Because it makes money for the governement via "sin taxes" and via the payments people have to make as a result of too much alcohol and lawyers aren't going to feed themselves...

Yup that was his point.
Lawyers can always live on rice and potatoes.

That's a catch-22, though. How are they going to prove they can process it without having any access to it?
Another side of the rating argument is one I've encountered countless times as a parent, trying to buy games for my son (who is 8 now). The age rating concerns the "harmfulness" of the content only. It does not indicate that a game is suitable for that age group in any way, just that it is "safe". I've bought quite a few games for him that he basically hasn't played, because the game was much too difficult.
It seems slightly misleading that a game rated 3+, featuring cartoon characters, requires the child to be able to read loads of text, conversations, mission descriptions, etc., and has complicated features that you really need to be about 12 to fully understand. This is compounded by the fact that very few games are translated into Danish, so the text the child needs to be able to read is usually in English too.
As a parent, I'm naturally interested in whether a game contains things that might be harmful to my kid, and having a guideline is certainly useful (although I may not agree with or abide by it), but I am also very interested in whether my kid will actually be able to play the game I'm about to buy, or whether I'll find out I've just wasted $80.

Because parents, as your legal guardian have a right to say what goes on in their house, the money you rightfully earn, isn't even yours until you're an adult. It's bull, but it's the law (that they own it). But again, legal guardian means that you're their indentured servant until you're 18.

Well, since it is 1:30 here and school is in.....5 hours and I cant sleep I guess I'll just surf here. Anyways, I've seen 5 year old play GTA4 better than people I know and just think '....they are so fucked....'. But as the consumer don't I have the right to buy something knowing right from wrong? (FYI, I've beaten every Splinter Cell game so I know how violent they are, and there probably no more than a gallon of blood total...)

Eh, whatever. I always lie about my age when it comes to this stuff.

I know it's not the best solution, but...couldn't you just fake your age or something?

After running into lots of kids recently who seem to have consumed way too many violent movies and games for their own good, I'm all in favor of age ratings.... it's just a shame they aren't often enforced.
The anti-social, bulling, yobbish kids always seem to be the ones who's parents exercise no control over what they see or do. Personally I'd rather not have to deal with them.
Though possibly age limits should be replaced with some form of maturity test... eg:
Name the best movie:
(a) 2 Fast 2 Furious
(b) Saw 3
(c) that one with jet li and the rapper where the dude gets chopped in half!
(d) bladeruner

While the obvious answer is d, I think you're undermining 2F2F a bit - it was a fun movie, and a proficient fun movie. Far better than any film of that name deserved to be.

Cause & Effect mate. Twats are twats at any age, about the only solution is to be smacked enough at a young enough age to learn that being a twat isn't something you do

the problem is when they appear to base their life around that movie... it's not the best of role models. (and hanging out next to the local mcdonalds with a modded ford fiesta is definitely NOT cool).

yeah... but we don't want little Rohan15 to end up needing a smack.. do we?

OP, you'll get over it in a year or two.
While I doubt you're going to spy for foreign governments or shoot the Covenant with rayguns, we can't take any chances, right?

Yeah....heh heh heehh......I'm totally not gonna use my gravity gun to fling a warthog at the president while urinating on a cat....YEAH......