First up was legal analyst Lis Wiehl, who actually defended the decision to overturn the law because, as written, the statute is overly broad. "You can drive a truck through this statute," Wiehl said. "Pac-Man is violent under this statute."
Lawyer and politician Jeanine Pirro was having none of it, siding with Governor Schwarzenegger and the California legislature. "[They] can prove a causal relationship between seeing videos of violence and aggressive behavior, especially in the frontal lobe," Pirro said. Funny, we thought that the frontal lobe was usually associated with thoughts, not behavior per se.
After a brief shouting match between the panelists, O'Reilly implied through a question that the rating board's decision should be good enough for these games. Despite this, after some more cross talk, O'Reilly comes down on Pirro's side. "If it's OK for the movies it should be OK for the video games," he said. One problem though ... there's no law regulating violent content in movies. So why should there be one for video games, then? Maybe just so O'Reilly will have a chance to call someone a "pinhead judge."