Michael Atkinson Defends His Stance On R18+ Games

We've long been infuriated by South Australian Attorney-General Michael Atkinson's obstinate refusal to support bills for an R18+ classification for video games. Today we've discovered a six page response to a letter sent to Mr. Atkinson that was published on Reddit. In it, Atkinson contradicts himself and taunts the gaming community. We've excerpted some of the highlights below.

"M.A.15+ games are restricted to children over 15 and if younger children access these games it further justifies complete protection from R.18+ games. It is up to parents and responsible adults to ensure a game is appropriate for a minor whatever age he or she is."

Let me get this straight. Mr Atkinson is claiming that children are already able to access MA15+ games because of poor parenting. After all, as they must be over fifteen to purchase them in a store, somewhere along the line an adult must have bought it for them. Atkinson is taking the nanny state approach of saying that if these parents can't do a good enough job, they'll at least minimise the damage by holding back all the R18+ material. And yet he claims that the parents have the responsibility to decide what their kids can see. So who is it, Mr Atkinson? Does the state get to tell people what they can or cannot show their kids, or is it up to the parents to police it? You can't have it both ways. And is this really a legitimate reason to block it from everyone else?

"I cannot fathom what State-enforced safeguards could exist to prevent R.18+ games being bought by households with children and how children can be stopped from using these games once the games are in the home."

Safeguards could exist in the same way that children are stopped from seeing R.18+ movies, Mr Atkinson. By regulating the stores that sell the products. A child is asked for ID when buying MA15+ DVDs in a store. A child is asked for ID when trying to buy a ticket for an R18+ film. The exact same policy would prevent the sale of these games to minors in the same way that the exact same policy already prevents the sale of MA15+ games to minors. The fact is that the state cannot protect all children from all objectionable content. That's why, as you say yourself, the responsibility lies with the parents. Why are you not concerned about the accessibility of R-rated films to children when they are in the home? Good parents place this content out of reach, or lock it away.

Atkinson signs off as such:

"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."

Federal-level censorship just isn't relevant these days, nerds. Grow up. We've grabbed a copy of the full document, which you can grab for your perusal here.

It seems appropriate to point to the new Gamers4Croydon movement, which has begun actively campaigning to oust Atkinson from his seat. It's an uphill battle, but a worthy one - and they have other policies of similar appeal to our generation, including rebates for solar panels, mandatory water tanks in all new houses, and support for establishing the electric vehicle industry. If you have the time, check out their site to see what you can do to help in the fight.

Latest Reader Comments:

Posted by Master Chief 17/11/2009 3:17pm

What a fuck-knuckle.

Posted by RJG 16/11/2009 8:59pm

I liked the part where he says parents are powerless over children and cannot in any way regulate their activities at all.

What a fuck-knuckle.