Arnold Schwarzenegger hard to Terminator E3 organizers say anti-violence unconstitutional

E3, ESA (American Entertainment Software Association (Entertainment Software Association), responded to a recent bill in California that banned the sale of violent video games to minors. Michael Gallagher, president and chief executive of ESA, issued a brief statement saying the proposed law was clearly in violation of the U.S. Constitution.　　The Association will submit the relevant legal basis to the Supreme Court. California's Supreme Court has begun to re-examine legal proposals for "banning the sale of excessive violent video games against minors" by Senator Yu Yin of California State. Leland said the legislation was only a simple restriction on the sale of minors to violent games and did not involve game companies banning propaganda.　　He also said game sellers who sold violent games to minors who did not meet their age requirements would be fined severely and their parents had the right to demand high compensation from game sellers.　　The proposal invites more voices, "although minors enjoy the protection of the First Amendment, it is more of a restrictive right than an adult." A brief statement by Michael Association, President and chief Executive Officer of ESA (American Entertainment Software Association (Entertainment Software Gallagher), Yu Yin E3, California state senator, said The proposed law is clearly unconstitutional.　　The association will produce a number of legal grounds to be handed over to the Supreme Court. Michael Gallagher said, "The First Amendment protects the freedom of computer games and video games," and video games and computer games have the same artistic views as movies, books and music, and games use sound and images to build the world and bring real feelings to players,　　These are now recognized and legally protected by the national courts. This is why other courts agree, Gallagher Michael Gallagher, the ESA president. The game has the right to music, books, movies and other forms of art should be protected by the Constitution, and California's laws are not fundamentally different from those of other States, which is clearly in violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, and we look forward to the United States Supreme Court to see our proposals and vigorously uphold the work of the industry, Author and the right to innovate.　　Before that, ESA executives had said that we would die in a state-level bureaucracy that would eventually lead us to sell different versions in 50 states with different jurisdictions. In all the evils of America, governor, you're not going to be able to do anything. Since the introduction of the bill, which has been repeated for five years, it dates back to the 2005, when Schwarzenegger signed a bill banning the sale of violent video games to children, and then started the constitutional amendment,　　The sentencing of those who sold violence to children was punished with heavy sentences, but the sentence was inconclusive and he was frustrated again in February, when the US Supreme Court dismissed Schwarzenegger's request. In August 2007, the California District Court handed down a first-instance verdict on California's proposal to set up a special censorship regime for violent games, and Judge Ronald Whyte ruled that California, led by Arnold Schwarzenegger, was unconstitutional.　　Schwarzenegger then vowed to appeal to the end of the lawsuit. The hearings are scheduled to take place this fall and make a ruling. (Edit Zhang Xing)