The lights are on
California's Senator apologizes to gamers for saying they have "no credibility" when it comes to the debate about violent games.
In 2011, California State Senator Leland Yee authored the anti-game legislation that was struck down by the Supreme Court. A few days ago, Lee told the San Francisco Chronicle that "Gamers have just got to quiet down. Gamers have no credibility in this argument." Apparently, Yee got some advice that this statement might not have been the best PR move and quickly issued an apology via twitter, "Gamers, I admittedly didnt use best words to SFchron. Meant video game
industry has inherent conflict of interest in the gun violence debate."
Yee went on to add, "I have a lot of respect for many gamers - many are on my staff and in my family - but the industry has profited at the expense of children."
Does this soften your opinion on what Yee said last week?
[Source: Game Politics]
Email the author Ben Reeves, or follow on Twitter, Google+, Facebook, and Game Informer.
Actions speak louder than words. Don't tell me you are sorry Yee show me you are Sorry!
Personally, I don't think Yee has any credibility.
I still say this guy is an idiot for trying to get behind the scapegoat of blaming real life violence on video game violence. Now I will admit I do like how there have been talks of increasing or improving the conditions rather of the help and aid available to those who have mental issues or those mentally troubled. But I've known kids who grew playing Call of Duty and Halo, and watching such films as aliens and Gladiator, all the while they've never had the slightest inclination of violence what so ever. Countless studies have been done, I think this just the extremely liberal states like California and New York, not there is anything wrong with liberals, but these states are thought to be more open minded and quick to take action against things, and have better quality of life or "at least in theory." But when they get caught with their pants down after failing their citizens they need a scapegoat rather than have the accountability of just saying we failed you guys and we understand that, tell us what we need to do better. They're leaders we elect to lead and are supposed to the collective voice of the people but instead tell the people they have no credibility in arguments that directly impact them. So why an apology is all fine and dandy the damage has already been done and your true colors already shown.
PR apology not accepted
Why you just go away and do what you do best... find something simple and complicate it!
It doesn't soften my opinion. I believe he said what he meant the first time. Trying to apologize because someone told him to doesn't mean he meant the apology. Also, I'm really tired of this whole debate. I'm going to go play something violent.
A weak attempt to backtrack and apologize, but it means nothing. He still believes what he said last time, and his insulting view of gamers has not changed. Let home make his excuses, but lets all be smart enough to know glow little they mean.
Now you say sorry after what we GIO members complain, yeah sorry isn't going to cut it games don't caused the violence, the choices the parents and the kids do, not responsible gamers.
terrible apology. in fact, he didnt even fully rescind his point. hes not sorry, he only apologized for pr reasons.
saying the game industry has no credibility is one thing, in fact i agree with that. they have a financial interest, so their opinion is invalid. (one caveat though, the game industry has just as much credibility as the nra seeing as the nra has a financial interest in guns, so if he had any shred of integrity he would go after the nra as well). that being said, gamers themselves have massive credibility. more credibility than someone who doesnt play video games anyway...
lets not forget... human history.. i mean seriously? you wanna whine about violence? our own history is far more violent than any game made to date, so whats next? we think we should ban history books?