Ban “Call Of Duty 3″, Cries Keith Vaz

By John Walker on November 23rd, 2011 at 11:55 am.

Oh shut up, Keith Vaz

Oh sigh, as soon as we report some balanced coverage of the effects of gaming, of course Keith Vaz appears once more to make everyone feel stupid again. He’s tabled an Early Day Motion to condemn Modern Warfare 3, presumably after some careful analysis to make sure such a thing would bring him maximum attention. Well, actually he’s condemning “Call Of Duty 3″, which is perhaps a bit late. But heck, why know the name of the game you’re wasting Parliament time over? Where he finds time to play all these games between chairing so many parliamentary committees I cannot imagine. Because of course he’s played the game he describes as having “gratuitous acts of violence”, right? More than that, he’s even finding the time to do his own scientific research, because his (as yet unpublished, I presume) study has found that “there is increasing evidence of a link between perpetrators of violent crime and violent video games users.” Which is a remarkable finding!

This is to be expected from the man who has previously blamed Counter-Strike for racist murders, along with so many more examples of ludicrous, unevidenced nonsense, devastatingly spoken within the Houses of Parliament. Once again he’s calling for the BBFC to ban the sales of such games. Or, as he so subtly puts it, he “calls on the British Board of Film Classification to take further precautions when allowing a game to be sold.” In fact, the full motion reads:

“CALL OF DUTY 3

That this House is deeply concerned about the recently released video game Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3, in which players engage in gratuitous acts of violence against members of the public; notes in particular the harrowing scenes in which a London Underground train is bombed by terrorists, bearing a remarkable resemblance to the tragic events of 7 July 2005; further notes that there is increasing evidence of a link between perpetrators of violent crime and violent video games users; and calls on the British Board of Film Classification to take further precautions when allowing a game to be sold.”

Admittedly only nine other MPs have signed the motion so far, and amusingly, because Vaz is inexplicably a Labour MP, no Tories have put their names to the sensationalist scaremongering rubbish, because he’s on the other side. Honestly, it must cause their brains to fizz-pop. But for Liberal Democrat fans, you might want to watch out for Mike Hancock and Bob Russell, who don’t quite appreciate the “liberal” part of their party title, signing a motion for banning adults’ access to adult games.

Fortunately, scourge of fireworks and hero of gaming, Tom Watson MP, has written an amendment onto the bill. It reads, in full:

leave out from `House’ to end and add `notes that the British Board of Film Classification (BBFC) gave the video game Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3 an 18 classification, noting that `the game neither draws upon nor resembles real terrorist attacks on the underground’; further believes that the game has an excellent user interface and challenges the gamers’ dexterity as well as collaborative skills in an outline setting; and encourages the BBFC to uphold the opinion of the public that whilst the content of video games may be unsettling or upsetting to some, adults should be free to choose their own entertainment in the absence of legal issues or material which raises a risk or harm.’.

Let’s all stand to applaud.

Of course, I found Modern Warfare 3 to be a deeply unpleasant game, though not for any of the reasons someone’s told Vaz are the case. But though I find its sinister desire to have you witness innocents being killed, and its tedious follow-the-leader play, that’s not a cause to ban it! It’s okay to feel uncomfortable, or even to actively not like something, without then abusing your position of power to have it removed from existence. Of course, I think Watson goes a bit far the other way. I’d be fully behind Vaz posting an EDM arguing that “this House thinks Modern Warfare 3′s single player campaign is spectacular but ultimately hollow, insidiously unpleasant while technically an enormous achievement, and furthermore recommends that people not bother with it but stick to the multiplayer.”

As for making spurious claims that violent video games have ever been linked to those who perpetrate violent crimes, let alone that it’s “increasing” – that is grotesquely irresponsible, and the day when Vaz is finally hauled up for deliberately spouting this crap in Parliament cannot come soon enough.

, , , .

151 Comments »

  1. Squishpoke says:

    Jack Thompson died, and was reborn under the British flag. This is the only explanation.

    • kupocake says:

      Vaz probably taught Thompson everything he didn’t know. He’s been doing this for years.

    • Premium User Badge bear912 says:

      “Jack Thompson died, and was reborn respawned under the British flag. This is the only explanation.”

      I think that’s what you meant.

    • aerozol says:

      Reply fail.
      Edit: Hehe, Mr. Vaz is quite the supporter of Homeopathy.

  2. Ovno says:

    Ban Keith Vaz!!!!

  3. Daniel Rivas says:

    I think we should get some balance on Keith Vaz, he is after all perfectly hateable for plenty of other reasons.

  4. mickygor says:

    Why wouldn’t leftists be in full support of censorship? To be liberal is not to believe in liberty.

    • Daniel Rivas says:

      That doesn’t actually make any sense, though, does it.

    • SurprisedMan says:

      How tiresome.

    • Tom OBedlam says:

      Who know what’s funnier than being wrong? Being wrong in front of an audience.

    • arienette says:

      You’re confusing British politics with American right wing rhetoric. The whole liberal don’t believe in liberty doesn’t pass muster here.

    • Magnetude says:

      Off topic slightly, anyone been following the Republican presidential debates? They’re an absolute comedy goldmine. It’s like a competition to see who can know the least about the topic at hand.

    • Premium User Badge Lord Custard Smingleigh says:

      Americans are so cute when they forget the Internet has tubes that go to other countries.

    • bagga says:

      I didn’t even realise Americans were allowed here. Don’t they have their own site, ShotgunRifleGuns?

    • sincarne says:

      Ms Palin, so nice of you to join us on our humble interweb netsite!

    • NathanH says:

      In fairness, the Labour lefties do have plenty of form in banning/wanting to ban stuff. The Liberal lefties are usually pro-liberty though.

    • Premium User Badge lurkalisk says:

      You know, it doesn’t hurt to feed trolls, but certainly doesn’t help.

    • mjig says:

      Liberals: Wah! Ban things I don’t like! Call it hate speech!

      Conservatives: Wah! Ban things I don’t like! Say it’s for the children!

      The majority of people would rather have the government act a nanny state than know that something that they personally disagree with is allowed to exist.

    • Sardaukar says:

      Sigh. I’m glad to see my country is as welcome and regarded without stereotype as ever on RPS.

      It never gets old, being generalised as a generalizer.
      (Apologies for assigning this reaction to all of RPS, I can’t resist that pun. The attitude does seem prevalent though.)

    • Premium User Badge lurkalisk says:

      @Sardaukar

      It’s beautiful, really. Nothing is so confoundedly amusing as the fact that (no matter how furiously people battle against it, especially in favor of certain groups) none of us are as terrible as all of us. We all suck to the most profound degree. Brittons? Yeah you’re all utterly reprehensible dolts, Just like Americans, and every internet using human the earth has ever born witness to. Hence aspiration.

    • Premium User Badge Joshua says:

      Actually, it is. Except perhaps in some two party states, where no one does…

    • Ovno says:

      Ahh reply fail my favourite…

    • StingingVelvet says:

      What mjig said is true for America. I can’t speak for Britain. I would actually say most of the big censorship hounds in America for the last 20 years have been Democrats/Liberals… Lieberman, Hillary Clinton, Tipper Gore, etc…

      BTW the superioty complex you guys are always quick to show after comments like that is as amusing as always. “Ho ho ho, those Americans and their guns, they sure do like them, oh yes!”

    • derbefrier says:

      @mickygor

      So true, so true.
      As I have gotten older I have come to realize the liberqls are not the champions of liberty they claim to be. This change of philosophy didn’t come easy by any means. And I still question my own beliefs from time to time. But what bothers me most about liberals is their unwillingness to question thier own party or to even dig deeper than bumper stickers and slogans. Almost every conservative I have come accross is willing and able to Disscuss thier beliefs and how they came to those conclusions, while I may not agree with everything they say thier honesty is something to be admired. while most liberals I encounter will quickly resort to crap like rascism, class warfare. Or petty insults in an attempt to derail the conversation.

    • Mutak says:

      @derbefrier

      How is life in Bizarro America? In the normal one, it’s kind of shitty.

    • n0s says:

      @mickygor

      You seem to go by a definition of “Liberal” that only appears in america.

      Whenever you see an american politician use the term “liberals”, you really need to stay alert, chances are he or she is talking about a completely different concept than what the rest of the world thinks of a “liberal”.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism

    • Archonsod says:

      “BTW the superioty complex you guys are always quick to show after comments like that is as amusing as always”

      Yes, it’s supposed to be. I really don’t know what happened to the sense of humour in the colonies. We did send you a shipment, I believe it was bound for Boston in 1773.

    • Chris Remo says:

      I’m a liberal American RPS reader who follows national British politics probably about as closely as your average British citizen (more closely in some cases, I imagine) and I have to say the constant explosive kneejerk response to Americans (or assumed Americans) in the comments on this site is pretty goddamn tiresome. With respect to the political content of this story, if the Brits here really don’t think that their liberal/Labour politicians are capable of favoring government-sponsored moralizing, or that that is exclusively the province of the Tories, they’re crazy. And that’s certainly not the case when it comes to video game proposals, which is pretty empirically clear. I have much respect for John and the other RPS writers, but I think that bit about Tories not signing on simply because it was the other side is a bit of political wishful thinking. This is not a national wedge issue that’s going to draw those kinds of party loyalty lines–and if it were, the actual numbers don’t really support the claim that it’s a fundamentally Tory goal.

    • mjig says:

      “Whenever you see an american politician use the term “liberals”, you really need to stay alert, chances are he or she is talking about a completely different concept than what the rest of the world thinks of a “liberal”.”

      Not really, nearly every party in Europe described as liberal is all about banning what they see as hate speech or inequality, just thoughtcrime bullshit. The only people who still support classical liberalism are libertarians.

    • Chris Remo says:

      I would like to add that the notion that there are two kinds of liberalism, “American liberalism” and “rest of the world liberalism,” is just as ignorant as the belief that there is only one variety.

    • Nalano says:

      Excuse me?

      Liberals in America don’t like liberty?

      So when they say that Blacks should be able to vote, gays should be able to join the military openly, pornography/marijuana/prostitution should be legalized, they’re not looking for social freedoms and civil rights?

      Dude, Tipper Gore and that shit is not only a superficial and mild claim, but it’s also viewed by liberals as a rightward tangent. We have hardcore pornographers running for office. What more do you want?!

    • CaptainWhappin says:

      The only party that believes in true liberty in America is the Libertarians. I have know idea what that equates to in Tea&Crumpets Land (see, I can be wantonly stereotypical too!).

    • shitflap says:

      Chris Remo, it is humour based on the nuances of the system in that this is something the Tories would usally be all over (hence inexplicably), except for the fact that Vaz is quite a figure of ridicule over here and that is more likely the reason that there are few signatories.

      “the constant explosive kneejerk response to Americans”, is something you’ll just have to tolerate, there is very little real hatred towards you people here, you’re just being over-sensitive.
      Keep your indignation to a minimum please.

      (Edited, due to the fact I’m talking out my arse, cheers formivore)

    • Redsplinter says:

      @CaptainWhappin What you said, word for word.

    • formivore says:

      Would this be a bad time to point out that the OP link to a .co.uk address?

    • shitflap says:

      Shit formivore, you’re right >.>
      Now to edit the egg off my face..

    • aerozol says:

      This thread was hilarious, and then some Americans felt insulted, and it got kind of lame.

    • bill says:

      Level headed (late) response:

      Politics isn’t black and white, and it isn’t measured on a single linear scale. Not all left wing groups agree, not all right wing groups agree, and not all liberals agree.

      Left wing doesn’t necissarily indicate a world view, and right wing doesn’t necisarily indicate conservative or religious.

      The problem, for us English-speaking non-Americans, is that most English websites are dominated by Americans, and any mention of anything remotely political or religious tends to lead to the ugly side of the American politcal war appearing. It just gets really BORING for the rest of us.

      While in America Liberal seems to have gained a meaning close to Communist (despite Aerican Liberals being more right wing than many country’s Right), in the rest of the world it tends to be a right wing thing. In the UK it’s a centerist party. In Japan the Liberal party is the right wing conservative party, and that’s true in many other countries too.

      As for the mild humourous anti-americanism on a British website – it doesn’t really compare to the ubiquitous anti-british humor on all the american dominated sites. So go with the flow… like we have to everywhere else…

  5. Icarus says:

    “no Tories have put their names to the sensationalist scaremongering rubbish, because he’s on the other side” Alternatively- work with me here- they haven’t put their names to it because it’s sensationalist scaremongering rubbish. I genuinely enjoy reading RPS but the party-political bashing is getting a little silly, in my opinion.

    • westyfield says:

      Yeah, I raised an eyebrow at this bit as well.

    • 4026 says:

      No, I’m pretty sure Tory MPs are cool with supporting and spouting sensationalist, scaremongering rubbish as much as the next desperate politician.

    • Premium User Badge RaveTurned says:

      I’m pretty sure any major political party will have it’s share of sensationalist scaremongers regardless of their ideological bent.

    • Icarus says:

      Yeah, I’m not defending the Tories as a whole, not by a long shot. It just so happens that there are sensible people as well as utter knobends in all parties- the Labour party has a long laundry list of criminally-fraudulent ne’er-do-wells, but it also has Tom Harris and Frank Field who I have a great amount of respect for. I’m just of the opinion that RPS’ consistent tone of ‘every time we mention the Tories it must be in the context of evil Thatcher-worshipping scumbags’ is getting a teensy bit old when it’s a PC games site rather than a political blog like LabourList or Guido.

    • Sheng-ji says:

      It’s almost as if we should vote for the best local MP rather than the one who is affiliated with a party we like…

    • 4026 says:

      It’s true that John’s assertion (that the reason no Tory MPs have signed the EDM is because it’s been brought up by the Opposition) is presented without any supporting evidence, and doesn’t really seem like a warranted opportunity for a swipe at the Tories.

      But, on the other hand, it does sound like a more plausible explanation for their conspicuous absence from the EDM than that they have all identified it as sensationalist, scaremongering rubbish and don’t want to be associated with it.

    • SurprisedMan says:

      Dunno about anyone else, but I come to this website to hear the real, unfiltered opinions of the writers whether I agree with them or not.

    • Simon Hawthorne says:

      I saw this as a swipe at the party political system (particularly its adversarial nature) and not as an attack on any particular political party.

    • youthful cynic says:

      Also, I’d like to point out that broadly speaking, ideologically, conservatives should be cool with people doing what they want whereas socialists are keener on state control.
      RPS, I like your gaming journalism not your your political journalism!

    • Ovno says:

      @youthful cynic: Nice to see that someone else here knows the parties views…

    • Cooper says:

      I, for one, am absolutely fine with unfounded, reactionary, cliched, hyperbolic swipes in the direction of Tory scum at any given opportunity.

    • westyfield says:

      @SurprisedMan

      I’m here for the opinions as well. It’s just that when John states that no Tories have put their names to the sensationalist scaremongering rubbish, because he’s on the other side, my immediate reaction is ‘prove it’. It read like a cheap shot at the Conservatives, and struck me as strange considering that, just a few paragraphs previously, John had been mocking Vaz for making unsubstantiated claims.

    • Eukatheude says:

      Fun, here in italy this kind of stuff is routine.

    • n0s says:

      @Eukatheude

      Well, you have had a mad fascist controlling your government for several decades now, so no wonder.

    • John Walker says:

      I do love this notion that we’re allowed to view our opinions about lots of things, apart from those decreed by the Commenter Lords. Um, we’re people, and I especially am a person. And as such I have political views. Also, it just so happens that all Tory MPs are twats.

    • lijenstina says:

      All political parties should be bashed. All around the world. Bunch of incompetent greedy corrupt tu*ds pilfering the future of humanity for a few nickels. To hell with them all. What new war to sell ? Who to destroy ? What lie to tell ? Which lord to obey ? Which victim to prey?
      As I grow older I’m becoming more and more cynical about politics and power in general in societies.

    • NathanH says:

      There’s nothing wrong with having an opinion and presenting it, Mr Walker, but as far as we can tell your opinion here is mostly based on “I don’t like the Tories much so I am justified in assuming anything they do is done in bad faith”, which comes across as a bit childish and insulting. In particular it stands out in an article criticising other people for saying, roughly, “I don’t like video games much so I am justified in assuming anything plausibly bad about them must be true”.

      We appreciate your diligent campaigning on these issues and I think it would be wise to leave out stuff that potentially undermines your position that you’re just writing because it makes you happy.

      Anyway, we all know you’re so damned virtuous and empathic that it hurts, so you don’t need to remind us all the time ;-)

    • Premium User Badge phuzz says:

      Personally, when I’m trying to work out why a politician did (or in this case, didn’t) do something, I try and think of the most cynical and craven explanation. An explanation that assumes that the politician in question cares for little else except for staying in power and lining their pockets.

      It’s generally not too far from the truth in a worrying number of cases. Which is depressing.

    • Simon says:

      Sheng-ji says:

      11/23/2011 at 12:51

      It’s almost as if we should vote for the best local MP rather than the one who is affiliated with a party we like…

      Look at you, distrating me from the opinions of others with a well thought out analysis of how the parliamentary system of local representation was originally designed to work!

  6. Gusdor says:

    Oh come on Keith. Spoilerific much?

  7. vandinz says:

    Keith Vaz makes me want to commit violence! BAN HIM!

    • pacificator says:

      i just want to hit someone with a spiked boot in the face multiple times.

  8. tigershuffle says:

    Im sure Keith Vaz has never ever seen any movies!

    I watched Four Lions on C4 the other night…………luckily I can discern social comment/parody from AlQuaeda recruitment videos.

    Sometimes he does let his innerDailyMail rise to the surface……oh okay he does all the time

  9. Caleb367 says:

    Oh look, another worthless drama queen milking for attention. Now it’s CoD, back then was Dungeons & Dragons and/or Magic, before that was rock’n roll… All in the same “look at me, TV! I’m doing stuff! I’m important! I deserve to be re-elected!” way.

    • Tom OBedlam says:

      Remember that novels were considered dangerous back in the day too. Nothing gets column inches like disparaging something new.

    • Sheng-ji says:

      I don’t think Archimedes was after column inches when he called for a ban on books – Which is not an argument against your point though, as I agree wholeheartedly with it.

    • DiamondDog says:

      Maybe he was after column inches in a more literal sense?

      I’m not sure where I’m going with this.

    • Soon says:

      “I wanted Corinthian not Doric! Stop reading those books and get to work!”

      (20 pedant points available)

    • Premium User Badge JB says:

      @DiamondDog – Oh good, I’m glad it’s not just me that was trying to go somewhere with that. I just couldn’t think of how to go with it, so you did better than me =)

  10. Tom OBedlam says:

    This house believes that parents need to stop buying these games for their children on the reasoning the CoD is cheaper than childminders

    • torchedEARTH says:

      The house believes that I am not a fag camping bitch and I always play the objective so your mom sniperl33t_nobeans.

      On a serious note, politicians like this can fuck off.

  11. Theoban says:

    I’ve played approximately ten minutes of Modern Warfare 3 and I’ve crashed sixteen tube trains since. Man has a point

  12. Network Crayon says:

    Why not just Ban War?

  13. Rao Dao Zao says:

    What’s the old adage?

    Something like “At age 16 you are old enough to die for your country, but not to watch films about it.”

  14. Premium User Badge jimbobjunior says:

    Tom Watson is a dude. He appears to one of the few technically literate MPs and has done amazing work in protecting our internets from the Digital Economy Act. Well done that man.

    • Vexing Vision says:

      I totally wish that man was a politician in my country, so I could just continually vote for him personally.

      Tom Watson is the one man I’d like to represent me on most topics in politics.

      UK, I envy you.

    • Josh W says:

      Yeah, it makes me wish we had some kind of elected house of lords, where you could make sure someone with a bit of games/tech knowledge stays involved in these debates.

      Instead I have to hope that whatever he does for the rest of the country, his constituents keep voting him in.

  15. UnravThreads says:

    Talking of games ratings, when on Earth will we move to a PEGI-only system? I’m sure it was meant to happen last year.

  16. Multidirectional says:

    Call Of Duty 3 was console exclusive, so maybe that’s the real reason for hating on it? Maybe the guy is a hardcore PC gamer.

  17. Anarki says:

    Fortunately EDMs never ever actually come to anything, they’re really just like little petitions for MPs to make a point. I doubt any parliamentary time will be wasted. Silly Mr Vaz though.

  18. westyfield says:

    Does anyone else snigger whenever they hear the phrase ‘early-day motion’?

  19. Teddy Leach says:

    Ban everything. Everything.

  20. Skusey says:

    Do “Liberal Democrat fans” still exist?

    • Ovno says:

      Yup, many of us are glad they kept there word and joined with the party that got both the most votes and seats in democratic election.

      I do wish they’d stop bashing the bankers though, personally I would prefer them to get on with fixing everything instead of just playing the blame game.

    • Premium User Badge RaveTurned says:

      Depends, are we including Tories that are glad they have a coalition partner that can take the blame for anything that goes wrong?

    • 4026 says:

      @Ovno: Man, you’re so right. My favourite thing about the Lib Dems is how they always keep their word. That’s just the best.

    • Magnetude says:

      @Ovno, as long as overpaid and under-regulated institutions are still messing everything up, I think the bashing should continue. Removing the people who caused the problem is part of fixing it.

    • Ovno says:

      @4026: I know, I know, but that’s why its so surprising that they did on who they would side with.

      Also it was always fairly clear that the student fees promise could never have been kept if they ever got any power but when they made it they thought they had no hope so why not make a completely ridiculous promise, oh hang on…

    • mike2R says:

      I genuinely admire the political courage they showed by going into coalition. We were in desperate need of stability, and they gave us that. From a political self interest point of view they should have supported the Queen’s speech, and then let the Tories govern as a minority government, and they may well pay the price for putting the country’s interests above their own. That is true political courage, rarely seen in British politics, and it should be applauded (but won’t be of course – it isn’t real political courage if it is popular).

      Course I’m not too likely to actually vote for them next time… They might end up going into a coalition with a party I disagree with…

    • Josh W says:

      I wish they’d made some kind of coalition manifesto to be honest, as they’ve ended up in this weird situation where they said:
      “our manifesto and the tory manifesto only counted if either of us got a majority, now we’re in a coalition we’re going to mash together the bits we think fit, then chuck the rest”.

      But by that logic, they could really do anything, because “circumstances have changed” now they are in power.

  21. MrWeed says:

    Good luck with your politicians, it won’t get better.

    Greetings from Germany.

  22. arienette says:

    Keith Vaz also believes in homeopathy, so we’re not dealing with a rational mind here. In general it’s quite surprising his political career has been as successful as it has. It’s tough to find examples where he wasn’t in the wrong tabling some EDM or on some comittee or other.

  23. Ian says:

    I do like that Watson’s amendment is basically the whole thing.

  24. DickSocrates says:

    Keith Vaz is a ****. His only agenda is promoting himself, and fiddling the rules for his friends. He should have been kicked out of the Labour Party years ago on the grounds of being an ineffective buffoon.

    I have no interest in defending MW3, it does go too far – intentionally – to drum up publicity, but calling for a ban is something only an idiot with a loose grasp of democracy would even think of suggesting. Banning is a last resort in order to protect people, not the first action in order to control what people have access to because you personally don’t like it. It’s a symptom of a personality disorder.

    Vaz has a long history of sniffing out soft targets (not always games, he jumped on the Shilpa Shetty bandwagon with repulsive glee) in order to get himself in the headlines. He’s a total joke. The Tories won’t join him in this not just because he’s Labour, but because it’s Keith Vaz.

  25. Chorltonwheelie says:

    Keith Vaz voted very strongly for the Iraq war.
    Keith Vaz voted strongly against an investigation into the Iraq war.
    Keith Vaz is a warmongering hypocrite.

    • bagga says:

      He supports the killing of real human beings; he is outraged by the idea of killing fictive ones. That’s not hypocrisy, it’s old fashioned idiocy.

    • cliffski says:

      Mr vaz…

      His claims included monthly mortgage interest payments of between £1,500 and £1,750, £200 in monthly grocery bills and £50 per month for a cleaner.

      On May 1, 2007, shortly after claiming for the flat’s £2,073 service charge and £1,022 council tax bill, he began renting it out and designated the Leicester property as his second home. He had no mortgage on it and so used his allowances to fit it with furniture.

      In all, Mr Vaz made claims of about £16,000 relating to the house, including more than £480 on 22 cushions, most of them silk, from John Lewis.

      He claimed £2,614 for a pair of John Lewis leather armchairs and an accompanying foot stool; £1,000 on a dining table and leather chairs; £750 on carpets; and £150 on a lamp and lampshade.

      Commons guidelines said MPs should “avoid purchases which could be seen as extravagant or luxurious”.

    • westyfield says:

      most of them silk, from John Lewis.

      He claimed £2,614 for a pair of John Lewis leather armchairs and an accompanying foot stool

      I like this Vaz chap. He seems like a man with good taste.

  26. Runty McTall says:

    Wouldn’t be *this* Keith Vaz would it?

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Vaz#Suspension_from_House_of_Commons

    I have no idea why they would put him in charge of committees when they basically kicked him out for a month for recklessly making untrue statements about a former policewoman.

    • Gusdor says:

      Also worrying is his expenses. Far more likely to insight violence like that. 45minute commute? I do 45 minutes _every day_

  27. Zoomon says:

    Slight aside, but I was rather pleased with myself when I managed to save a man from execution in MW3 even though the game was clearly rigged to get me killed if I was to try it, I feel I probably could have save all three, but just saving one of them, even though suddenly every gun was turned on me and I had been ORDERED by the game to stand and watch the brutal murder of civilians, I was able to run and hide and kill everyone.

    I did what modernwarfare 3 told me not to do, and I survived, however much it wanted to force a rather trite overdone point down my throat. Especially considering we had been allowed to rescue a man from being burnt alive, but only because the big man with the moustache said it was ok.

    • westyfield says:

      Yeah, that’s one of the problems with very linear games – people get bored of being told what the can and cannot do and try to ‘game’ the game. Another example of that is when you try to escape the game world, and you find invisible barriers everywhere.

    • Zoomon says:

      Agreed, however I don’t feel the annoyance comes from the linearity of the experience, but that the game constantly breaks it’s own internal logic. Many times in the game you can shoot down MI-17 HIPs with grenade launchers and RPGs, but in the first level, you cannot shoot down any helicopters even though you have a grenade launcher, any attempt to destroy the helicopter will bring the message “YOU CANNOT DAMAGE THIS VEHICLE WITH YOUR WEAPONS”, why the fuck not???

      Then, later in the same level, there is a Hind, if I attempt to shoot it down with the grenade launcher, it says “NOOOO, YOU CAN’T DO THAT!, USE THE PREDATOR MISSILE INSTEAD”

      But all the other helicopters are fair game. Linearity is fine, it allows for tightly scripted and controlled game experiences, but I should be allowed to shoot down that helicopter any damn way I want, not just in the WOW BANG EXPLODE way that they designed.

      I did enjoy the SP game overall, but thought the level of violence and warcrimes on offer was completely unnecessary. There are no good or bad guys, everyone is a murderous cock.

    • dragonhunter21 says:

      @zoomon

      To be fair, the reason that you can’t destroy a tank/APC/helicopter with your assault rifle is because… well, you can’t. COD tries to be a bit realistic (understand that “realistic” is defined here as “Shoot the gun, man goes down” and not in setting). In real life, those vehicles are generally designed to take a tank shell, turn around, and send another one back your way. That didn’t really bother me at all during the campaign, because (as a military nerd) it made sense. Honestly, what bothered me was the Russian army using AK-47s and not any of the multitude of more modern rifles Russia actually uses, and the RPG-7 being able to do more than dent a modern tank.

  28. salgado18 says:

    Wouldn’t it be better to propose a law or regulation which states violent games must have an option to dial the violence down, or off? Some people don’t like gratuitous violent acts in games, despite enjoying the game very much, so making an option to replace or turn off gore and stuff, and leave the good-old red particles blood effect would appease all those in favor of less violence AND all those in favor of free-speech.

    • Premium User Badge Lord Custard Smingleigh says:

      And if they could include a way to remove puzzling from Portal and building from Minecraft and death from Spelunky that would also be great.

    • Thants says:

      No, I don’t think a law forcing game developers to censor their own games would be good for free-speech.

    • NathanH says:

      Does it really count as censorship if the user can turn it off?

      That said, I’m not sure the idea is particularly useful, since it seems most plausible that someone who is at risk from violent video games would not be inclined to use the option. Perhaps it could be a new form of ASBO: if you commit a petty crime you have all your video games locked to Fluffy Violence.

  29. GenBanks says:

    British politics is in a sad state. Who is there to stand up for social liberalism? Labour politicians are just as prone to being controlling, condescending and judgemental of private lives as Conservatives. They just rationalise it in different ways, Christian morality versus social welfare. The LibDems would in the pre-coalition days have been my glimmer of hope, but no longer.

  30. Premium User Badge oceanclub says:

    The most ludicrous part of this tiny petition is how it manages to unite Jeremy Corbyn, a far-left London MP who was a long-time supporter of Sinn Fein/IRA when they were involved in actual murder, along with David Simpson, a hardline fundamentalist christian Unionist – that section of NI primarily targeted by the IRA. The long history of violence in Ireland was nothing to do with video games, and perhaps these guys should worry about real-life violence.

    P.

    • shitflap says:

      As David Simpson lives in Portadown and is a member of the DUP and the Orange Order, I’m sure he gets the opportunity to incite/see quite enough real violence every year, “defending the union”, or whatever his bullshit rationale is.
      Still, funny to see them both united against this real scourge, true enough, as that Jeremy Corbyn guy seems quite switched on otherwise.

      (BTW, being for a United Ireland isn’t quite the same thing as supporting the IRA, just as being against the Iraq War isn’t the same as supporting Al’Qaeda)

      ED; It would seem that you probably know that already

  31. RogB says:

    I’ve got an ‘early day motion’ i’d like to present to this man.

  32. torchedEARTH says:

    That comedy website Early-day-motion is better than rock-paper-shotgun.

    Someone had to say it.

  33. cliffski says:

    Aha this guy again? :

    Mr Vaz, the chairman of the home affairs select committee, also switched his designated second home from the £545,000 flat to a house in his Leicester East constituency and back again in the space of a year.

    Mr Vaz’s main home is a house in Stanmore, north-west London, that he bought with his wife Maria for £1.15 million in November 2005. They live there with their two children.

    The house is less than a mile from Stanmore underground station, which takes passengers directly to Westminster on the Jubilee Line. According to Transport for London, the 14-stop journey should take about 37 minutes..

    Documents filed with Commons officials showed that between 2004 and April 2007, Mr Vaz claimed more than £69,000 for expenses at the flat in Westminster, which he bought in 2003. He moved in shortly after selling another for £312,000.

    Also the guy who fell mysteriously ill the day he was due to be questioned about ghis corrupt activities.

    • Ergates_Antius says:

      The only pertinent question when it comes to Vaz is “Why is this man not in prison?”

      He’s a crook. He takes bribes from foreign businessmen, then obstructs the inquirey into his activities.

      It absolutely astounds me that they still let him be a member of Parliament – have they no standards?

  34. Premium User Badge oceanclub says:

    The word we have in Ireland for MPs of Vaz’s type is “gombeen”:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gombeen_man

    Is there a UK equivalent?

    P.

    • Hoaxfish says:

      we just have swear words

    • Ogun says:

      No, but ‘gombeen’ sounds good enough – unless ‘vaz’ catches on.

      Something that (with my Daily Mail hat on) I find extra-annoying about this game being singled out is that it is sensationalist and morally repugnant, just like all the other Modern Warfare games have been. Based on that Tom Watson note, the BBFC have handled it perfectly well – for a moment I thought Vaz might be complaining about a game including anti-personnel mines (where claymores have traditionally been the only exception) or the single player story being like a Clive Cussler novel re-imagined in Crayola by the Jeremy Kyle audience.

      ..but no, it’s another jump onto the same old bandwagon with zero research behind it. Don’t know how parliament works, but if you brought something this irrelevant and poorly thought out into a professional environment it’d earn you an entirely justified bollocking.

    • Cooper says:

      I’d go for the much more simple:

      The man is an arse.

  35. Man Raised by Puffins says:

    The increasing popularity of the filthy John Walker® sickens me to my stomach. Ban John Walker® 3™, I say, no good can ever come from him.

  36. sonofsanta says:

    You know what really surprises me most, is that Keith Vaz MP has not yet appeared in any series of I’m A Celebrity, Get Me Out Of Here!

    Interesting and vaguely related anecdote: I work as the Network Manager at a UK Secondary School, and recently volunteered to be the e-Safety officer as I’m inevitably involved in any Facebook falling outs and online bullying etc. I was going through an online training module in preparation for a course, and after a couple of hours of nothing-new-to-me, the module suddenly declared that computer games lead to an increased risk of suicide. Without any warning, or evidence, or context, just declared that playing computer games makes you want to kill yourself. This in a course being touted as an authoritative guide to modern technology for professionals caring for children and teenagers.

    I have horrifying images of a middle aged professional woman, with no prior experience of computer games, doing her best for the children she works with, all good intentions, overhearing some boys discussing a game of MW3 and instantly phoning parents and warning them their children are suicidal. It’s incredibly dangerous rumour-mongering and deserving of all scorn and horror.

    (Of course, if I was stuck playing MW3 with teenage boys I might personally feel like ending it all, but that’s beside the point)

  37. radioactivez0r says:

    You walk a fine line with this kind of story; it gives the guy free publicity which is probably what he wants, but you are probably obligated to cover it. Then of course, everyone on the site is in agreement that he’s a nut job, so there isn’t much actual discussion to be had over it.

  38. Dana says:

    Thats weird, because I dont remember any train being bombed in MW3…

  39. Dana says:

    ~comment flopped

  40. Guiscard says:

    Sheesh, get your facts right Keith. Terrorists don’t blow up the tube trai 7/7 style. An incompetent SAS member drives a pickup into it.

  41. DeadPanda says:

    I almost thought I was reading Private Eye for a second there.

    Keep it up chaps, or I shall be cancelling my subscription forthwith.

  42. Jonith says:

    I didn’t like this game either Keith, but come on don’t you think your overreacting a little

  43. OJSlaughter says:

    There are 9 signatures, not many at all. All Left-Wing too…

    No worries, no threat!

  44. thesundaybest says:

    If your answer to youth violence is to ban videogames, you’re 30 years too late and a thousand years too stupid.

  45. pmouse says:

    ive seen Vaz being driven around town waving to us peasents , i think he should be banned from waving as this enraged me

  46. Tams80 says:

    Hmmm, my local MP is the president of the Lib Dems. Perhaps Mike Hancock and Bob Russell can disappear?

  47. Roshin says:

    The Forsworn shot arrows in my horse Bessie until she died the other day. That was a gratuitous act of violence, let me tell you! And the twat Jarl wont do anything about it. :(

    Fuckers.

  48. magnus says:

    Is there any depth to his stupidity? Hopefully if there’s some kind of industry meeting at the HP he’ll get an invite, not turn up again and various industry figures will rip on him again.

  49. magnus says:

    Here’s the most ridiculous shot of Keith Vaz I could find; http://www.censorwatch.co.uk/images/nekvaz.jpg

  50. Gary W says:

    So Keith Vaz does his bit of cheap demagoguery and MW3 sells even more copies.

    Meanwhile, an army of psychologists, neuroscientists and other narrow specialists, with their elementary understanding about the inner workings of the human brain, continue to sniff at an infinite series of ratholes, producing inconclusive results.

    The result: nobody knows anything; further research is needed.