> What such bills accomplish is not crime reduction but political protection. It gives the appearance of action from legislators who do not want to take more decisive or direct action. It is easier to blame a video game than state or city enforcement policies.
Setting the absurdity of the situation aside, how can limiting the personal freedom of your citizens be the "safe choice" compared to criticizing or changing policies? And be considered a "less decisive action"? Especially in the USA, one of the countries which arguably values personal freedom the most. This is really not a good direction.
Setting the absurdity of the situation aside, how can limiting the personal freedom of your citizens be the "safe choice" compared to criticizing or changing policies? And be considered a "less decisive action"? Especially in the USA, one of the countries which arguably values personal freedom the most. This is really not a good direction.