For years, violent video games have served as the scapegoats for violence in real life. Despite the fact that no statistics support a correlation, politicians continue to take aim at the gaming industry. The newest crusader against gaming is Pennsylvania State Representative Christopher B. Quinn (R-168).

Back in September, Quinn proposed House Bill 2705, which one Democrat and two other Republicans co-sponsored. Now, that bill is finally drawing large amounts of online attention. The bill proposes a 10% tax on violent video games rated “M for Mature” or higher. That money would be placed in a “restricted fund” which would pay for “school safety enhancements.” Although Quinn has not proved specific enhancements, could include metal detectors, additional security forces, or even arming teachers.

Quinn is not the first politician to propose a violent video game tax. Rhode Island State Representative Robert Nardolillo (R-28) pushed forth a similar bill ten months ago following the Parkland, Florida shooting. Nardolillo proposed a similar 10% sales tax on games rated “M”, which would increase revenue for “counseling, mental health programs, and other conflict resolution activities.” That’s slightly more information than Quinn’s bill, but not significantly. The one thing they can agree on is that violent video games are to blame and now they must pay.

It should be noted that Quinn does not have a strong rating by the National Rifle Association. His 33% approval rating on the NRA scorecard is fairly low for a Republican, especially one in a swing state. That indicates Quinn is indeed attempting to solve gun violence in the U.S. rather than simply directing attention to the video game industry. On the other hand, Nardolillo carries a 93% rating. His bill seems reactionary rather than logical and carries a copious amount of hypocrisy and bias.

These bills ignore the key components of gun violence in America while threatening businesses and, therefore, jobs. Actually, ignore isn’t the correct word as they flat-out state what the actual problems are. The bills intend to direct money to stronger mental health resources and increased budgets for counselors and security. Those are the main issues that must be addressed. Quinn and Nardolillo found the real problem but took an easier route. That method rarely finds a legitimate solution.

To gather the money to fix the real issues, the politicians have chosen to attack a fragile industry instead of, say, billionaires hoarding wealth. No, companies like Bethesda and Rockstar won’t go bankrupt after losing sales due to exorbitant prices. But indie studios and even other triple-A studios are a bust away from folding. Directly contributing to the downfall of a company tends to spell doom for politicians.

Additionally, the bills fail to recognize the message of many game developers: violence is bad. Naughty Dog stated they hope players feel repulsed by the violence in The Last of Us Part II, not eager to replicate it. Games, movies, and books can be graphic without encouraging their audiences to re-create the graphic material. That’s a pretty good use of the First Amendment in my book. We will see if other members of the Pennsylvania and Rhode Island Houses of Representatives understand that when it comes time to vote.

What do you think of these two bills? Do you think they could pass their votes? Could they lead to a national gaming tax? Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below. For more gaming news and updates, follow DFTG on Facebook and Twitter!

Thanks, GameRant.