eldavojohn writes "Delusional disbarred Miami attorney Jack Thompson claims to have a bill in the state of Utah that targets retailers and entire industries with the Truth in Advertising Law. The best part of his rant: 'Our military appropriately uses violent video games a) to suppress the inhibition to kill of new recruits, and b) to teach killing scenarios. Games have the same effect on civilian teens.' While GamePolitics couldn't find the bill on Utah's state site, they did receive a response from him claiming 'I have a sponsor and a bill, and [the video game] industry is in trouble.' For 2009 bills, there seems to be merely a bill enhancing the Truth in Advertising Law but does not contain any of Thompson's verbiage. Good 'ole Jack — always good for some laughs, but really he needs to give it up one of these days."
Video games never made me want to kill another (real) person. Jack Thompson on the other hand makes me want to kill - someone, possibly named Jack - every time I hear from Mr. Thompson.
I don't play video games and my reaction is the same: "kill Jack!" I do like to play chess though. And I like to eat potato chips as well. Still can't decide if it's playing chess or eating potato chips that causes me to have that reaction? Hmmm, something to think about (if you are or should be in a mental institution).
I don't play video games and my reaction is the same: "kill Jack!" I do like to play chess though. And I like to eat potato chips as well. Still can't decide if it's playing chess or eating potato chips that causes me to have that reaction? Hmmm, something to think about (if you are or should be in a mental institution).
Chess was the murder simulator that introduced kings to killing scenarios and casued the crusades.
True story: I had a nightmare once when I was around 8 years old, in which I kept spotting people that were poised to kill me. I knew they meant to kill me because they were an L-shaped move away from wherever I was at the time. I knew they'd be able to jump over any obstacle between us and kill me instantly upon landing, so I kept having to run away thereby changing the positional advantage they had. But I would only wind up encountering someone else also that same relative position away from me, and have to run again. Had I not been exposed to chess, I would not have had to contend with this frightful situation. Clearly chess breeds violent thoughts and needs to be stamped out once and for all!
You're right, but have video games led to move violence? I think a bigger area to look at would be how do things like the huge popularity in MMA affect today's youth. Are people more likely to fight because they are watching so much realistic violence all the time? Or, are things like violent video games, MMA, etc... simply reflecting our current society where violence appears to be more prevalent than in the past?
Spurious comparison. Witchcraft and mythical creatures are not real (I know some would argue they are but we'll go with the assumption they are not). Violence is real though so your argument is invalid. You can't disprove a logical argument by constructing a similar argument using unreal elements.
To think that people are not affected by their environment at all is just as bad as thinking every violent act leads back to a video game.
To use your logic kids with abusive parents should never have any problems later in life if what they experience every day has no long lasting affect on them.
No, but to think that people (not just kids) aren't affected by the stuff they experience in their daily environment is just as short-sighted.
People are affected by everything they experience, daily or otherwise, but how that experience affects them is non-obvious and varies massively from person to person. As such, trying to lay the blame for anything at the feet of one particular source (be it music, game, show, movie, book, or person) is to ignore the real problem. People do things for a variety of highly complex reasons, sometimes physical in nature (chemical imbalance), other times psychological (PTS, indoctrination of various kinds, various abuses [somewhat related to PTS], poor reasoning skills). You cannot legislate away crazy, immoral, illegal, or just plain stupid behavior, there will always be those that do bad things, no matter what they are or aren't exposed to, and what is and isn't illegal, to believe otherwise is to believe a fiction, and those that operate in ignorance of reality do so at their own peril.
No, they haven't. Check the DoJ's website if you don't believe me. The more popular video games have gotten, the lower *actual* violence amongst youths has gone down. In 2003-5 it was at a FORTY YEAR LOW, at the supposed "height" of video game violence controversy.
Secondly, Rome built a Colosseum (and other structures, but that's the main one in Rome, of course) purely for entertainment, correct? And there they watched (and enjoyed watching) gladiators and slaves and criminals either killing each other or getting killed by animals, etc. And often very violent, such as putting freshly-killed-animal skins on a person, tying him or her to a post, and unleashing half starved lions. Yup, definitely
There's a reason that we don't have humans fighting to the death in giant amphitheaters, we've become more civilized.
What's the reason? What is "civilized"?
Considering the fact that some of the most "civilized" people can end up raping and murdering, I fail to see how being civilized has anything to do with it. with regard to the Puritans enjoying violence more so than the Romans, I still find that very dubious, especially if one reads actual Puritan writings.
As to civlization, between 150 and 50 years ago we had things such as eugenics and sterilization, Hitler, Mao Tse Tung, Stalin, Mussolini, the Vietnam guy (can't r
He will never give up. The reason is simple - every time he goes off on one of his insane ramblings, news sites and services cover it and give his voice an audience. Until people stop caring what he has to say, he'll keep saying things. Unfortunately.
I'm less bothered by the publicity this guy gets (let's face it, most "news" is cruft) than the fact that he keeps getting through the Slashdot editors' filters. Lately, they've been showing a depressing fondness for stories whose main interest is to lovers of freak shows [invivio.net].
He will never give up. The reason is simple - every time he goes off on one of his insane ramblings, news sites and services cover it and give his voice an audience. Until people stop caring what he has to say, he'll keep saying things. Unfortunately.
As the submitter of this story, I think it's important we keep pointing out his actions because (1) he has lost (2) although I'm not a lawyer I believe it sets precedence for future cases and (3) even the general public can see through to his attacks on our freedom. I believe there are more lawyers masquerading in our legal system as legit when they're really just Jack Thompsons at heart and I hope the public learns about them by observing the obvious cases of dementia. In my opinion a good example is Joh [wikipedia.org]
Listen, and understand. That Jack Thompson is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.
The reason is simple - every time he goes off on one of his insane ramblings, news sites and services cover it and give his voice an audience. Until people stop caring what he has to say, he'll keep saying things. Unfortunately.
And how is that working out for him, so far?
Sure, he's been disbarred, he's trashed his livelihood and his reputation, and he has become the laughingstock of both the legal and entertainment industries -- but since someone is still printing his NAME on a WEB SITE, he must be WINNING!
No offense to the nice nice people in Utah, but one state law, in a very small (population-wise) state, and will have little or no impact on the VG industry. Even IF this bill passes, there is certain to be an immediate EFF or ACLU lawsuit to overturn it.
Utah is the reddest of the "Red States", and I have to imagine that most good Mormon kids aren't playing GTA4 anyway.
We are so fortunate to have Jack Thompson. Without his antics, people might start to take the "violence in media = real violence" statement as a logical thought, and may consider censorship.
Continue to fight for the right side (probably unintentionally) Mr. Thompson!
I was hoping that Jack now had a side kick named, Utah Bill. I imagine them wandering the wilds together. Jack, a country lawyer taking down virtual murderers while Bill constantly has problems from his multiple wives.
The movie rating system is pretty messed up [imdb.com]. I prefer the Joe Bob Briggs method of rating movies from when he was on the movie channel. He'd run down the count of kills (with an emphasis on decapitations or anything out of the ordinary) and breasts and other nudity. We could throw in counts of bad language. The rating would be something like:
up to 542 kills/per game - some with chainsaw
8 breasts and 3 asses
"shit" - 12, "piss" - 1, "fuck" - 17, "cunt" - 0, "cocksucker" - 3, "motherfucker" - 6, "tits
I think their problem is that games are treated more like movies, and less like cigarettes and alcohol. And to them that seems like a bad thing.
An easy-going cashier might sell a violent game to some 8-year-old without a care in the world. I've seen it happen with films at the theater, rentals at a BlockBuster, and games at a GameStop.
As with most things, video games shouldn't be a federal matter but a family one. Parents need to take an active role in their kids lives and not just hand over wads of cash or buy something because they want it.
Parents should be vigilant about what they're buying for their kids: a box with dismembered corpses on the cover might require a millisecond of thought when buying for a 5-year-old.
Parents should keep track of what their kids are doing with their money. Personally when I was a kid I didn't have access to a lot of disposable income
etc
I've mentioned it in the past, but my favorite anecdote about this whole thing took place while waiting in line at a GameStop. Some mother was asking the cashier if he thinks she should buy DeadRising for her really young kid. He told her about the ratings and described the game, but she STILL didn't want the responsibility of making the decision herself and kept asking for him to make the decision..
I find it interesting that the rants here are about not stopping violent video games, while on the Superbowl Ad thread [slashdot.org] Slashdot users bemoan the fact that ads that are sexually suggestive are censored, while the violent commercials are not
I would posit that the difference between the two is that you have a choice over which video games your kids play. You don't have a choice over which commercials play during the Super Bowl and the Super Bowl is typically regarded as something that the whole family can watch.
I think that's a dangerous attitude to take. There are a lot of people out there who don't know any better who will take seriously whoever is shouting loudest. For many years now, that person has been Jack Thompson.
The thing that makes him most dangerous is that there's an element of truth to his arguments. There's a minimal amount in there that makes the things he says plausible to those people who don't/can't educate themselves.
Or those who don't know he was disbarred, and he says "I'm Jack Thompson. I have a XXX law degree." or some other weasel verbiage that makes it sound like he's a lawyer without actually saying he's a lawyer.
Or heck, he could still be introducing himself as a lawyer, too. Wouldn't put it past him.
Really though, he IS a lawyer in all but technicality. (For what little that's worth.) An insane one maybe, but the government merely took his license to practice, not his lifetime knowledge. As long as he's not offering to take a case for you...
It's not like the government is who I listen to in choosing who has the most accurate technical opinion in any given area. His credibility, IMHO, is right where it was before. (Zero, but for other reasons...)
AFAIK, state bars are not government institutions. They are a group of Lawyers. It's like lawyer government. By the people for the people. By lawyers for lawyers. Self-regulating and all that.
Video games vs Jack (Score:5, Funny)
Video games never made me want to kill another (real) person. Jack Thompson on the other hand makes me want to kill - someone, possibly named Jack - every time I hear from Mr. Thompson.
Re:Video games vs Jack (Score:5, Funny)
He's made me want to get into racketeering! [penny-arcade.com]
Parent
Little known fact, Jack: (Score:3, Funny)
The word "thompson" in Elbonian means "cough".
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Video games vs Jack (Score:5, Funny)
I don't play video games and my reaction is the same: "kill Jack!" I do like to play chess though. And I like to eat potato chips as well. Still can't decide if it's playing chess or eating potato chips that causes me to have that reaction? Hmmm, something to think about (if you are or should be in a mental institution).
Chess was the murder simulator that introduced kings to killing scenarios and casued the crusades.
Parent
Re:Video games vs Jack (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
So clearly, chess breeds porn as well.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
You're right, but have video games led to move violence? I think a bigger area to look at would be how do things like the huge popularity in MMA affect today's youth. Are people more likely to fight because they are watching so much realistic violence all the time? Or, are things like violent video games, MMA, etc... simply reflecting our current society where violence appears to be more prevalent than in the past?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Seems like similar logic to me.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's probably had a hand in teenage obesity.
To think that people are not affected by their environment at all is just as bad as thinking every violent act leads back to a video game.
To use your logic kids with abusive parents should never have any problems later in life if what they experience every day has no long lasting affect on them.
Video game violence and situation comedies... (Score:5, Insightful)
Video game violence and situation comedies are obviously ruining this nation.
This is why we have so many random acts of violence and comedy in the streets.
Wait. I guess kids aren't the mindless copy-drones they're made out to be.
Never mind.
-- Terry
Parent
Re:Video game violence and situation comedies... (Score:5, Insightful)
No, but to think that people (not just kids) aren't affected by the stuff they experience in their daily environment is just as short-sighted.
People are affected by everything they experience, daily or otherwise, but how that experience affects them is non-obvious and varies massively from person to person. As such, trying to lay the blame for anything at the feet of one particular source (be it music, game, show, movie, book, or person) is to ignore the real problem. People do things for a variety of highly complex reasons, sometimes physical in nature (chemical imbalance), other times psychological (PTS, indoctrination of various kinds, various abuses [somewhat related to PTS], poor reasoning skills). You cannot legislate away crazy, immoral, illegal, or just plain stupid behavior, there will always be those that do bad things, no matter what they are or aren't exposed to, and what is and isn't illegal, to believe otherwise is to believe a fiction, and those that operate in ignorance of reality do so at their own peril.
Parent
Re:Video games vs Jack (Score:5, Informative)
No, they haven't. Check the DoJ's website if you don't believe me. The more popular video games have gotten, the lower *actual* violence amongst youths has gone down. In 2003-5 it was at a FORTY YEAR LOW, at the supposed "height" of video game violence controversy.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
At the risk of feeding the trolls...
Hmmm. Read some Puritans sometime.
Secondly, Rome built a Colosseum (and other structures, but that's the main one in Rome, of course) purely for entertainment, correct? And there they watched (and enjoyed watching) gladiators and slaves and criminals either killing each other or getting killed by animals, etc. And often very violent, such as putting freshly-killed-animal skins on a person, tying him or her to a post, and unleashing half starved lions. Yup, definitely
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's a reason that we don't have humans fighting to the death in giant amphitheaters, we've become more civilized.
What's the reason? What is "civilized"?
Considering the fact that some of the most "civilized" people can end up raping and murdering, I fail to see how being civilized has anything to do with it. with regard to the Puritans enjoying violence more so than the Romans, I still find that very dubious, especially if one reads actual Puritan writings.
As to civlization, between 150 and 50 years ago we had things such as eugenics and sterilization, Hitler, Mao Tse Tung, Stalin, Mussolini, the Vietnam guy (can't r
Never (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm less bothered by the publicity this guy gets (let's face it, most "news" is cruft) than the fact that he keeps getting through the Slashdot editors' filters. Lately, they've been showing a depressing fondness for stories whose main interest is to lovers of freak shows [invivio.net].
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
He will never give up. The reason is simple - every time he goes off on one of his insane ramblings, news sites and services cover it and give his voice an audience. Until people stop caring what he has to say, he'll keep saying things. Unfortunately.
As the submitter of this story, I think it's important we keep pointing out his actions because (1) he has lost (2) although I'm not a lawyer I believe it sets precedence for future cases and (3) even the general public can see through to his attacks on our freedom. I believe there are more lawyers masquerading in our legal system as legit when they're really just Jack Thompsons at heart and I hope the public learns about them by observing the obvious cases of dementia. In my opinion a good example is Joh [wikipedia.org]
Re:Never (Score:5, Insightful)
I think it was Tycho from Penny Arcade who said something like this, though I can't find the quote:
"I'm glad we have Jack Thompson as the spokesman for the anti-videogames movement, lest we have someone more competent to take his place."
Parent
Re:Never (Score:5, Funny)
Listen, and understand. That Jack Thompson is out there. It can't be bargained with. It can't be reasoned with. It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop, ever, until you are dead.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
The reason is simple - every time he goes off on one of his insane ramblings, news sites and services cover it and give his voice an audience. Until people stop caring what he has to say, he'll keep saying things. Unfortunately.
And how is that working out for him, so far?
Sure, he's been disbarred, he's trashed his livelihood and his reputation, and he has become the laughingstock of both the legal and entertainment industries -- but since someone is still printing his NAME on a WEB SITE, he must be WINNING!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Tell that to Hitler.
(Yes, I did just Godwin the whole conversation)
I can't wait until they finally lock him up (Score:5, Interesting)
...and give him this guy as a cellmate. [wikipedia.org]
At least they wouldn't run out of stuff to talk about.
So they'd stop selling stuff in Utah (Score:3, Funny)
I'm sure the very thought must have them terrified, Jack.
To quote W. C. Fields. (Score:2)
But it's UTAH.. (Score:4, Funny)
Who cares?
No offense to the nice nice people in Utah, but one state law, in a very small (population-wise) state, and will have little or no impact on the VG industry. Even IF this bill passes, there is certain to be an immediate EFF or ACLU lawsuit to overturn it.
Utah is the reddest of the "Red States", and I have to imagine that most good Mormon kids aren't playing GTA4 anyway.
Re:But it's UTAH.. (Score:5, Funny)
Parent
The man is pitiful (Score:2)
Slashdot... (Score:2)
News for nerds, rantings of crazy people?
Jack has no authority anymore. Until such a time as he actually gets some, please ignore him.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
News for nerds, rantings of crazy people?
Jack has no authority anymore. Until such a time as he actually gets some, please ignore him.
What do you mean "anymore"?
I don't believe that he ever actually had any.
The Ann Coulter effect (Score:2)
We are so fortunate to have Jack Thompson. Without his antics, people might start to take the "violence in media = real violence" statement as a logical thought, and may consider censorship.
Continue to fight for the right side (probably unintentionally) Mr. Thompson!
Solution looking for a problem (Score:3, Interesting)
Jack Thompson is always coming up with these solutions, but he has yet to prove a problem.
Jack Thompson? (Score:4, Insightful)
I can't believe he hasn't been found in a cheap motel room; dead from autoerotic asphyxiation, wearing a gimp suit and a dildo in his ass.
The dude.... (Score:5, Funny)
... Really needs to have some hot coffee.
jack was a sanctimonious a%%h#@e (Score:3, Informative)
Truth in Advertising? (Score:3, Informative)
Maybe ol' JT should disclose that he's not a lawyer [gamepolitics.com].
Now that's truth in Advertising.
I misread the headline. (Score:3, Funny)
I was hoping that Jack now had a side kick named, Utah Bill. I imagine them wandering the wilds together. Jack, a country lawyer taking down virtual murderers while Bill constantly has problems from his multiple wives.
Re:Thank god he's still around (Score:5, Funny)
I remember Jack Thompson, but who the hell is Utah Bill?
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
up to 542 kills/per game - some with chainsaw
8 breasts and 3 asses
"shit" - 12, "piss" - 1, "fuck" - 17, "cunt" - 0, "cocksucker" - 3, "motherfucker" - 6, "tits
Re:Just as it happens in movies (Score:4, Insightful)
I think their problem is that games are treated more like movies, and less like cigarettes and alcohol. And to them that seems like a bad thing.
An easy-going cashier might sell a violent game to some 8-year-old without a care in the world. I've seen it happen with films at the theater, rentals at a BlockBuster, and games at a GameStop.
As with most things, video games shouldn't be a federal matter but a family one. Parents need to take an active role in their kids lives and not just hand over wads of cash or buy something because they want it.
I've mentioned it in the past, but my favorite anecdote about this whole thing took place while waiting in line at a GameStop. Some mother was asking the cashier if he thinks she should buy DeadRising for her really young kid. He told her about the ratings and described the game, but she STILL didn't want the responsibility of making the decision herself and kept asking for him to make the decision..
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I find it interesting that the rants here are about not stopping violent video games, while on the Superbowl Ad thread [slashdot.org] Slashdot users bemoan the fact that ads that are sexually suggestive are censored, while the violent commercials are not
I would posit that the difference between the two is that you have a choice over which video games your kids play. You don't have a choice over which commercials play during the Super Bowl and the Super Bowl is typically regarded as something that the whole family can watch.
Re:Hahahah (Score:5, Insightful)
Kick & scream all you want pig, you lose
I think that's a dangerous attitude to take. There are a lot of people out there who don't know any better who will take seriously whoever is shouting loudest. For many years now, that person has been Jack Thompson.
The thing that makes him most dangerous is that there's an element of truth to his arguments. There's a minimal amount in there that makes the things he says plausible to those people who don't/can't educate themselves.
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Or those who don't know he was disbarred, and he says "I'm Jack Thompson. I have a XXX law degree." or some other weasel verbiage that makes it sound like he's a lawyer without actually saying he's a lawyer.
Or heck, he could still be introducing himself as a lawyer, too. Wouldn't put it past him.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Looks like he is going with 'recently practicing lawyer.'
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Really though, he IS a lawyer in all but technicality. (For what little that's worth.) An insane one maybe, but the government merely took his license to practice, not his lifetime knowledge. As long as he's not offering to take a case for you...
It's not like the government is who I listen to in choosing who has the most accurate technical opinion in any given area. His credibility, IMHO, is right where it was before. (Zero, but for other reasons...)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
AFAIK, state bars are not government institutions. They are a group of Lawyers. It's like lawyer government. By the people for the people. By lawyers for lawyers. Self-regulating and all that.
Re:Hahahah (Score:5, Funny)
He could get struck by lightning or hit by a bus
...run over by a carjacker, shot by a sniper....
Parent
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
All at once? You'd think his life was a Calvin & Hobbes cartoon!
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)