Slashdot Mirror
Kids Kill, Victim Sues Game Maker
qbproger writes "Sadly, two kids decided to go outside and start shooting cars. They were mimicing a video game they had been playing, Grand Theft Auto. I think it's about time parents started paying attention to the rating on video games." The family of one of the victims has decided to file suit against Take Two Interactive, presumably deciding that blame should be assigned to whoever has the deepest pockets instead of to those who actually did something wrong.
who?
who?
Keep the Classic Slashdot.
Maybe then they'd stop taking all these crap lottery cases.
It is so obvious that Jack Thompson jumped all over this. As I mentioned when this happened, whenever there is any juvenile violence that is remotely associtated with vidoegames, Jack Thomson is there to blame videogames and remove any possibility of personal responsibility.
This is the guy who said that the DC snipers were gamers and got nearly every mainstream media outlet to beleive it. This is also the guy who sent a 13 year old (possibly his son, I don't remember exactly) into Best Buy to guy M rated games. He has very good PR and is very good at getting media coverage beacuse he gives the media the kind of hysteria laden sound bites they love. This guy has an agenda and he needs to be watched out for.
http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
I think it's time to start filing suit against parents who don't take their parental responsibilities seriously.
And 90% of the time, the parent nods and says yes, they know. And then the kid, insulted that I had to point out how young they are, brags that they've already played that game before. And they often mention that they've already played GTA: Vice City.
At least it's not as bad as when the kids come up to the counter with a game without a parent. Those kids are just plain jerks sometimes.
"But my mom is _waiting_ right _there_ in the _car_."
That's great, legally she has to be in store.
"You can call my dad at home!"
Anybody who picks up the phone and sounds male could sound like your dad to me. I can't do it.
"*walks out swearing up a storm to their mom in the car*"
Buncha savages in this town.
You have no clue what you are talking about. The lawyer invests signifigant time into filing and preparing for a lawsuit. If the lawyer didn't honestly think that the client had a valid claim, that time could be spent working for a client that did. And the lawyer IS held accountable. It's called "Rule 11" [epistolary.org] and it's there to sanction lawyers that file frivilous law suits.
My parents have just been sued by a tenant who claimed to have suffered $10 million in pain and suffering by falling down the stairs in their apartment building, oh, and that my father pushed her.
She did however neglect to mention that she was drunk off her ass, forced her way into another tenants apartment, assaulted them, and fell down under her own power (or rather, lack of stability), and much of this is on video. Also, she fell down two carpetted steps to land on a carpetted landing, and was SO pained by the fall that she refused to let the EMTs take her to the hospital until the police arrested my father (which they eventually didn't).
Now I ask, what kind of scumbag of a lawyer does she have that would file a $10 million suit against us on her behalf? The insurance company took our statements and saw the video and the case in their opinion is so frivilous that they're not even willing to settle with her for any amount and will actually take it to court.
Why would her lawyer get involved in this?
This is my opinion, so to put that into context, this is me. I hunt, i own guns, i played video games since i was little, violent ones since they existed, I was of medium popularity in highschool, although we wore metal band t-shirts and baggy pants. Did any of those things make me want to shoot at traffic? No. The fact is that even though i personally have no problems with guns, I feel that these children obviously should not have had access to them. The same goes for GTA, as great a game as it is for most, its now painfully clear that access should have been denied. If, while i was a teenager, I ran around mimicing video games, My parents probable would not have allowed me to use firearms. If I began to act out oddly because of video games, they probably would have taken them away. And if i showed signs of depression, They probably would have gotten me counsoling. Did any of that happen? No. The parents failed. The M rating on a game is desinged to preven people who might be negativly affected by a game from getting it. Did that happen? No. ESRB Failed. The legal age for purchasing guns, and the mandatory inclusion of gun locks with firearms is designed to prevent kids from shooting things. Did that happen? No. Gun control failed too. I dont believe that this happend because video games brain wash our kids. I dont believe this happend because we need stricter gun controll laws. And i dont think this is because the parents neglected they're kids 24/7. what happened is the parents DID neglect the game rateing when the game was purchased, they DID neglect to lock guns and amunition and make the keys inacceable to the children, and they did Neglect to see what their kids were doing at the time that this occured. Why doesnt this happen in other countries? I dont know maybe we have too much freedom here, but i doubt that. Why didnt the kids have enough common sense not to do this? i dont know, maybe they have a learning disability. The Bottom line is this, EVERY ONE FAILED. The system is full of precautions and gaurds agaist things like this, but they're all too often neglected. Had the parents or the store heeded the rating, had the parents locked the guns, had the parents been there, perhaps this all could have been prevented. WE FAILED, I FAILED, YOU FAILED, THE ESRB FAILED, THE PARENTS FAILED. Now everyone buck up and take some resposibility.
"I am the Flail of God!" -Genghis Kahn
Apparently the insurance settlement wasn't enough for them...
I sure can't see any other reason for them to file suit against the game company, especially with statements from their crackpot lawyer like, "The industry needs to cough up money so victims and their families can be compensated for their pain," Thompson said. "The shareholders need to know what their games are doing to kids and their families. They need to stop pushing adult rated products to kids. These products are deadly."
I think his first statement is really what the lawsuit is all about...
If I was a shareholder in the company that produced GTA (I'm not), I'd be congratulating them for a good product. But then I'm obviously biased based on what I just said, huh?