We tend not to get overly excited over a federal judge’s ruling that a Michigan law barring retailers from selling or renting violent video games to minors is unconstitutional. When it comes to: a) necessary laws that are intended to protect the young vs. b) a parent being responsible for a child’s welfare, this issue clearly belongs in the “b” category.The young clearly need to be protected from drugs, pornography, alcohol, exploitation and the like, and our police and courts must be a major player in all of this.But we’re not certain violent video games, though offensive and distasteful, fall within this same range.This smacks a little of society once again stepping up to the plate, taking the role as parent because the biological beings that are supposed to be fulfilling those roles are simply failing in their duties.The courts have painted this as a free speech issue, and we suppose, constitutionally, it makes sense, We’d prefer it instead be a parental responsibility issue, and parents accepting the challenge of deciding what their children do and don’t see.Prior to leaving their children with a new sitter, parents should check on the responsibility of that person. We would think the same would be done with the video games many use to occupy a child’s time.Also, it’s time businesses that sell and rent these games step up to the plate. There’s no law that says they have to stock or provide every game that’s ever made. They don’t have to rent or sell each and every game any more than every grocery story has to sell every disgusting porn magazine that rolls off the printing press.This is a problem that needs to be addressed, but getting the courts and police involved is too much of a stretch.Their involvement will be needed with these gamesters decide to “play” in real life.