Why Michael Atkinson’s Campaign Is A Waste Of Time and Money

You’ve probably already heard of a man called Micheal Atkinson, and if you’re an Australian gamer then you more than likely hate the hipocritical twat more than anyone. He is the attorney-general of South Australia, a position with an unfortunately large amount of power, and the one of the most hated men in the minds of gamers. Due to this man’s stupid vendetta against games, developers must constantly delay & censor their games before they finally get to the Australian market or get outright banned all together.

To stress my point, here’s a quote from the man himself.

“I think you will find this issue has little traction with my constituents who are more concerned with real-life issues than home entertainment in imaginary worlds.“

The man isn’t ignorant to the suffering he causes, however, as he also acknowledges that his policies ”restricts adult liberty to a small degree worth it to protect children from violent games.”

Now he probably never meant it to be used in the defense of violent videogames, but I remember a popular Benjamin Franklin once said;

“Those who sacrifice Liberty for Security deserve neither.”

Basically, by sacrificing the rights of older gamers he hopes to create a false security in which people think that younger gamers will not get their hands on violent videogames. So tell me then why I constantly seem to run into foul mouthed 12 year olds on Modern Warfare 2? These kids could not possibly be able to buy it themselves legally. Even by banning these games and denying older gamers a mature videogame rating it won’t prevent it. If these kids want these games then nothing is going to stop them. Atkinson also brought up that although he is against violent games, he hasn’t an issue with movies because underage viewers wouldn’t be allowed in the cinema. Ok Michael, fair point. So what happens when the violent movie in question is leaked onto to the Internet and released on DVD? You got a plan to try and stop that too?

More and more people are playing videogames everyday and many of these gamers are contributing members of your society. For example myself am a training paramedic and EMT, Resumeplay’s Matt Castelli is an accomplished author (Allegedly), former Resumeplay writer Jim Hargreaves is a training Biologist and none of us have ever had the sudden urge to recreate a violent segment of a videogame, or at least not to my knowing anyway.

So what actual facts does Michael Atkinson have to use against videogames? The number of cases of homicide or tragedy involving a videogame are countable on two hands. The only logical case against videogames I can think of is Brandon Crisp and even then it’s debatable as to whether the real factor for the lad’s tragic death was his addiction to Call of Duty or the unfortunate breakdown of communication between him & his parents on the day of his runner. Surely a man (?) with as much power as Mr Atkinson  would direct his attention to more serious matters like the threat of global economic collapse, drugs,  and illegal prostitution instead of wasting his office resources on something he finds so trivial?

Micheal, trying to stop underage gamers from getting violent videogames is like trying to prevent the tide from coming in. Sacrificing legal gamers rights won’t stop it, and it only makes for a couple of thousand pissed off gamers all wanting to take a swing at you. Give up your stubborn idea that you’re actually making a good difference and let Australia join the rest of the modern world!

Tags: games Jack Michael Atkinson Patton Ratings