Slashdot Mirror


Game Violence Lawsuit Hits Take Two, Sony, Wal-Mart

oDDmON oUT writes "According to TBO/AP, $246 million is being sought from hardware manufacturer Sony, game publisher Take Two, and retailer Wal-Mart, by the families of victims killed by two teenagers supposedly inspired by Grand Theft Auto. The suit was initiated by Miami lawyer, Jack Thompson, and is not the first time that Thompson has attempted to sue game makers. His crusade to implicate video games in violent incidents has led to countless media appearances, but his 1997 efforts to implicate id and others in a $33 million dollar suit stemming from a school shooting ultimately failed, when the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals dismissed the case, writing that: 'We find that it is simply too far a leap from shooting characters on a video screen to shooting people in a classroom.'" This looks to be an extension of the lawsuit filed last month.

67 comments

  1. As a character profile by JabberWokky · · Score: 2, Funny
    When I was in Florida, this guy was great. He pickets arcades. The media eats it up and does tight shots making it look like there are more than five people there with four bored kids.

    --
    Evan

    --
    "$30 for the One True Ring. $10 each additional ring!" -- JRR "Bob" Tolkien
  2. this is just dumb. by Nutcase · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "from the famous-radiohead-song dept"

    Which famous radiohead song are we talking about?

    In any case, this is just dumb. This guy just keeps taking pot shots in the hopes that he will one day find the judge who agrees with him?

    I hate when people try to legislate morality.

    I hate it more when criminals (or their families) try to sue someone else for "causing them to be criminals" - the game companies should sue the kids and their families for slandering their game or something. Just to highlight the absurdity.

    1. Re:this is just dumb. by PainKilleR-CE · · Score: 1

      Which famous radiohead song are we talking about?

      Creep comes to mind, but then that's the song that always comes to my mind when someone says Radiohead.

      Or maybe I'm thinking of the wrong band completely, it's been ~10 years.

      --
      -PainKilleR-[CE]
    2. Re:this is just dumb. by Nutcase · · Score: 1

      Good Call! Thats probably the one.

      I was sitting here going... hmm.. Karma Police? Paranoid Android? nah... couldn't be Fake Plastic Trees could it? What is he on about?

      I always forget about Creep... which is a shame, cause thats a great song. :)

    3. Re:this is just dumb. by missing000 · · Score: 1

      I'd go for "Knives Out" personally, but I guess it's not really famous.

    4. Re:this is just dumb. by exick · · Score: 1

      My first thought was No Surprises. It's somewhat famous and it makes sense when you're talking about Thompson.

      But maybe Idioteque or Bulletproof...I Wish I Was make more sense. Though their famousness is debatable.

    5. Re:this is just dumb. by nearlygod · · Score: 1

      Maybe "Just"... "You do it to yourself..."

      --
      The Tools Of Ignorance wanna be a tool?
    6. Re:this is just dumb. by Chris+Mattern · · Score: 1

      I think it's "Killer Cars". It *is* GTA...

      Chris Mattern

  3. Here's the article text by scumbucket · · Score: 2, Informative

    KNOXVILLE, Tenn. (AP) - A $246 million lawsuit was filed against the designer, marketer and a retailer of the video game series "Grand Theft Auto" by the families of two people shot by teenagers apparently inspired by the game.

    The suit claims marketer Sony Computer Entertainment America Inc., designers Take-Two Interactive Software and Rockstar Games, and Wal-Mart, are liable for $46 million in compensatory damages and $200 million in punitive damages.

    Aaron Hamel, 45, a registered nurse, was killed and Kimberly Bede, 19, of Moneta, Va., was seriously wounded when their cars were hit June 25 by .22-caliber bullets as they passed through the Great Smoky Mountains.

    Stepbrothers William Buckner, 16, and Joshua Buckner, 14, of Newport, were sentenced in August to an indefinite term in state custody after pleading guilty in juvenile court to reckless homicide, endangerment and assault.

    The boys told investigators they got the rifles from a locked room in their home and decided to randomly shoot at tractor-trailer rigs, just like in the video game "Grand Theft Auto III."

    In a suit filed Monday in Cocke County Circuit Court on behalf of the victims, Miami lawyer Jack Thompson and local lawyer Richard Talley alleged the game "inspires and trains players to shoot at vehicles and persons."

    "These kids simply decided to take the thrill of that game out to Interstate 40 and started pointing at cars," Thompson said in a telephone interview Tuesday.

    Thompson, who said he sent letters to Sony and Wal-Mart to drop the game before the shootings, said, "It's not like this is coming out of the blue, they chose to ignore this danger."

    San Mateo, Calif.-based Sony and Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart did not return calls for comment Tuesday. The lawsuit alleges the retail giant sold the game to the Buckners about a year before the shootings.

    Douglas Lowenstein, president of the industry Entertainment Software Association, called the shootings "an unspeakable tragedy" but said blaming a game played by millions for the boys' actions was "misguided and counterproductive."

    "There is no credible evidence that violent games lead to violent behavior," he said. "While video games may provide a simple excuse for the teenagers involved in this incident, responsibility for violent acts belongs to those who commit them."

    Thompson has made similar claims in the past and lost, notably a $33 million lawsuit against video game makers stemming from the 1997 school shooting near Paducah, Ky., by a 14-year-old boy.

    The 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in the case last year that it was "simply to far a leap from shooting characters on a video screen to shooting people in a classroom."

    --
    CMDRTACO CHECK YOUR EMAIL!
  4. you must be soooooo conflicted. by Fished · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    The slashdot editors must be so conflicted. On the one hand, Walmart is being sued, which is a good thing. On the other hand, they are being sued for distributing video games, which is a bad thing. What's a guy to do?

    --
    "He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
    1. Re:you must be soooooo conflicted. by pbrammer · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Take Two and Sony should not be sued -- they did their part by putting a MA rating on the game.

      Wal*Mart on the other hand, should be sued because they allegedly sold the game to kids who are under the age of the MA rating. If their parents bought the game, then Wal*Mart should not be sued, but rather their parents should.

      This is an easy case to close IMO.

      Phil

    2. Re:you must be soooooo conflicted. by gamgee5273 · · Score: 1

      Arguably, if the state doesn't have laws against selling an MA game to a minor, then Wal-Mart can't be sued, either. If they do have laws barring the selling of the game, then Wal-Mart's in deep shit.

      Added to that, I believe that I had read that the parents bought the game for the kids. If that's the case, then there is no case for any suit other than the victims & their families to sue the kids and their redneck parents.

      <sarcasm>

      Now, if you'll excuse me: since I was playing GTA:VC last night, I have a driving need to pull a sniper rifle and a flamethrower out of my pocket and kill dozens of people so that I can carjack a national guard tank and park it in my garage. Anyone seen any body armor around here? It would be floating and have a green glow to it...

      </sarcasm>

    3. Re:you must be soooooo conflicted. by Moonshadow · · Score: 1

      The solution is obvious. Nuke them from orbit; it's the only way to be sure.

  5. "Wal-Marting" of games by John+M+Ford · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I fear this will only accelerate the trend of removing violent and /or adult content from games and other entertainment carried by major retailers.

    I was really looking forward to experiencing the dark side of RPG with Temple of Elemental Evil. Unfortunately, it looks like the brothel story line from the original PnP modules was removed. Apparently, it was removed in order to have Wal-Mart carry the game.

    I am an adult. I enjoy content that is not appropriate for everyone. If Wal-Mart will not carry what I want, I will buy it where I can. I just wonder if Wal-Mart's influence will mean that the content will no longer even be produced.

    John

    --
    I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it. jya.com/ap.htm
    1. Re:"Wal-Marting" of games by NexusTw1n · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That storyline may have been removed but the plot about a cabin boy/slave who loves his master despite the fact he regularly physically hurts him was kept in. The aforementioned underage boy will flirt openly with male characters in the group.

      The irony with Walmart being inconsistant with its demands for censorship is it leaves them wide open to the charge of disapproving of consenting adults paying for sex, while having no problem with child abuse...

      Whereas if they hadn't censored the brothel, they could at least argue that they don't care about the content as long as minors don't buy it.

      It's a bit like demanding the rocking car in GTA3 is taken out while having no problem with killing a hooker for her money. It generates a rather mixed message about your morality.

      --
      It has become appallingly obvious that our technology has exceeded our humanity. --Albert Einstein
    2. Re:"Wal-Marting" of games by Gogo+Dodo · · Score: 1

      Wal-Mart has already started to alter the content of CDs. There was a recent BusinessWeek feature on Wal-Mart about the power it has over the economy. See the Cultural Gatekeeper section. Music companies already provide sanitized versions of CDs with the explicit lyrics removed. Some magazines are not carried or have to be sleeved. Manufacturers of other things have had to make changes just for Wal-Mart.

    3. Re:"Wal-Marting" of games by Guppy06 · · Score: 1

      "Whereas if they hadn't censored the brothel, they could at least argue that they don't care about the content as long as minors don't buy it."

      Hell, this is Wal-Mart. Minors probably sell it.

  6. At least..... by drfrog · · Score: 2, Funny

    theyve stopped blaming heavy metal

    --
    back in the day we didnt have no old school
    1. Re:At least..... by Zardoz44 · · Score: 1

      There's been no good "shock" story since Marylin Manson got boring to the media. And I'd be surprised if they blamed the twin tower attack on music.

    2. Re:At least..... by drfrog · · Score: 1

      yah music zealots!! LOL
      we all know those zealots are terrorists!

      --
      back in the day we didnt have no old school
  7. other inspirations by Datasage · · Score: 1

    Im inspired by the US miltarys actions in iraq to go and drive through this person house.

    And the good thing is that the goverment would be reponsible for inspiring such a behavior in me.

    --
    In America we are imprisoned by our fear of them.
  8. A measure of excellence by malverian · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It seems to me that we can really consider Rockstar/Take Two as among one of the most influential game designers in the world. Honestly, how many people get to say they went the same route as Id?

    On a serious note, I can definitely see this as a cop out for major game distribution stores (Walmart, EB Games) to stop selling "questionable" games. I have been playing violent games since I was about 8 years old, and I'm not violent in the least.

    People like this need to take a breather, and actually think for once. If someone will kill someone because of a video game - they were probably mentally unstable enough to kill them from watching a movie, listening to a song, or having a conversation about Barney; That doesn't make the responsibility fall on anyone other than him/herself.

    --
    You're just mad because the voices in your head talk to me.
    1. Re:A measure of excellence by milkman_matt · · Score: 1
      they were probably mentally unstable enough to kill them from watching a movie, listening to a song, or having a conversation about Barney

      Let's be honest, having a conversation about Barney would push MOST of us over the edge :)

      -matt

  9. If I were Take Two's Lawyer... by op51n · · Score: 0

    First thing I'd ask is which version of the game they played.
    Just since if they said GTA3 then, well, you couldn't shoot people in cars until Vice City and that would get the case dismissed easily.

    Only thing I'm scared of is that because they claimed it was GTA that inspired them, and because in Vice City you can do exactly as they were, that it may end up differently this time.
    Oh, dear god let's hope not!

    1. Re:If I were Take Two's Lawyer... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      They were trying to shoot the sides of semis, or more specifically the trailers of semis. They missed and killed people following behind the trucks.

      There are no semi trailers in GTA3, or Vice City.

  10. Why??? by Jhonny · · Score: 1

    We have been through this thing many times, When the colombine shooting happend what did they blame? Doom, quake etc. Did they ever stop to think that maybe these games had little or nothing to do wih them? OH NO! I play doom and Wolf3d regularly, does that mean I am in danger of shooting up a school? SURE! Lock me up before I can! They are just looking for somthing to blame it on other then the parents lack of concern for their children which in my opinion is the main reason things like this happen.

    --
    DUKEY!
  11. Let me guess by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "from the famous-radiohead-song dept"

    Which famous radiohead song are we talking about?


    Everything In Its Wrong Place?

  12. EULA and countersuits by musikit · · Score: 0

    i believe it was said in another post but really people will continue to sue game companies for stuff like this until someone wins and game companies back off or until a game company counter sues for bad press about their game. with the walmart banning thing i believe Billy Joel had it best when he had one of his albums banned and it ended up being his best selling album at the time. parental disobidence will drive people to games not at wal-mart. really the only reason to get a game on a wal-mart shelf is for kids to pick up while their parents are shopping and say "buy me this" what i believe is that soon all media, books, music, movies, and game will have a EULA that basically comes down to the following "by reading/listening/watching/playing this product you give up all your rights to sue the publisher for anything" kind of reminds me of the simpsons episode where marge reads the letter sent home out loud and it says "by reading this out loud you give up the right to sue the school" or something like that (not a HUGE simpsons fan, casual watcher) my end comment is this. companies will protect themselves however they need to but until a actual court case wins they will not know how to protect themselves so they will continue along as if they have no need to.

  13. Standing in a Barney suit with an AK47... by Oddly_Drac · · Score: 2, Funny

    Think about it. Someone offs Jack Thompson in a Barney suit. Current logic dictates that Barney is evil. Everyone wins.* * Please note that this is comedic and should not be taken orally or literally.

    --
    Oddly Draconis
    Too cynical to live, too stubborn to die.
    1. Re:Standing in a Barney suit with an AK47... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      **Please note that this is comedic and should not be taken orally or literally.

      Oooh! may I still do it anyway? please?

  14. In other news... by cgenman · · Score: 4, Funny

    This week's tops at the box office is Time Warner's remake of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, which took in a whopping 28 million dollars for a 9 thousand dollar per screen average, yet only featured one dismemberment every 20 minutes. It dethroned Disney's ultraviolent Kill Bill, which continued to charge ahead at the box office. With an enviable 3 week total of 43.2 million dollars it's averaging 240 thousand dollars for every man woman and child disembowled, dismembered, or decapitated for your viewing pleasure.

    In other news, a spat of school violence is sweeping across the nation. "I didn't even realize that trenchcoat wearing freak existed before he put on a hockey mask, pulled out a 2-foot machete, and started lumbering towards everyone" one spunky but virtuous survivor at a Des Moines High School told reporters. "We usually just laughed at him. Then he started killing us. Then the cops shot him dead. Who is laughing now Freak?"

    Parents across the nation have uncovered the source of the violence: games that you play on your television, AKA "Videoed-Games" were present in all of the troubled children's rooms. "My son was a model student," the mother of one such corrupted child told reporters Tuesday, "the babysitter said he always came home from school on time, he never missed a meal (food disappeared regularly from the refridgerator), and he was so quiet and respectful those times we took him to see House of the Dead, 28 Days, House of 1000 corpses, and Spy Kids 3D. The other kids roughed him up a bit, but you know... boys will be boys. And then... And then..." The mother broke down into tears, "And then we accidentally opened the door to his room, and discovered these shiny little disks everywhere. They all had names like 'Devil Dice,' 'Dark Savior,' and 'Speed Devils Online'. He had a House of the Dead game that was so realistic it integrated footage from the movie! I immediatly increased his beatings from one to four per day. But even that wasn't enough to save him from the influence of these Demon Games."

    "His father will be furious when the warden tells him," she added. "I'm so upset by this gaming-inspired lack of morality, I need to go watch 'Special Victims Unit.'" The mother then left the interview, forgetting the small baby she had brought with her.

    1. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      The mother then left the interview, forgetting the small baby she had brought with her.
      Comedy gold.
    2. Re:In other news... by extrarice · · Score: 1

      This would be funnier if it wasn't true...

      --
      "Jesus saves, but everyone else in a 10 foot radius takes full damage from the fireball."
    3. Re:In other news... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      28 days or 28 days later? This differance can be important.

  15. Mr. Jhonny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The FBI will be by shortly, please handcuff yourself and wait in the closet.

  16. Plus, Video Games Made Me Fat! by frenchgates · · Score: 4, Funny

    All those hours playing Pac-Man and Burger-Time made me eat too much!

    --
    Syntax error: loose != lose, affect != effect, then!=than
    1. Re:Plus, Video Games Made Me Fat! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You got a good case here. For further help please call 1-800-fuck-torts

  17. Just wait. by DAldredge · · Score: 1

    Wait till a D&D Computer Game with Heavy Metal Music comes out.

    It will be the end of the world!

  18. Why do people always try to blame video games? by magiluke · · Score: 1

    Really, video games are not to blame. If it's anything, it would have to be the parents. If you don't want your kids to go out on a shooting spree, teach them that shooting people in the head is bad. instill in them a sense of right and wrong.
    Even if, for some reason, this game sparked some sort of violent behavior in these kids, you can still blame it on the parents. The last time I checked, Grand Theft Auto was rated M anyway, parents should learn to give a damn about what their children play. These kids were, as the article says, clearly not of the recommended age to play these games.
    I was planning on ranting a little bit, but it's time for work, maybe later...

    --
    -Magiluke

    Earl Grey, Hot.

    1. Re:Why do people always try to blame video games? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you don't want your kids to go out on a shooting spree, teach them that shooting people in the head is bad. instill in them a sense of right and wrong.

      Interesting to note that a couple of the Rampage missions in GTA3 specifically require that you decapitate X number of people by gunfire. If you don't do it right, then you fail. Sounds kinda like school.

    2. Re:Why do people always try to blame video games? by Sylver+Dragon · · Score: 1

      Really, video games are not to blame. If it's anything, it would have to be the parents. If you don't want your kids to go out on a shooting spree, teach them that shooting people in the head is bad. instill in them a sense of right and wrong.

      Yes, shoot for the neck, knees ,and groin they squirm longer that way...
      Ok, bad joke, but seriously this type of thing happens over and over again. Some children are just screwed up in the head, usully the reason can be found sobbing over the bullet riddled body of the kid who did it: the parents. But here in the good old US of A no one is required to take responsibity for their actions anymore. Its always someone/thing elses fault. Its the Rock and Roll, or D&D, or Heavy Metal, now its the video games. Truth is, the fault lies squarly with the parents, but because people in the US are unwilling to take responsibity, they blame everything else, lest they be blamed for their own short-commings some day.
      Were it up to me, the parents of these kids should be taken out an shot. If they had been doing their job, actually teaching these kids right from wrong, and properly supervising what these kids did, this probably wouldn't have happened. But instead we get countless hours of the news media displaying the parents as some sort of victim, talking about how little Jonny was such a great kid, who wouldn't hurt a fly. If the parents had been paying attention they would have realised that little Johnny was actually not only hurting flies, but doing everything he could to torture them, along with small animals.
      I hope that the Judge/Jury who see this case have a clue inside their skulls. Its not the game's fault, its the fault of parents who have kids, but never take on the responsibility of rasing them.

      --
      Necessity is the mother of invention.
      Laziness is the father.
    3. Re:Why do people always try to blame video games? by magiluke · · Score: 1

      Well, I'm back from work, and...well, you said just about everything I had wanted to... Well, maybe I wouldn't shoot the parents, but the general point is there...

      --
      -Magiluke

      Earl Grey, Hot.

  19. Great by bnavarro · · Score: 1, Insightful

    This guy is just another Ambulance Chasing(tm) Lawyer; blaming everybody but the actual criminal for the crime.

    When the hell are we going to see tort reform that puts these guys out of business?

  20. My thoughts... by inkless1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Dear Jack Thompson,

    We will agree that video games can have a harmful effect on kids when you agree that parents who raise thoughtless murdering psychopaths are jackasses. Deal? Good. Oh, and instead of $260 million dollars - you get nothing. Good? Good.

    Signed,
    Some gamers.

    -
    Cathode Tan

  21. Lawyers make me violent. by ClioCJS · · Score: 0, Troll

    Let's ban them.

    --
    -Clio
    Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
    Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
    1. Re:Lawyers make me violent. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This was a fucking troll? Moderators are god damn morons.

  22. It is called a brain...let's use it by Hassman · · Score: 1

    Let me get this straight (I'm sorry if this is a dup post)...

    Someone does something in a 'fantasy' land such as a video game. Kills monsters, car-jacks, jumps on gumba's (or whatever they are called) heads, etc...

    Because they did this in a game on a PS2 or PC or Nintendo, the person thinks it is ok to do it in real life? Because the person is too stupid to make a distinction between the real world and the 'pretend' world?

    Or is it, that people are greedy are see that Sony and the rest have deep pockets that they can go after?

    After all, if games can be blamed for people doing stupid shit like this, then why aren't books? It isn't that far of a step... Why wasn't Tom Clancy sued when 9/11 happened? After all, he wrote a book where terrorists did practically the same thing. It could be claimed that they were 'inspired' by the book.

    This is what it comes down to. People are stupid and don't want place the blame where it is due. Everyone is responsible for their own actions regardless of if you're 15, 25 or 50. Everyone has a conscience and knows what is right and what is wrong. If you are 15 and do this stuff, it is probably because you're parents suck at parenting and never hold you acountable for anything or the kid has totally lost it... no where do video games, movies, books, or whatever come in there.

    The next questions is how did they get those guns? Someone is definitely at fault for that one. I'm sick of people taking the easy way out... own up to it, punish them, and fix the problem already!

    There. Now I feel better.

    --
    -Mark
    Dovie'andi se tovya sagain.
    1. Re:It is called a brain...let's use it by wickedj · · Score: 3, Funny

      The next questions is how did they get those guns? Someone is definitely at fault for that one.

      <sarcasm>I think the game companies gave the guns to them.</sarcasm>

  23. I think this will explain all. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just watch "bowling for Columbine" Michael Moore explains this much easier than I could ever do.

    Anyway, if this guys are so convinced "games did it" why do they always sue for money? wouldnt be more useful for their "cause" if they asked the game to be banned, or games to stop being sold in walmart? isnt painfully obvious that money simply wont solve anything?

    And since we are in the subject, why they dont sue the weapon company or the NRA or ask for the ammendment that allows anyone to have a gun to be abolished? I mean those are the ones responsable for the weapon existance and the fact that is available for a kid. The game merely "suggested" what to do with it (if you believe that crap of an argument of course).

  24. Unpopular position by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

    People instinctively assess the danger of something by how familiar they are with it. That is to say that it is completely normal for a person to feel no danger while driving recklessly without a seatbelt, yet be afraid of flying if he is not used to it . If a law suit like this is going to succeed, it's goign to be with a jury that is completely unfamiliar with video games and/or movies. No matter what the evidence, if they are fairly normal non-gamer, a game like Grand Theft Auto will make them very uncomfortable, no matter how little merit the suit may have.

    I personally don't think that the courts or the government should be involved in judging media for this reason.

    That said, I'll take what is likely to be an unpopular position here and say I believe that games like GTA are probably a bad thing. For one thing, the game reinforces the perception of the city as a frightening place populated by predators and victims. For another thing I worry that it might blunt empathy for people who are victims of violence. Of course it's ridiculous to think a normal person would go on a rampage after playing a videogame - it's too far from normal behavior. But being able to dismiss the suffering of people who are remote or easy to objectify is very close to normal behavior. I just don't think it's an appropriate subject for lighthearted fun.

    This may strike many as political correctness, so let me make it clear I consider it a personal choice that I do not play games like GTA and nor let my kids play or watch others play them. I realize that reasonable people may differ, that the gamers who play this game are normal people who are on the whole decent to their fellow human beings. So I have no desire to impose this choice on others.

    I suppose, though, that an amoral game like GTA is probably worlds better than a game that wraps violence in moral approval.

    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    1. Re:Unpopular position by the_ed_dawg · · Score: 1
      Grand Theft Auto has become the Dungeons and Dragons of the 21st century. The game has a strong following and offers a form of entertainment that is sometimes or often socially deviant. Like D&D, GTA has become a target for criticism, largely because the gaming is not usually the 'cool' thing to do and a small fraction of people take the game too far.

      What we have in this case is a failure to accept personal responsibility, which is an unfortunate trend here in the USA as of late. The central issue here is not the content. It is that these children were not taught the difference between the virtual world and the real world and were not supervised well enough for parents to realize that they were playing a game that they probably shouldn't be. (I find it hard to believe that a parent didn't take note of the constant sirens going off during long chases. My wife complains about them all the time.)

      There was a South Park episode about this. Kyle and Stan were caught trying to hang Stan's grandpa because they weren't paying attention to his suicide attempt while watching the Terrance and Philip Show. The parents left town to go protest the network, leaving their children to keep watching television. The moral of the story was that the problem was not the television show; rather, if parents paid more attention to their children, the television wouldn't be the lone source of moral education.

      I commend the parent post that stated his personal choice to forbid his children from being exposed to Grand Theft Auto. This is a responsible choice and many should benefit from the idea that 14-16 year old children probably shouldn't be playing GTA. However, such entertainment should not be banned from adult purchase, nor should developers be sued for creating a game clearly meant for adults.

      --
      There are two types of people: those prepared for the zombie apocalypse and those who will be eaten.
  25. I have to ask... by NanoGator · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Was the people behind the Three Stooges ever sued? What about Warner Brothers for their Wile E. Coyote cartoons? Superman? Tom and Jerry?

    When you kill somebody in GTA, they die. Run over somebody, they die. Beat a granny to death, she dies. On top of all that, the cops chase you. When they chase you, it gets a LOT harder to finish the game. They don't stop until they get you.

    So, GTA teaches you that shooting somebody kills them, and that it must be wrong because the police come after you. But Bugs Bunny teaches us that a duck can get hit in the face with a shotgun blast, and all that'll happen is his beak will be shifted to the opposite side of his head.

    Getting back to the case at hand here. There's no possible way that those kids could have shot at cars without realizing that a.) They were doing something wrong and b.) that by firing the gun, they were aiming to kill. Both of these lessons are learned when playing any of the GTA games.

    So, if they were inspired by GTA, then they intentionally set out to commit murder. Pity, GTA warned them what would happen.

    I wonder how many kids were in the hospital due to frying-pan-in-the-face injuries during Tom and Jerry's prime.

    --
    "Derp de derp."
    1. Re:I have to ask... by Mike+Hawk · · Score: 1

      You make many good arguements, but I'm going to pick on a subtlety that you included.

      When you kill somebody in GTA, they die. Run over somebody, they die. Beat a granny to death, she dies. On top of all that, the cops chase you. When they chase you, it gets a LOT harder to finish the game. They don't stop until they get you.

      Alot harder to finish the game or impossible to finish the game requiring a start from the beginning? In Super Marios Bros you die 3 times you start over. In GTA you go to "jail" but immediately respawn. Since you are making the arguement (and have time and time again) that GTA shows consequences (this is YOUR arguement), isn't it showing that the consequence will be minor and life will go on? The consequence/violence ratio in GTA is trivial. If I flip your arguement around, maybe GTA demonstrates to someone with an altered sense of reality that there will be consequences, but nothing to worry about.

      I propose that the design choice of not requiring starting over from the very beginning upon arrest could affect one with an altered perception of reality with regard to what will happen if you go on a killing/crime spree. This design choice was Rockstar's.

      It would go along way if a GAME OVER screen ever appeared.

    2. Re:I have to ask... by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      " Since you are making the arguement (and have time and time again) that GTA shows consequences (this is YOUR arguement), isn't it showing that the consequence will be minor and life will go on?"

      I get your point, and I think it's a good one, but I don't think it's as extreme as you're making it. When you go to jail in either game, you lose all your weapons, and some of your cash. Plus, you have to start whatever mission you were on over. So this game teaches you that you lose everything and serve time. The problem with putting a 'game over' in it is that you just go back and load from where you last saved. It doesn't buy you anything.

      At this point, you have to draw a line and say "kids will understand at least this." If they don't know that saving and reloading is a gaming concept, not something based on real life, then.. well.. you know I just can't imagine anybody who's led a life that'd believe that.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
  26. anyone who says that... by seriv · · Score: 1

    is obviously saying it for someother reason. They might have problems already, I mean it is not like it is going to not be sparked from somewhere else!! There was violence before video games! Or they are saying this because they want to take the attention off the murders they commited, which they seem to have done.
    -Seriv

    1. Re:anyone who says that... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That reminds me of A Christmas Story. Remember when Ralphie was caught cursing by his mom? He was too scared of telling the truth--that he learned it from his father--so he blamed an innocent third party . Hmm....

  27. How about the rifle manufacturer & retailer? by John3 · · Score: 1

    Wal*Mart might be liable for selling the video game, but isn't it a bit silly that they're suing the video game distribution system but not the firearm distribution system? Who knows, the parents probably bought the rifles at Wal*Mart as well. Seems to me that the people who should be sued are the parents who let their kids buy the game, play the game, and get access to the weaponry.

    --
    "We make our world significant by the courage of our questions and by the depth of our answers." Carl Sagan
  28. The Pac-Maniac! by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 2, Funny

    I should put together a short film about videogame violence about a serial killer who goes out every Halloween in a yellow jumpsuit and with a can of blue spraypaint who cannibalizes children who go out dressed as ghosts, leaving behind only their eyes.

    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  29. Media Whores & B.S. Reasoning by felonious · · Score: 1

    Point 1-
    The law doing filing the suit it a media whore from way back. He used to pursue the likes of The 2 Live Crew and such and his work has never amounted to jack sheeyat. As said before he's just trying to legislate his own opinions on what's right and what is wrong and hopefully make some cash in the process.

    I don't see this or anything else he tries to run through the courts because the damages he seeks are a joke. He might have a chance if he lowered his damage claims to a reasonable amount and he's lucky enough to find a court full of religious right-wingers who don't know their ass from a hole in the ground.

    I find it amusing that this "neck" is suing Walmart since he's probably buying most of his clothes and electronics there. Walmart is a store that sells shit and caters to country "sheep" who are lead and could never form an educated opinion. I know I sound like I'm stereotyping but it's based on reality.

    I say this because I don't base where I shop on what magazines and games the store might or might not stock. Fuck Walmart and their Cheryl Tiege Collection! I know it's a "neck paradise" but I'm no neck and I prefer to buy things that aren't produced from a child working 7-10's of hard labor in a 3rd world country.

    Let me say this one more time.
    Jack is a media whore looking for a payday and Walmart sucks unless you're into hypocrisy and bad fashion!

    Point 2-
    On the games are evil point I would say that we live in an age of blame. It's never our fault no matter what.

    If I eat 10 big macs a day and becaome a fat fucking cow it's mcdonald's fault and they should compensate me for the pain they have caused me. What a joke yet we allow it to persist because of our "I don't care attitude".

    Parents are the ones to blame and that's it. I have played every violent game since I was a kid. I have seen more violent images on the net and real life that 99% of the people out there will ever see. In saying all of this I would also state that after playing Doom I never felt obligated or had an incentive to go blow someone's head off. I haven't and don't plan on ever doing it either.

    I was raised with morality and common sense so I know right from wrong. If parents don't raise their kids and they act out and kill people it's their fault. It's not a movie, video game, or the system's fault.

    Period...end of rant

    --
    You aren't free to do anything, until you've lost everything.
  30. What's he going after next? by FortissimoWily · · Score: 1

    What's Thompson going to go after when this case is over and done with?
    Cute blue hedgehogs and two-tailed foxes that eliminate robots by jumping on their heads?
    Chubby, Princess-rescuing Italian plumbers who stomp on walking mushrooms?
    Peace-loving robots who fight for everlasting peace, maybe?

    --Fortissimo

  31. This is so stupid by hades13 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I need to get this off my chest.

    This is so ridiculously stupid in point form

    1. If GTA3 made them kill then what is to say that a violent movie / or song couldn't do the same. They were obviosly mentally unstable to start with.

    2. What about gun control? Why does a 14 and 16 yr old need access to a gun? I don't see a reason. ( and no, self defence from someone else with a gun doesn't cut it as they probably would have a gun either if there was gun control) Don't blame video game maker just because the is a gaping big hole in the constitution.

    3. Where are the family and friends in all this? Did they have so little to do with there sons/friends that they had no idea they were capable of these sorts of actions. They obviously didn't know these two kids from the next.

    4. Millions of other people play GTA3. I myself play and have no want or need to start randomly shooting people. I have been playing games of this nature since I was about 13. Perhaps these are just defective humans / bad genes. These kids were destined to kill themselves in some easily avoid accident and go in the runnings for the darwin awards, making the human race better by ridding themselves from it!

    5. Crap point but none the less. You get put in Jail in GTA3 if you shoot people, highlighting that it is bad and against the law to kill people / shoot at cars. They played the game long enough for it to influence them right? How come they didn't see this?

    Why are criminals no longer resonsible for there actions? Perhaps familys and schools are not teaching "responsibilty for your own actions" well enough. Why are they being sued?

  32. Fighting The Good Fight by DarkZero · · Score: 2, Funny

    This lawyer is obviously right on the money, because there is plenty of statistical data to back him up. Just do a quick Google search for the sales figures for Grand Theft Auto 3. So far two people have acted violently and blamed GTA and, lo and behold, how many people have bought the game? Two. Obviously, the game automatically makes anyone that plays it extremely violent, because EVERYONE that has played it has become violent.

    I just hope that this media publicity doesn't propel Grand Theft Auto series from the bottom of the charts up to, say... the number one game in America each month for over a year. If Mr. Thompson's theory stayed true, then the entire country would collapse into chaos!

  33. Bunch of idiots... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The boys told investigators they got the rifles from a locked room in their home and decided to randomly shoot at tractor-trailer rigs, just like in the video game "Grand Theft Auto III."

    Liars. There are NO tractor-trailer rigs in GTA3.

  34. Hmm, i have a better idea... by xMKRx · · Score: 1

    Rather than sue the companies, they should encourage the companies to educate people on proper parenting, and help sponsor day cares around the world.

    It would cost the same, and actualy work towards fixing the problem, it's a win-win situation.

  35. like chris rock said.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ....whatever happened to just "crazy"? Those kids are crazy. Forget TV, music, games etc.

  36. Invade by mrsev · · Score: 1

    I saw a documentary on the history channel. To cut a long story short, I invaded Poland.