Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games

Jack Thompson Still Has a Grudge (theverge.com) 72

Posted by msmash from the still-fighting dept.
A new profile of Jack Thompson, the notorious anti-violent video game crusader of the mid-2000s. The Verge: When the video game industry is valued at $300 billion, a Halo TV series trailer is occupying prime real estate during the AFC Championship, and a GTA facsimile like Free Guy is one of the top-grossing films of the year, it is clear that Jack Thompson lost the fight. For those who don't remember, Thompson was the attorney who led the charge against violent video games and helped morph a fringe topic into a dominant wedge issue of the mid-2000s. He has since vanished from the public eye as the outrage ran dry, and everyone moved on. [...] Thankfully, Jack Thompson was kind enough to answer his phone on a sunny Friday afternoon in South Florida. It only took a few minutes for him to unleash a salvo of takes, forever cocked and loaded for anyone willing to listen. He asserts an association between the rise of crime in New York City to Take-Two, the publisher behind Grand Theft Auto. After all, he explained, Take-Two is headquartered in Manhattan. Thompson is never going to betray his heart, for better or worse.

"Americans are famous for moving on," he told me. "We have the attention span of a mosquito. Churchill said that when most people stumble across the truth, they pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and move on as if nothing happened. What pissed people off about me is that I didn't do that. I'm 70. I'm still here. I haven't died yet." [...] Thompson anticipates a reckoning. Someday, he says, the defense team in a murder trial is going to argue that their client was revved into a frenzy due to, in part, an inveterate video game habit. The jury will buy it, and the suspect will escape the death penalty. At last, all of Thompson's warnings come home to roost, and the real villains -- Tommy Vercetti, Niko Bellic, and Carl Johnson -- will be unmasked for all to see. It's hard for me to even conceptualize the scenario that Thompson describes, but I suppose that anyone still committed to dismantling Grand Theft Auto in 2022 must engage in some degree of magical thinking. "It's going to work, and that's going to get people's attention," said Thompson. "People are going to freak out. They're going to say, 'Wait a minute, somebody can kill somebody and only be convicted of manslaughter by virtue of a video game defense?' ... [they'll want to] do something about the games and their distribution."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Jack Thompson Still Has a Grudge More

Jack Thompson Still Has a Grudge

Comments Filter:

  • With a whole generation growing up with these video games and slowly getting into positions of power, it's simply no longer an issue. Almost all of us has played a violent video game at some point.

    • Jack will never be able to convince me he didn't play cowboys and indians or cops and robbers when he was a kid. Just because this dinosaur didn't grow up with video games doesn't means he didn't act out violent games. He's a clueless fucktard who lacks an ability to evolve and adapt. Times change old man. Keep up or shut up

      • His counter argument is that he's violent and doesn't deserve to have law career. It's because he played cops and robbers as a kid. Snowball fights are a "gateway drug" to irrational ranting on TV. (See also Tucker Carlson who has completely jumped the shark).

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by fermion ( 181285 )
      Issues have to raise money or win elections. A stolen election, being gay, those are issues that hold water. There are divergent opinion over a wide range of people. Video games isnâ(TM)t like that. Everyone plays video games, and have personal experience not going out and killing people for fun. The libertarian incel, the liberal atheist, Matt Gaetz.
  • I really did read Macbeth right before I murdered that king. Don't tell me it's a coincidence. My regicidal urges were never a problem before then.

    • Yeah but I don't think the violence in Macbeth is what caused my own urge to kill to rise, but rather the fact I had to perform that archaic non-english bullshit.

  • To quote Elon Musk, "I keep forgetting you're still alive." Only, in this case, I'm not sure anyone cares. We've all been playing violent video games for 30 years now. Guess what. We haven't started killing people yet. His theory was provocative and interesting at the time, but the data hasn't played out. He is literally the poster child for the truth knocking him on his ass, getting up, dusting himself off, and continuing his pointless crusade when the truth has already deemed his quest quixotic, at

    • Literally?

      • Poster Child: 2. A person who is a prominent example or type of something. The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition. So, yes. Literally. Ass.

        • That's a figurative definition. Unless he has been pictured, as a child, on a poster referencing being knocked on your ass by the truth he is not "literally the poster child...". So no, not literally. Ass. It's fine to make a mistake but to double down on it while calling the guy who mentioned it an ass is assholish behavior.

          • Still nope. The definition of literally supports my usage too. Grammar policing people on the internet is a dick way to live your life. But, you know, to each their own. I'll enjoy the rest of my life, I hope you do too.

            • The definition of literally supports my usage too.

              No, it doesn't. You've literally used it as a contronym, and it's not one.

              But, you know, to each their own.

              Their?

        • Poster Child: 2. A person who is a prominent example or type of something.
                  The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition.

          So, yes. Literally. Ass.

          I quite liked your original post. I can hardly fault a good "quest quixotic", and it's apparent you can write well. Why ruin it by doubling-down on what was probably a careless slip?

  • "Americans are famous for moving on,"...
    Are we talking about the same Americans who still use 9/11 to excuse all kinds of shit?

    • Yes, but to be fair we learned almost nothing from 9/11. 9/11 itself (what happened and why) are long forgotten. However the political currency that it affords when you bring it up to push an agenda is priceless for politicians and 'angry patriots' everywhere. It's kind of gross when you think about it.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

  • If his claim is that by playing video games which have violence in them leads to people being violent, I certainly hope he's on a crusade to ban the Bible. Considering all the murders which take place in the stories, it should be very easy to show people who have read the Bible are also ones committing murders.

    Also, how many times have we heard of someone claiming "god" told them to kill their children? If that isn't a clear cut reason to ban the Bible, not sure what else is. You have the protragonist of

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Qwertie ( 797303 )

      Now now, his claim is that participating in fictional violence, rather than reading about it or watching it, will cause people to commit violent crimes.

      He makes falsifiable claims though:

      Someday, he says, the defense team in a murder trial is going to argue that their client was revved into a frenzy due to, in part, an inveterate video game habit. The jury will buy it, and the suspect will escape the death penalty.

      Let's think about this: there are over 400,000 homicides each year [ourworldindata.org], so we've probably had

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by nasch ( 598556 )

        It's not quite falsifiable unless something happens to cause murder trials to cease occurring. As long as there are still murder trials with defenses, one could claim that it's still possible it will happen at some future date. Not that I disagree with your analysis.

  • New York City's violent/major felony crime rate has been steadily trending downward in the last 20 years that we're talking about. 185K cases in 2000, versus 103K cases in 2021.

    Citywide Seven Major Felony Offenses 2000-2021 (PDF) [nyc.gov]

    • Perhaps I should add in particular that "grand larceny of motor vehicle" is especially down, from 35K cases in 2000, versus 10K cases in 2021 -- less than a third what it was 20 years ago.

    • New York City's violent/major felony crime rate has been steadily trending downward in the last 20 years that we're talking about. 185K cases in 2000, versus 103K cases in 2021.

      Citywide Seven Major Felony Offenses 2000-2021 (PDF) [nyc.gov]

      No wonder I had a hard time believing the impact of COVID, was less crime. That's because you're not being honest here. Almost every category increased between 2020 and 2021. And crime hovered right around 95K for the previous four years before 2021 saw an increase. Not exactly what I would call a "steady" decline when the difference in violent crime for the last half decade amounts to a rounding error.

      In fact, it's worse when you consider the amount of people who left.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

        In fact, it's worse when you consider the amount of people who left.

        Who's that, the 15,000 that left the metro area between 2018-2020 [macrotrends.net], or the 150,000 that left the city proper [populationu.com] between 2016-2019, only for that loss to be erased three times over in 2020 with population continuing to increase into 2021-22?

        Just curious.

        • In fact, it's worse when you consider the amount of people who left.

          Who's that, the 15,000 that left the metro area between 2018-2020 [macrotrends.net], or the 150,000 that left the city proper [populationu.com] between 2016-2019, only for that loss to be erased three times over in 2020 with population continuing to increase into 2021-22?

          Just curious.

          Uh, OK. Forget my comment for a moment. Care to explain why the hell THAT many people left in five years? 150,000 lost in 2016 - 2019, has fuck all to do with COVID.

          And no, I don't actually believe that people were moving back to THAT city in "three times over" droves in 2020, since it was the fucking epicenter of pre-vaccine COVID outbreak. 2020 was also a census year, which more likely explains the "increase".

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

            Care to explain why the hell THAT many people left in five years? 150,000 lost in 2016 - 2019, has fuck all to do with COVID.

            Jesey [manhattan-institute.org], for one. THAT many out of 8.4 million, for another.

            And no, I don't actually believe that people were moving back to THAT city in "three times over" droves in 2020...

            You don't get to cherry pick the numbers that you believe. If you don't believe the 2020 census number, then you have to disbelieve the 2016-2019 numbers as well, because non-census years certainly aren't more acc

            • And no, I don't actually believe that people were moving back to THAT city in "three times over" droves in 2020...

              You don't get to cherry pick the numbers that you believe. If you don't believe the 2020 census number, then you have to disbelieve the 2016-2019 numbers as well, because non-census years certainly aren't more accurate than census years.

              Uh, you DO understand the entire point of a census, right? Yes, normally you do tend to give more credence in the year they actually DO the census. The numbers will always be off by some margin, which is why you also can't "cherry pick" a rounding error worth of difference and call it some kind of steady decline in crime. It wasn't, and still isn't.

              ...since it was the fucking epicenter of pre-vaccine COVID outbreak. 2020 was also a census year, which more likely explains the "increase."

              Sure, that increase happened in other years in 2011-2019. Congratulations. You just shredded your own argument for population loss in the latter third of 2010-2020, I guess. Unless you really want to argue that the U.S. census was a lie.

              Fine. You're right. Not even one citizen, decided to leave a viral epicenter when an outbreak occurred. And not one NYC citizen died, so no reductions ther

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

                Fine. You're right. Not even one citizen, decided to leave a viral epicenter when an outbreak occurred.

                I guarantee at least one person managed to leave every census block in the country over the last two years. What's your point?

                And quite frankly, this conversation was centered around your claims of crime reduction. The population argument, is damn near irrelevant.

                My what now? Dude, you've lost track of who you're replying to.

                • Fine. You're right. Not even one citizen, decided to leave a viral epicenter when an outbreak occurred.

                  I guarantee at least one person managed to leave every census block in the country over the last two years. What's your point?

                  Since you can't acknowledge basic human nature and survivability instinct, I have no more "point" to give you. You refuse to accept that humans, would naturally evade a danger to themselves. Not only did people not die or leave NYC, but they came running there in droves in 2020. I guess I stand corrected. NYC does cause people to overlook any harm in the face of a deadly virus. Some would call that a "love for the city". Most would call that fucking insane, but then again so is the cost of NYC.

                  And quite frankly, this conversation was centered around your claims of crime reduction. The population argument, is damn near irrelevant.

                  My what now? Dude, you've lost track of who you're replying to.

                  Yup, yo

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by DRJlaw ( 946416 )

            Who's that, the 15,000 that left the metro area between 2018-2020 [macrotrends.net], or the 150,000 that left the city proper [populationu.com] between 2016-2019, only for that loss to be erased three times over in 2020 with population continuing to increase into 2021-22?

            Just curious.

            Uh, OK. Forget my comment for a moment. Care to explain why the hell THAT many people left in five years?

            I apologize, I failed to note the fact that you inexplicably focused upon the 150,000 that left NYC proper and ignored that only 15,000 left the NYC metro ar

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by skam240 ( 789197 )

        They're being completely honest, you just don't understand that you're using a completely different metric. Just because you can show that crime increased between 2020 and 2021 doesnt mean it didnt decrease between 2000 and 2021.

    • Yes, with everybody playing their favorite shooter and auto jacking game, fewer people have the time to do the real thing. Pornography is less restricted in Japan, except for those weird rules about pubic hair exposure, and look how their population growth rate has been going down. Correlation? Perhaps. But just as valid as any correlation between video game violence and real world mayhem. Crazy people will do crazy things.
  • to the whole "CRT is woke" grift like all the other culture warriors did. He always struck me as somebody out for some quick fame and fortune. Maybe he can't adapt to changing times.

    In the 70s the culture warriors went after D&D and hippies. Later it was the PMRC and heavy metal (and a bit of He-Man oddly enough). By the 90s it was video games. In the '00s there was a bit of quiet from them (I think they were making plenty of dosh from 9/11 grifts) but by the mid 2000s the Atheist community on YouTu

    • Nothing to do with Jack, he is irrelevant.

      But, that is a fantastic historical summary of the major "scare" culture wars since the 1970s. I understand why the War on Drugs wasn't included as it was very "real" and very much disfigured society to this day (the aggressors at least).

      I've been thinking about the "velocity" of culture since 1900 or so, around which more than 10% of US children started attending/graduating high school. Prior to that popular culture was driven and curated by the wealthy (subcultu

    • He didn't pivot because he was a lawyer, not a politician. Politicians have to change with the times or face the potential of ostracism from within their own party.

      Scumbag lawyers just have to follow the money trail. He could've gone to work for some patent troll company or those scumbags that send out DMCA notices for pirating movies. Instead, he decided fighting violent video games was the hill he wanted to die on. So yeah - loon.

  • We've had people playing violent video games for roughly 4 DECADES.
    If it was turning anyone but already VIOLENTLY disturbed people into murder spree perps, WE WOULD KNOW.
    And if it pushes some whackjob, the problem is WHACKJOB, not the game.

    I don't get why this fucking fossil doesn't get this...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by sinij ( 911942 )

      I don't get why this fucking fossil doesn't get this...

      Jack Thompson anchored his entire identity on this belief. Re-evaluating it at this point in his life would require admission that his entire life's work was a huge waste. Crustaceans in a similar situation dissolve their brains and grow a new one.

  • let it go. Let it go, dude. Move on. Your hypothesis was plausible. It truly was. But it didn't turn out that way. The hypothesis was simply wrong. Study after study has shown that. Actually, from what I understand, the availability of violent video games, and videos in general, actually make society LESS violent, because it's so much easier for a pissed off 25-year old guy to murder people on a computer screen while stuffing their face with pizza. No need to get up off the couch and actually go find a vic

    • It scratches the violent urge without any need for fresh blood.

      So in the future when all gaming will be cloud based, and we suffer a network outage, that built-in "violent urge" will need to be "scratched" with fresh blood from the streets?

      Not quite sure who's point you're trying to prove here, but we sure as hell better not have an outage according to you.

  • How did we have TWO World Wars before video games were even invented???

    These morons aren't fooling anyone by scapegoating any activity they don't like. There is always some excuse for why technology gets blamed for moral problems. Let's look at the the last century:

    1900 Film
    1920 Prohibition (Alcohol), Phonographs
    1930 Jazz, Movies
    1940 Radio
    1950 Dancing
    1960 Psychedelic Drugs, Sex
    1970 Rock n Roll, Movies (again)
    1980 MTV, DnD, Heavy Metal
    1990 Computer Games
    2000 Internet and "strangers online", Religious Cults
    2

    • Why don't we talk about the number of people that die to automobiles or guns every year instead?

      Because driving is something that most of us cannot avoid, so you can either be paralyzed by those statistics, or simply accept the risk. Most people don't want to think about harm they cannot avoid. Go figure.

      Regarding gun deaths, I'd prefer to talk about obesity instead in the same way. After all, blaming high-capacity cups and legalized ladels, IS of course the reason people are fat.

      (We also don't like to talk about guns, because the overwhelming majority of deaths are due to suicide, and mental healt

    • You forgot, satanic religious cults are back, not just a preschool fear from the 90s, it's a secret cabal underneath a pizza parlor run by Hillary. But even that's old news as the satanic cults are now a doctrine in Qanon!

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by PPH ( 736903 )

      Why don't we talk about the number of people who die from drugs every year? That beats automobile plus gun deaths.

  • The little cute things that are harmless, it bothers me every time I have to kill them to farm. Like in Elden Ring. It would be almost the same if it was a bunch of little toddlers running around. I never liked GTA, but I somehow don't have a major problem shooting "bad people" in video games. I guess my brain is able to more easily disconnect it from reality. Maybe it is that same feeling you get in movies... half the people die, not a big problem. The one little puppy dies, OMG, what the hell is this movi

  • What Thompson thinks the issue is:

    "Churchill said that when most people stumble across the truth, they pick themselves up, dust themselves off, and move on as if nothing happened. What pissed people off about me is that I didn't do that. I'm 70. I'm still here. I haven't died yet."

    The truth about Jack Thompson is that he was disbarred due to extremely unprofessional conduct. That is what pissed people off about Jack Thompson. The Florida state bar cited 31 violations when they disbarred him including harassment of two judges.

    Among the things that got him disbarred is slander and libel against seemingly unrelated parties. For example Thompson accused fellow lawyer Alberto Cardenas of "distribution of pornography to children". What was Alberto Cardena

  • Living in a permissive, open, liberal society is a good thing. In order to preserve this good thing, it is vital to have a citizenry that can discern between right and wrong, between beneficial and detrimental, and between being civil and being rude. In as much as video games isolate their players (even the ones playing collaboratively online) from society, they take away from the cognizance and inclusion that characterize civil society. In as much as violent video games normalize rudeness and uncivil behav

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by jvkjvk ( 102057 )

      >In as much as violent video games normalize rudeness and uncivil behavior, they contribute to the general decline in human relations currently catalyzed by "social" media.

      But do violent video games normalize rudeness and uncivil behavoiur? You seem to be asserting that without asserting it by caveating it with "in as much". Maybe "in as much" is *none*?

      >Thompson's outlandish claims very unfortunately detract from a worthwhile discussion of whether video games are improving social norms or eroding t

      • That's my point. The people in the game are not necessarily your neighbors. All this time on the computer, whether spent in games or in social media, is spreading an experience that is different from interacting with someone in person.

        A lot of things normalize rudeness. Stand up comedians of the 80s did it. Trump does it. Video games do it, too. You are assuming that everyone has the same grip on reality as you do. Big mistake.

  • His whole campaign against video games is just part of a grift. A grift that helped get his disbarred because of his bad behavior. Lets not give him a platform to stand on again and preach his screed anymore.

  • Old man yells at cloud.

  • F this guy in particular. You're going to say that the increase in Asian hate crimes and rash of gun violence in NYC is due to GTA? Huh?!? Get lost, dinosaur.

  • Honestly screw this numpty. Back when I was a kid and he was in a position to screw me over without any recourse from me, he tried.

    Now that he failed and I'm a lot older, screw this guy. He's lucky someone doesn't want to track his old ass down.

    I still remember ThinkGeek selling toilet paper with his name on it. Besides the annoyatron, that was one of the few things on there I bought.

    Video games got me through a rough childhood, screw that man for trying to take away my medicine. I wish him a slow death.

  • An angry religious person with a grudge. Who'd have thunk it. Not me. No way.

  • https://globalnews.ca/news/648... [globalnews.ca]

    claims he thought that he was actually playing a video game "but in his mind" at the time of the murders

  • Isn't that the guy who wrote those Star Wars novels?

    I think his butt still hurts from being so publicly humiliated by Penny Arcade.

Slashdot Top Deals

He who has but four and spends five has no need for a wallet.

Close