The Supreme Court will begin to hear oral arguments for and against the California law that would make it a crime to sell certain games to children, and both sides of the debate have begun their PR battle. Common Sense Media is claiming that 72 percent of adults "support a ban on the sale of ultraviolent video games to minors."

The question asked wasn't quite that simple, however, and the included video is more shock than truth... but we must think of the children.

"The results of this poll clearly show that not only do the effects of ultraviolent or sexually violent games weigh heavily on the minds of parents, but also that parents feel that the video game industry isn't doing nearly enough to protect kids from accessing the most ultraviolent games," said James Steyer, CEO and founder, Common Sense Media. "The Supreme Court's decision in this case is going to have a huge impact on families and kids across the United States, and what we've learned from this poll is that parents want to be the ones deciding which games their kids play, not the video game industry."

Just so we're on the same page, this is the video Common Sense Media released with its press release, claiming this is the sort of violence being talked about. Before you watch it, can you guess what games are shown? (Hint: others have used these titles as shock tactics in the past)

Here is the actual question asked in the survey, which included 2,100 adults: "Would you support or oppose a law that prohibits minors from purchasing video games that depict killing, maiming or sexually assaulting an image of a human being?" Forty-six percent of the adult respondents would somewhat support the law, and 26 percent of respondents would strongly support it.

This doesn't have anything to do with ratings, mind you; if you show a person being killed or maimed, that game should be illegal for children to play according to these responses. To satisfy our curiosity about the wording, we looked up "maim" to see what would be included in this hypothetical law. Here's what we found: "To deprive a person of such part of his body as to render him less able in fighting or defending himself than he would have otherwise been." That's the definition in criminal law, at least. We were also told to see "Mayhem." Indeed.

That's a broad definition, and it impacts all sorts of games. This is why it's hard to boil down laws and issues this complex to a single question on a survey, no matter how strongly you think it makes a point.

Games need to controlled by law. Everything else? Not so much

We asked James Steyer why games need to be legally controlled while film and music are both constitutionally protected speech. "That's not an accurate assessment of this statute," he told Ars. "This law doesn’t restrict the freedom of games or game developers in any way. Companies can still create them, vendors can still sell them, and parents can purchase or rent them for their kids if they choose do so."

What does this law do, then? "If I don’t want my kids exposed to ultraviolent video games—games that the ESRB already rates as M or AO—what this law says is that vendors can’t sell them to my kids behind my back," Steyer explained.

Despite Streyer's assertions, there is strong legal precedent that this is a constitutional issue. There have been 12 rulings in the lower courts that have declared that games are protected speech, and every law that seeks to control who can and can't buy games has been struck down.

Hal Halpin, President of the Entertainment Consumers Association, takes exception to the argument that the law doesn't restrict the freedom of retailers and publishers. "The law in question sends a chill through the entire video game publishing world," he told Ars. "Publishers will curtail the types of images and games they put out on the off chance that they might run afoul of this law. Because the law is overly broad, it’s confusing for publishers, retailers and the general public to really know what video games could be seen as problematic, so it would chill huge swaths of artistic media."

Common Sense Media may be thinking of the children, but the law has been pretty clear on this issue in the past. The eyes of watchdog groups and the video game industry alike will all be on the Supreme Court on November 2.