Slashdot Mirror
Columbine Video-Games Suit Dismissed
Dr_LHA writes: "This story on Yahoo! reports that the federal judge on Monday dismissed a lawsuit that claimed the influence of video games and movies where what caused the Columbine High School massacre. Obvious to those of us who play GTA3 regularly but still manage to overcome the urge to plough over pedestrains on the way to work in the morning, but good to see someone high up showing some sense."
Maybe it's time to freshen up on your Slashdot History.... #2 HOF for "Most Visited Stories" Voices From The Hellmouth
It's not video games, it's not music, it's not "posters on their walls", it's high school. -kwishot
Maybe the events of September 11th, the current and ongoing war in the Middle East, and all the other various world conflicts made the judge smack himself in the forehead and say "It ISN'T video games that cause violence." I feel for the families of these kids, and the families of the victims, but sometimes you can't find someone to blame. Sometimes bad things happen, for no reason that makes any sense. Sometimes there ARE no answers. A lot of people blame the parents, but in fact they probably aren't to blame for this. I am sure there are a lot of worse parents out there, and their kids didn't go ballistic.
What is even more depressing to me is that I had almost forgotten about Columbine.
My beliefs do not require that you agree with them.
That game already exists, in a way.
Do a search on Google for the Columbine Mod for Half-Life, you'll find it.
I think the personal responsibility of the person involved should be a mitigating factor with regards to damages.
It was. The jury awarded $200,000 in compensatory damages, but this amount was reduced to $160,000 because the jury also found that Liebeck was 20% at fault for the spill. The massive $2.7 million punitive damages award was, well, punitive, and likely had a helluva lot to do with the 700 claims McDonald's had settled since 1982 involving people scalded by its coffee, was aware that its coffee could cause and had caused serious burns, and was utterly unrepentant of that fact.
McDonald's knew its coffee burned people, and did nothing about it. A quality enforcement manager at McDonald's testified before the court that the coffee was required to be held in the pot at 185 degrees, +/- 5 degrees, and admitted that this would cause burns, but also that McDonald's had no intentions of reducing that holding temperature.
The judge reduced punitive damages to three times the compensatory damages, and called McDonald's conduct "reckless," "callous," and "willful."
It is entirely another thing to have a cup of potentially-scalding hot coffee wedged between your legs while driving.
It is, indeed. But that's not what this woman did. This woman wasn't even driving the goddamned car. She was a passenger. Her son was driving, and he stopped the car at her request so she could take the lid off the coffee and add cream and sugar. She held the coffee between her legs to pry the lid off, at which point it spilled.
She was not driving. She was not holding the coffee between her legs while she was driving. The car was not even MOVING when this incident occurred.
if you aren't assuming that hot coffee can burn you, you are being stupid
Do you routinely assume that beverages served to you for your consumption are capable of inflicting full-thickness third-degree burns in 2-7 seconds should they touch your skin? I'm aware that I should treat my coffee as if it were a hot beverage, not as if it were hydrocholoric fucking acid.
I'm sorry for the off-topic post, but I'm sick and fucking tired of how people who are ignorant of the fundamental facts of this case feel qualified to pronounce judgement upon it.