After two tries, a bill that would make it a felony for adults to knowingly exhibit violent video games to minors will advance to the House for debate.

Rep. David Hogue's bill passed 7-2 Tuesday in a committee, suggesting committee members who voted no during the first hearing were pleased with an amendment that changed the punitive focus from all media to interactive video and computer games only.

"It's more than a message bill," the Riverton Republican said. "This is a bill that identifies the effects that different media has on our children."

Hogue said the bill would generally apply to vendors, but could also have an impact on "perpetrators trying to influence a minor." In both cases, prosecutors would have to prove the defendants "knowingly and intentionally" provided the material.

"Inappropriate violence" would include video games with material patently offensive to the prevailing standards in the adult community, as long as it didn't have "serious literary, artistic, political or scientific value for minors."

Games that use violence to hold the plot together, including those based on historic wars, would fall into the "inappropriate violence" category.

Some members of the public who spoke against the bill in the first hearing reiterated their arguments during Tuesday's hearing.

"This bill is not needed. More importantly, the bill will be challenged as unconstitutional," said Scott Sabey, representing the Entertainment Software Association. "To plug violence into an obscenity statute won't work."

Margaret Plane, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union, also argued the bill would be unconstitutional because the Supreme Court has ruled that violence is a protected form of speech, even for minors.

Hogue responded by saying the legislative legal staff said it was likely the bill would hold up in court.

Whether or not placing the restrictions would be constitutional, Eagle Forum Director Gayle Ruzicka spoke in dramatic fashion in support of the bill: "If we have to go all the way to the Supreme Court, then let's take it to the Supreme Court."