New York Assemblyman Steve Englebright (D) has proposed a bill that would require video game retailers to display a sign warning customers of the risk of epileptic attacks that can occur in select groups – particularly in young children – when playing some video games. Retailers who failed to do so would be subject to a $50 fine.
Educating consumers is quite the noble goal, and while I'm not particularly fond of legislation that caters to the "Think of the Children!" meme, Bill A04004 is commendable for its attempt to alert parents about legitimate risks that some children might face.
That being said, a quick glance at my game library reveals that every single title I own – including Personal Trainer: Cooking, on the DS – comes with some form of epilepsy warning right on the case. A white box, with bold red letters, serve to alert potential customers that they should consult a doctor if they've had epileptic attacks in the past.
Should video game retailers be forced to display epilepsy warnings? I think not – and as the bill's legislative history shows, there have been multiple attempts to have it passed over the last few years, meaning that I'm not alone.
While the cost of displaying a sign warning parents of epilepsy dangers is trivial, and the $50 fine a negligible burden, the bill would ultimately serve no purpose. If parents were somehow unaware of their child's epileptic condition, a quick glance at the case (perhaps while they were reading up on the ESRB rating) would readily alert them of the danger.
That being said, many liquor stores prominently display warning signs, usually alerting customers to the dangers of drunk driving, or drinking during pregnancy. These are both issues that should be obvious to the average person, but reminders are still considered necessary. Is Englebright right in taking the "better safe than sorry" route? Where do you stand?
Image: Un ragazzo chiamato Bi / flickr
NY Bill Would Require Seizure Warnings by Game Retailers [GamePolitics]
See Also:
