What mainstream publishers don't want you to know about door-to-door magazine sales.
When these huntresses on are on the prowl, the prey very much wants to be caught.
How rumored McCain veep choice Charlie Crist wants to bail out Big Sugar.
Are Asian women getting their jawbones cut to look whiter?
Currently, all video games are clearly marked with ratings from the Entertainment Software Ratings Board, an organization that extensively reviews all games and has a defined rating system. But Pappas insists that parents rely on the government to tell them what's suitable for children, and that the ratings by an independent board are not enough. Groups like the Media Coalition and the Video Software Dealers Association say that not only will the law grant government authority it doesn't have, but any kind of law prohibiting sales of games with violent content to anyone of any age violates First Amendment rights.
"This is clearly unconstitutional," says Sean Bersell of the VSDA. "Minors have First Amendment rights. You can restrict access to material that is obscene or sexual, but when it comes to violence you cannot."
Pappas says that argument is crazy. "Who says children have First Amendment rights?" she says. "How is that relevant?" It's relevant to the courts, which have overturned similar laws in St. Louis and Indianapolis because violent content is constitutionally protected material. And it matters to the U.S. Supreme Court, which has ruled that minors are entitled to a significant measure of First Amendment protection.
In the entertainment industry, there's a difference between regulation and prohibition. And ratings for video games, movies, and music are guidelines for children and parents, not a law. Bersell says a bill prohibiting access will usurp the rights of parents. "This says that as the state of Minnesota, we think we know better than you what's right for your son or daughter. That's the state playing nanny."