yes, there was a time when VCRs were not around, much less DVD players). The policy is designed to protect sellers, movie makers and to inform parents. Without the ratings, movies designed for adult audiences would likely not make it to the Big Screen and then DVD. Why? Liability, of course; the movie rating system puts the responsibly on parents. So when little Johnny decides that Dirk Digler is his hero, the parents cannot hope to win a lawsuit when the DVD case says the movie contains nudity. These policies should be enforced so we, as adults, and responsible minors, with parental permission, can view the films at all.
The enforcement policies from each of these organizations does not say minors cannot play a game or watch a movie, only that a parent or legal guardian decide if the game or movie is appropriate. Without these rating systems in place, the State would take charge and criminalize more aspects of games and movies. They have tried, and failed – thanks to the rating system and the voluntary enforcement from the parties involved. If persons of any age are allowed to purchase any game or any movie regardless of the rating, then the rating is arbitrary and without an enforcement policy, the State will take over the process and criminalize it.
In light of these reasoned observations, the Pro position cannot hold.
crushilista forfeited this round.
crushilista forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by sherlockmethod 7 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||7|
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.