http://www.news.com.au/adelaidenow/stor ... 62,00.html

"A UNITED States citizen has been charged with allegedly attempting to import games featuring child pornography into Australia.
Investigations began on Wednesday when Australian Customs and Border Protection Service officers at Melbourne Airport examined an air cargo consignment from the US labelled as comic books.

Upon close examination of computer games inside the package customs officers allege they found 37 disks containing material deemed to be child abuse or other objectionable material.

On Friday, a 33-year-old US citizen was charged at a Melbourne trade fair with importing prohibited goods.

He will appear at the Melbourne Magistrates' Court on Monday.

Customs and Border Protection national manager investigations Richard Janeczko said the arrest should serve as a warning to anyone considering smuggling illegal pornographic material into Australia."

Melbourne trade fair....Supernova's on....hmmm....sounds like TR got done....

(UPDATE: TR was in sydney that day

...makes me wonder who DID get caught though....)

Actually there quite a few games that have been prohibited in Australia....(ones that aren't just pornographic)
Ones like Postal2 which are extemely violent have been banned, (one reason being you can set people alight, then urinate on them to put them out).

A full list can be found on wiki ----->http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_banned_video_games

which rasies the question...are these games any different to movies such as SAW?

I'm beginning to think we need a forum term for Michael Atkinson because we've referred to him a lot lately. And NEVER in a good way!

Boltz wrote:are these games any different to movies such as SAW?

According to Michael Atkinson, they're aimed at children whereas Saw is for grown ups.

Well, from the sounds if it, the arrested naga got what he deserved and any material like that ain't cool at all. Good to know it ain't floating around the east coast now.

edible_hat wrote:

Boltz wrote:are these games any different to movies such as SAW?

According to Michael Atkinson, they're aimed at children whereas Saw is for grown ups.

And that's why we'll never get an R rating for games in this country while morons like him exist, as they seem to live in this world where they think that as soon as everyone turns 18, they automatically stop playing videogames forever, so therefore no matter how violent a game is, they're ALL aimed at children.

Boltz wrote:Ones like Postal2 which are extemely violent have been banned, (one reason being you can set people alight, then urinate on them to put them out).

You can do the exact same thing in one part of Conker's Bad Fur day, yet that never got banned.

Boltz wrote:which rasies the question...are these games any different to movies such as SAW?

The real argument is the perspective. In a movie you are a spectator whereas in a game you are the participant.
However, very few people would reenact what they play, most would be less inclined to do so.
It's that hand full of loonies that are stopping a functioning rating system and soccer mums who ignore the ratings then complain.

White Demon wrote:You can do the exact same thing in one part of Conker's Bad Fur day, yet that never got banned.

"Light up the furry guy!"

"Ah, I got pee in my mouth"

You know...your post and your sig match very well right now...

I wonder how milk comes up in his crotch?

....

That's what you get if you mix his avatar and sig.

How did I know that was going to be the reply if I quote something at the end of my post?

lol there are a huge variety of ways that your sig can be a response

Atory wrote:The real argument is the perspective. In a movie you are a spectator whereas in a game you are the participant.

None of the anti-game crowd actually use that argument though.