There has been further controversy recently regarding the UK banning of a game called "Rule of Rose". In the past I've been quiet on this sort of issue, or even opposed the banning of games in Australia. But this time, I'm coming right out and saying that I'm for it. Something has to stop games like this.

Let's be clear. There is no "banning" of games. There are classifications for games, as for movies, with the relevant ones being MA15+, which is illegal to sell to those under 15 years old, and R18+. R18+ is only applied as a category for movies, and is not considered applicable to games. A game which rates over the guidelines for MA15+ is "refused classification" and cannot legally be sold in Australia.

My concern, though, is not with violent video games. Games such as Rule of Rose, Mark Ekko: Getting Up, and Postal 2 prove conclusively that such games should never be played, and banning them outright protects children from their influences. No right thinking p...

There has been further controversy recently regarding the UK banning of a game called "Rule of Rose". In the past I've been quiet on this sort of issue, or even opposed the banning of games in Australia. But this time, I'm coming right out and saying that I'm for it. Something has to stop games like this.

Let's be clear. There is no "banning" of games. There are classifications for games, as for movies, with the relevant ones being MA15+, which is illegal to sell to those under 15 years old, and R18+. R18+ is only applied as a category for movies, and is not considered applicable to games. A game which rates over the guidelines for MA15+ is "refused classification" and cannot legally be sold in Australia.

My concern, though, is not with violent video games. Games such as Rule of Rose, Mark Ekko: Getting Up, and Postal 2 prove conclusively that such games should never be played, and banning them outright protects children from their influences. No right thinking person would argue against that.

But we are overlooking a dangerous loophole. What about movies? The same children who stand to be warped by the pixellated (yet still abhorrent) breasts of Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, are still able to see movies like Showgirls or Basic Instinct.

We've made damned sure that they can never play Reservior Dogs, but they can still see the movie, which is even more explicit and violent than the game.

The pro-violent-movie racket that makes its living off these disgraces will try to tell you that the adult movie goers have a right to decide for themselves what they'll see. But a recent survey of the attendees of current movie "Open Season" showed that movie audiences are over 70% under the age of 18. That these patrons are exposed to violent images like those of Hostel and Saw is a shocking oversight of the system intended to protect us.

"Film afficionados" will try to tell you that R rated movies have historically been some of the best movies: Goodfellas, Platoon, Requiem for a Dream, Reservoir Dogs, Scarface, Chopper, Clerks, A Clockwork Orange, Night of the Living Dead, The Deer Hunter, Deliverance, The Devils Advocate, Evil Dead, The Exorcist, Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, Fight Club, The Godfather, The Last Temptation of Christ, Lolita, Natural Born Killers, The Graduate, Human Traffic, Se7en, Silence of the Lambs, Taxi Driver, Three Kings, Trainspotting, Apocolypse Now. Pretty much the entire works of Scorsese, Tarantino, or Kubrick. They would disemble, saying that without controversial and powerful movies the industry would stagnate as a relevant social force.

I say, what about the children.

These people try to justify their "art" as something intended for viewing by mature adults, yet they seem unable or unwilling to face the fact that these "works" are available to be viewed by children as well.

Apologists for the gore industry say that identity checks are already taken for R rated movies, and underaged patrons are not permitted entry. They also controversially and unacceptably claim that the responsibility for childrens viewing habits lies with their parents, not with heavy handed governmental "interference". Clearly this is not a reasonable solution. Federal legislation is the only way.

Rule of Rose, like other games of its nature, should be refused classification, absolutely and unquestionably. While this loophole still exists, children can and will still access material that should not be available.

I call upon the lawmakers for sanity. Revoke the R rating for movies. Please will somebody protect the children. Am I the only one who cares anymore?