Video games not involved in the Virginia Tech shooting

GamePolitics.com reports the final report of Virginia State Governor Tim Kaine's Virginia Tech Review Panel has been released to the public today.

The report states in no uncertain terms that video games were not involved. Not that there really was any doubt about it in the first place.

The report's findings should, once and for all, now prove that people with self-serving agendas quick to rush to blame video games for the tragedy were completely wrong about it. I don't expect these people to ever admit they were wrong, however. It's just not like them to do so. In fact, I expect most of them to issue statements disputing the findings of the report.

I applaud the efforts of Governor Tim Kaine and his Review Panel. In this day and age, it seems media concentrates their reporting on the most scandalous and controversial topics no matter how inaccurate they might be. The Virginia Tech Review Panel, on the other hand, rigorously studied all aspects of the incident and produced a thorough report on their findings based on the facts they uncovered. I would encourage the critics of video games to do the same.

The Constitutional issues with anti-video game laws

The New York Times writes about the Constitutional issues surrounding the anti-video game laws introduced by several US States in recent years.

The article takes a very skeptical view on New York State Governor Eliot Spitzer's anti-video game bill's chances to hold against a Constitutional challenge by the courts.

It also quotes Judge Richard A. Posner of the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit. Judge Posner ruled on a case to regulate public game arcades in Indianapolis.

In his ruling to block the law in question he said:

“Violence has always been and remains a central interest of humankind and a recurrent, even obsessive theme of culture both high and low. It engages the interest of children from an early age, as anyone familiar with the classic fairy tales collected by Grimm, Andersen, and Perrault are aware. To shield children right up to the age of 18 from exposure to violent descriptions and images would not only be quixotic, but deforming; it would leave them unequipped to cope with the world as we know it.”