I tell ya if there was ever a fucking useless government it would HAVE TO BE the South Australian Government. If there was ever to be a figure within this government to closely resemble Dr. Claw from Inspector Gadget (in that he spreads about his clumsy evil, but is never seen), it would be Attorney General Michael Atkinson. I'm going to discuss our dear friend Atkinson over this rant and not even acknowledge Rann because we all know he's a piece of shit.

**Before I continue - I must note that the new R rated movie covers law I'm about to discuss was in fact introduced by Family First MP Dennis Hood and not Michael Atkinson. Mr. Atkinson brought this to my attention in an email. Now that I've mentioned this, I will now add "Dennis Hood" next to Atkinson's name every time I mention him. THANKS!

Michael Atkinson is the South Australian Attorney General and if he (AND Denis Hood) had his way we would ALL be living in cages, blind folded from the evils of the world, with our only activity being running in a fucking spinning wheel. If he had his way we wouldn't have any rights, we would all just pay our taxes and be told what we like, what to do and how to fucking do it.

This clueless weasel is the reason why we can't get R rated games in Australia, first starters. Atkinson's argument behind this is all about "protecting the children". Apparently if we DO introduce R rated games then children will be exposed to more filth and indecency (you know, the kind of shit that goes on behind closed doors in parliament). Maybe somebody should remind Atkinson of the purpose of ratings. An R rating blocks any Australian under the age of 18 from being able to access this material. So wouldn't you be more inclined to think that an R rating would actually protect children from all the "indecency" in modern games? Thus allowing us, you know, the larger majority of adult gamers, to enjoy our games in their fullest glory. Not half assed rushed cut and paste censor jobs like Left For Dead 2. No, no, Atkinson believes it's more useful to allow all games to fall under an R rating, allowing children to legally pick up these titles. But it's okay, because instead, Australia gets a censored version of games instead. By the way, this only applies to more well known, controversial games and does not apply to all unknown games that fall under the radar. Wow, inconsistency in an Australian government operation? Noooo... you don't say!

Atkinson (and more so Dennis Hood) has gone too far with his latest effort though. You know how South Australia is already extremely behind the times? Well get used to it, because now South Australia has been singled out as the ONLY state to introduce a NEW legislation, limiting the exposure of R-rated dvd covers! Yep, you heard right. In DVD stores across South Australia all R-rated titles will be in a seperate section, in amongst the pornography. If they're not in this seperate section the covers must be replaced with a plain cover with only the title of the film apparent.

This law has been introduced by Family First MP Dennis Hood since he noticed his two year old daughter picked up an R-rated DVD cover. Dennis Hood is probably the sort of fucking Adelaide windbag who has no real ambitions and just likes getting angry at shit that doesn't require anger. This guy thought that his daughter being exposed to this was terrible, forwarded his concerns to Atkinson (and the other super happy friendly politicians) and TADA! Now we are robbed of yet more freedoms.

Not only does this law not make sense at all, it again allows parents to be even lazier. Of course some fucking complete morons out there actually support this. Some parents out there are saying "WAH! PARENTING IS HARD! HOW CAN I CONTROL MY CHILD PICKS UP IN A STORE!". Well here's a fucking notion, you clueless cunt, WATCH your fucking CHILD. You know, like a parent does? Get your fucking eyes off the 50% reduced SALE signs and watch your fucking child you irresponsible fucking idiot.

The reason the law makes no sense is that not all R-rated covers are bad. Actually, almost none of them are, because they're intended for public display. Consider this, Robocop is R-rated, the cover features Robocop on it. SAW is MA15+, the cover features a severed foot on it. So it's cool for a child to view a severed foot because the rating is MA15+? Or are we going to eventually censor the display of MA15+ covers too? I guess it just depends on when Dennis Hood's two year old daughter eventually picks this title up while he's STILL not watching his child.

Secondly, R-rated posters at the cinema are fine to display. How the FUCK does that work!? This whole law is a fucking disgrace and smells as sloppy as Betty Boop's vagina.

What really hurts about this law is I remember as a child ENJOYING looking through the forbidden horror zone. Looking at all the cool covers and knowing that one day I will be able to watch that movie. Hell, the reason I own half the horror movies I do now is through child hood memories of the COVER alone.

But our Government doesn't want our children to have memories. South Australia's government doesn't want our children to experience anything. They just want to wrap them in bubble wrap and store them in a padded cell away from all the sharp objects. Aren't these people old enough to realise that without challenge and without experience you will also be lacking in character? The world is dark, reality is harsh and society is a fragile system of bullshit laws that can only guide so much. Depriving us of freedom of choice and our right to parent our children as we see fit is breaking a law.

In my opinion the government should be fucking held accountable for the break down of society as slowly parents are not allowed to punish children and every kid is raised with the softest touch. So they become smarmy little bastards, who grow up to be arrogant prick adults. The fact that our Government eagerly steps in to censor and blanket our society is completely embarrassing. How does this look to the rest of the world? The entire fucking planet would be laughing their ass off! Good old South Australia, always on the forefront of idiocy, illogical laws and complete regression.

I want to leave this state because of this kind of shit. I officially hate Adelaide. I FUCKING HATE ADELAIDE! It's a dwelling ground for old people who seek death and clouding. While people like Rann, Atkinson and Hood are in influential positions, South Australia is in trouble. It's 2010 boys, get with the times you miserable pussies. Oops - should I censor that? No, FUCK YOU.

I don't think these guys realise that the more they ban things and the more they censor, the more the passionate people our simply going to import. All they're doing is taking the profit to other countries. They are simply clueless idiots who have no place to be making these decisions.

Oh... also, before any of you go "Well, Mr. Bludge, it seems as though you could've done with child censorship because you swear so much and seem so angry", I will explain. As a child I didn't watch a whole lot of horror or other darker films because they scared me, plain and simple. As a child I was not angry, hell as a teenager I wasn't angry. The only thing that turned me into a swearing, angry, ego-maniac is when I was old enough to realise I'm a fucking anal-slave to a "system" that brings me no benefit whatsoever, yet I continually hand it money I worked for. That's what has driven me to madness. I am sane enough to recognise the difference between entertainment and reality. I know what to take on board and what not to. All because I wasn't an over-protected monkey.

REALITY REQUIRES STRENGTH.

THAT SHOULD BE LEARNT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

I literally challenge Atkinson to explain to me how this new law works and how banning R-ratings for video games works. Here is a letter I will be sending him today:

Mr. Atkinson,

I write to you querying the law you recently introduced which restricts the display of R-rated DVD covers in stores across South Australia.

What exactly are you hoping to acheive with this new law? I don't understand how the law works with any real consistency. For instance -

ROBOCOP (R RATED): The cover features Robocop on the cover. That's it. Nothing horrible on the cover, yet it cannot be viewed by young "innocent" eyes.

SAW (MA RATED): The cover prominently features a severed foot on a white background. That is all. One big cut off foot. It's gorey and disturbing.

P2 (R RATED): The cover features a woman standing against a column. The word P2 is printed on the column. That is all.

PLANET TERROR (MA RATED): The cover features a woman with a mutilated leg that has been replaced with a large machine gun. All kinds of madness fill the background.

Not only does that show how illogical and flawed this new system is, it also shows you have nothing better to do than waste tax payers money and I DO pay my tax.

Another flaw to this "law" is not restricting access to R-rated posters in cinemas. How in the hell do you expect this law to be of any use when you leave so many holes in it's reach? So a child can't view an R-rated DVD cover (unless they, you know, WALK over to the R-rated section) but they can readily view a LARGE poster of an R-rated movie at the cinema? Right, well... that's a real well thought out law you've got going on there, Mike.

I don't understand any of your decisions behind any of your restrictive laws. They just seem to be your personal (and out of touch) preferences on how to handle things.

I know the mere mention of it will make you yawn, but how the hell do you think not allowing R ratings for video games will protect the children? Isn't it better to enforce the R rating, stopping children accessing the game AT ALL, than to censor it and allowing them to still experience a low level of violence? I mean, I guess that's just what my BRAIN is telling me. Why won't you just allow the damn R rating? You know a large majority of adults play the games, you know if it's R rated children cannot access it... and quite frankly I don't think it's your damn job to parent other people's children.

On top of all the censorship business, have you seen how easily a child can turn the TV on and watch Video Hits for a nice dose of softcore porno? Nothing you're doing is changing things for the better. It's just making people angry.

Are you aware of the consequences to this ridiculous R rated cover law? What if distributors find this all too much of a hassle to deal with so we get less distribution in SA? I bet you didn't even think twice about that. Did you consider that doing all this plain cover stuff is too labourious and costly to distributors and stores alike so they simply wont bother with some titles? Have you considered that if this happens people will be buying from other states? Or have you considered that the consequence from BOTH laws is that people will simply import more games and films? All you're doing is pushing the money to other countries.

Every child up until now seems to have coped without a blanketed childhood, so why introduce this waste of time policy now? You're depriving me of my freedom. YOU are breaking the law. I don't know what to think of you Mr. Atkinson, not because of these laws, but because you cannot prove that they're effective and you refuse to listen to others on that matter. It comes across as prudish and resembles everything my home state of South Australia is becoming - OUT OF TOUCH.

I would appreciate a response to this letter, as I've taken the time to write you. Also, this letter (and it's response) will be posted on my website, www.thebludgeoner.com, which has many readers from South Australia, Australia and the USA. I think we'll all be very interested in what you have to say.

-------

Go HERE to find Mr. Atkinson and his email contact. Go HERE to find Dennis Hood and his email contact. Don't hold back either. Contact these "people" and make them explain why they feel they can rob us of our freedom. MAKE THEM EXPLAIN THEIR FUCKING ACTIONS.

Well I'm about done with this topic. I'll be updating this rant as soon as I receive a reply from Mr. Atkinson. Until then, here are some reader comments from the source news page on this topic:

Nanny state. One of my main reasons for leaving. Unfortunate, Adelaide is such a beautiful place to live.
Posted by: Mark of 2:30pm January 18, 2010

Here's an idea - parents could actually take responsibility for parenting their children, and not permit them to be somewhere that they are likely to encounter images that are age-inappropriate. Radical idea, I know. It would require people to actually think about how they parent their kids, rather than just sleepwalking through it and then blaming 'society' when something goes wrong.
Posted by: crystalsinger of Melbourne 2:21pm January 18, 2010

South Australia..... home of the prude. The great irony, is that when SA was founded, some of the earliest settlers were amongst the most liberal and forward thinking people in the world. The German 'Utopian' settlers lead issues like female voting and social inclusiveness and tolerance for other views. How sad to see my old home state become a back-water of conservative wowserism.
Posted by: Oz of Melbourne 12:26pm January 18, 2010

CHAMPION:
Won't somebody please think of the children? What if they want to watch porn? Oh that's right, Video Hits on channel 10 on saturday morning.
Posted by: Dean K of Glenside 10:27am January 18, 2010

MORON:
Personally I think all covers with naked women and all violent covers should be in a separate section ... I dread taking my two boys to a video store these days to hire a game or a DVD and they have to be subjected to looking at things that are really just not age appropriate! Good on you Dennis Hood!
Posted by: Bek of Adelaide 10:32am January 18, 2010

------

I hope all this is reversed some day, because it makes me feel fucking sick and I wouldn't be surprised if you feel the same.

**UPDATE!!

Attorney General Michael Atkinson's "response" has arrived:

Thank you for your abusive and ad hominem email.

The law to which you refer was introduced by Mr Dennis Hood, M.P., of the Family First Party. It was a private member's bill not a government bill. It was supported by all members of Parliament (Liberal, Labor, Greens, Ex-Democrat, Xenophonites). If you supply me with your home address, I will put you in touch with your local M.P., or your party of preference, and he or she or it can explain why he, she or it supported the proposal.

I know it's fun to blame everything on a hate figure, especially one who worships in a church from whose members you would remove civil rights, such as the right to be in Parliament, but sometimes things are a little more complicated than they seem.

Michael Atkinson
--------------------------

So there we have it. An insulting, smart ass reply from a person in "leadership". Naturally (being a politician) all answers were avoided, except when it came to telling me I was wrong. Apparently in my email I also abused him and suggested I hate him for going to church? I don't actually remember saying that at any point but meh. I acknowledge I had some wrong information and I have since sent my reply which reads:

Dear Michael,

No worries for the abusive and ad hominem email. Thanks for the personal response. I will be sure to contact Dennis Hood of the Family First Party, before his daughter picks up an MA15 rated movie with an inappropriate cover.

While I will acknowledge that I was wrong to directly suggest that YOU were responsible for this law, I guess I directed this email at you because you have gone on AdelaideNow defending it. Have you seen the responses to your comment on that site? Do you care? How do you feel that so many people disagree with all this censorship? Fair enough, you didn’t introduce the law, but I still would have desired your opinion on the matter as I want to understand YOUR views on censorship.

I still cannot grasp how this law can be seen as anything other than annoying to movie goers AND movie sellers? I most definitely do not understand how you think the absence of an R-rating for video games will reduce indecent games getting into the hands of children.

I am not having fun, Mr. Atkinson. I am simply seeking some answers from somebody who is infamous in relation to the topic at hand. I don't see what you going to church has to do with anything? At no point did I bring up your religious views, nor do I care to know them. I don't see how going to church should conflict with your parliamentary role, which should be acting on behalf of the people, eg. Taxpayers. It's your civil right to worship "god" just as it's my civil right to browse movies at the DVD retailer from A-Z by genre. It's your right to be in Parliament just as much as it's my right to play video games with adult content before they're butchered in accordance to the OFLC's specification.

I guess the email was a little over the top but it was seeking your genuine opinion, on both topics. But I guess you're more interested in suggesting I hate you because you go to church? How unfortunate, I was eager for some answers.
-------------------------

I wonder if he'll reply to this one with some ACTUAL answers??