Slashdot Mirror


Grand Theft Auto Ban To Be Decided By Courts

Wingchild writes "Haitian civil rights groups in Florida have filed a lawsuit with the circuit court in Palm Beach County, which Rockstar Games has asked to be moved up to a federal court for a final decision on whether or not their game has to be banned from stores. This move happens as the court of media opinion begins weighing in on the subject (facts irrelevant, of course), a fact which Slashdot Games noted a scant two days ago."

46 of 758 comments (clear)

  1. A Game Is Freedom of Speech by BoldAC · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.

    Parents should just do their job.

    AC

    1. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by CSZeus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It's not as easy as all that. I'd imagine that all sorts of issues get involved, from racial/ethnical issues ("Kill the Haitians!") to obscenity (which, according to the Supreme Court, is not protected by the Freedom of Speech clause).
      It'll be interesting to see how they play the cards.

      (and yes, putting all the legalities aside, I rather agree with you - if the parents don't like it, they should just keep their kids from playing it. Doesn't mean they don't have a case, though.)

    2. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by AntiOrganic · · Score: 5, Insightful

      First off, where do you get off that everyone defending the Constitution and the rights enumerated therein is a "liberal?" It seems like it's almost trendy these days to refer to the Constitution like it's some antiquated relic preventing this country from being run the way it ought to be. I happen to consider myself a centrist on most issues, leaning slightly to the right on economic issues and slightly to the left on social ones. Though, the broad-stroked brush with which you paint everyone with opposing ideals ought to say enough about you without even needing to go into detail concerning your actual views.

      A video game is a form of expression, a work of art, just like a movie or music. I'm not trying to imply a "slippery slope" chronology here, which has been all too cliched recently, but legally, to permit a "ban" of this game would set a legal precedent permitting songs with racist lyrics or movies deemed "politically incorrect" to be banned just for insensitivity to certain cultures. You don't see anything wrong with that?

      Haven't we lost enough of our civil liberties in the last two and a half years?

    3. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by cfuse · · Score: 5, Funny
      Parents should just do their job.

      Next thing you know, you'll be telling us to think for ourselves!

    4. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by NanoGator · · Score: 5, Informative

      " I'd imagine that all sorts of issues get involved, from racial/ethnical issues ("Kill the Haitians!")"

      Man, that shouldn't even be an ethnic/racial issue. The reference was to the Haitian gang, not the entire population from that background.

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    5. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by DarthWiggle · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A game is absolutely not freedom of speech. And I'm a liberal (well, mostly). A game is a (usually) commercial attempt to engage our minds, hearts, and wallets through software. It's a device from which we derive pleasure and which, in turn, provides pleasure to the shareholders of the software company which produced it, or to the members of the open source community which did the same, whether through simple good karma or through positive uptick in the value of the company.

      It is not a politically expressive act protected by the First Amendment, though it may contain protected speech within it.

      Here's the thing that gives me trouble. I've played GTA:VC, and I've enjoyed it. It's fun. It's funny. It's very, very well-produced and the voice acting is some of the best I've seen in a game (hell, with that cast, I'd hope so). And it's really no worse than Scarface, Miami Vice, the Sopranos, or any other pop culture creation based in drugs and organized crime.

      The difference is that you /watch/ Scarface, but you /participate in/ Vice City. You don't watch the fictional leader bash in someone's head with a baseball bat (switching movies), you choose to do it yourself, and that's where the battle-line is: Do we allow or prohibit people from living out fantasies inside a computer game? Do we say that "Kill the Hatians!" is as wrong inside a computer game as an incitement to violence as it would be in the real world? What about a fictionalized non-participatory movie about Hatians in Miami which contained the line "Kill the Hatians!"? Would that pass muster because it doesn't contain the participatory aspect of a game like Vice City?

      I don't know, and really the only thing that this whole debate has caused for me is a lot of soul searching about why I should derive pleasure from killing virtual Hatians and stealing virtual cars. Great game, great gameplay, bad context.

      Then again, chess simulates war.

      This will indeed be an interesting case to watch. The requested damages are so small ($15k?) that it hardly seems like a frivolous lawsuit. I guess the decision will come down to whether games are considered to be passive entertainment (in the same way that a play that requires audience participation might be), or an active extension of the real world, where an incitement to kill in the virtual world may carry over into the real.

      One last thought: the Supreme Court tossed out a case against Hustler magazine which had published a parody ad which, basically, said that Jerry Falwell had done incredibly bad things to his mother. The grounds? That nobody could possibly believe that the ad was serious.

      Who knows.

    6. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by clarkcox3 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Why is a video game not free speech, but a book is? Or a television program, radio program, painting, song, sculpture, etc.

      What is so different about a videogame that suddenly makes it non-speech? Is it that it's on a TV? no, can't be that because TV programs are on TV.

      Is it that it is interactive (i.e. the end user can change the outcome)? No, it can't be that because I read several books as a child where one could change the outcome. And books are protected speech.

      Is it that videogames are relatively new, and didn't exist at the time of the framing of the Constitution? No, it can't be that because TV and radio didn't exist then either.

      --
      There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
    7. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by kfg · · Score: 5, Interesting

      One might well ask where you get off denying Alexander Hamilton's (a "conservative" Federalist) admonition that the Bill of Rights is not to be interpreted as in any way being a restriction on the rights of the people and pointing out that even in the absence of the Bill of Rights the Constitution gives Congress no authority to pass laws that would violate the rights enumerated in it?

      The Constitution overtly restricts the government, not the people, and your post is exactly the sort of thing he warned an explict Bill of Rights would lead to.

      Your view is radical, antiliberty and downright unamerican.

      From your tone one might surmise you consider yourself a conservative. Well sir, I am a conservative. As an American that also makes me a liberal, as the Constitution and the Bill of Rights are overtly liberal documents. I have taken an oath to defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign and domestic, and you sir, are an enemy of the Constitution.

      KFG

    8. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by runlvl0 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Next thing you know, you'll be telling us to think for ourselves!

      If someone tells me to thinks for myself, and I do it, then did I?

      --

      Carthago delenda est!
    9. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by Major_Small · · Score: 4, Insightful

      once again the supreme court says the constitution isn't what it is... IMO, if our government is going to be based on the constitution, we should have a court that respects it most of the time, and only uses the "times have changed" BS when something really has changed. just because some people are offended, the court shouldn't fold and create a new law throwing a few more of our rights out the window...

    10. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by Daimaou · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Okay, let me make sure I have all this straight.

      Source code is not free speech.

      Religion is not free speech.

      Anti religious speech is free speech.

      Politics ARE free speech, except prior to an election, where anybody caught speaking at all will be run through with a spoon.

      Pornography is free speech.

      Pro gay speech is free speech.

      Anti gay speech is not free speech.

      Games depicting white people in futuristic battle gear, aliens, robots, skeletons, and other obvious "bad" people being killed are free speech.

      Games depicting gay, athiest, Hatian politicians, turning tricks with alien robots, and then being killed with a sharpened religious symbol are not free speech.

      The definition of freedom seems to be escaping me.

    11. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by psyco484 · · Score: 5, Funny
      Except that's not the issue since that's a derogatory term towards people of an African decent. The game doesn't use a derogatory term, it simply says "kill the Haitians." Since within the game the Haitian gang is simply refered to as "the Haitians" I don't see why "kill the Haitians" is unacceptable.

      Don't worry though, there's an easy solution: "kill the group of persons whom have a common trait of originating in a non-specific country." Come to think of it, "kill" is a strong word and probably offends those not living. Let's replace all instances of "kill" with "give a basket of kittens to." It's not so bad really, sure "give a basket of kittens to the group of persons whom have a common trait of originating in a non-specific country," isn't as to-the-point as "kill the Haitians," but at least no one gets offended. Then we can all sing songs and dance amongst the trees and kittens and give flowers to each other and everyone will be happy, or else.

    12. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I dont care if the game says flat out "KILL ALL FUCKING NIGGERS" It doesnt matter. Its free speech. FREE SPEECH IS FREE SPEECH. "ALL fucking niggers must hang" A line from Full Metal Jacket... A film considered a classic. GTA is a game that is considered a classic.... I dont care what HATIANS think. Honestly. This is a free speech issue and the fact that a group of them are offended... means NOTHING. Look i have Psoriasis. Do i protest and want to rip down the bill of rights and the freedoms of this country everytime i hear a joke about it on tv? No. Do i hate having a disease in a world where life is cruel enough? SURE... But thats life. Things are offensive. Someone's going to look at me and say something... and i have every right to tell them to go fuck themselves. Its AMERICA... We have the right to do, and say what we want, live how we want... etc. Sure there are limits... But offending people is not the limit my friends. I'm offended by our governments over abuse of power, the rich upper class folks who live like kings while others cant afford healthcare... Those things offend me.. But they exist. Should we outlaw government? Wealth.... Should we outlaw Jesus.. he offends me... What do we outlaw? BOO FUCKING HOO.. HATIANS... WELCOME TO THE WORLD where EVERYONE gets SHIT ON... YOUR TURN TO SIT IN THE TOILET. Sorry if i offended any hatians... Then again i'm not really that sorry. Its MY point that we're all going to be offended. Generally we'll all play nice and try not to hurt each other.. But when the shit hits the fan.. You're stepping over the next guy to get ahead in this world.... So you're all just as guilty. Its the nature of life. LIFE IS OFFENSIVE. Dont like it? Take the easy way out.

    13. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by spiritraveller · · Score: 4, Insightful
      > Religion is not free speech.
      >
      >Why would you think that?

      Because he doesn't understand the difference between exercising free speech and using the government to endorse his own religion.

      It's a particularly ignorant statement, since religion doesn't even need to be free speech. The "free exercise" of religion gets its own specific protection, even if it only involves meditating by yourself (which would be neither speech nor expression).

    14. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by Jackie_Chan_Fan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Just want to add that i have nothing against hatians , blacks, gays, or whatever any of you happen to be. If the feds do ban GTA... America is a failed experiment. The BILL OF RIGHTS folks... jeez i cant stand how easily people neglect them and try to widdle down the rights of humans EVERY DAY... Its just said. I'm what you call a liberally pissed off person who stands for civil rights above all else. I dont care if a small group of hatians are offended. The game GTA games (VC and GTA3) sold over 20million copies. 20 million people voted folks... The game is a classic. Many offensive films are classics... how about "Fuck the police" by NWA? If the FEDS ban this game, i will laugh and simply give up on this country because these fucking babies dont deserve it. Yes it's sad that they were offended. I do sympathize.. but really its not my problem, its not your problem. Its their problem. Its not RockStar Games problem. 20million bought the GTA games (atleast, and i've seen the figures from video buisness magazine) surely atleast 50% of that 20mil are black... Most people dont care. Most black people worship songs about getting rich, shooting each other and partying... Most of blacks love GTA.. As do i. Its a classic, just like "Fuck the police" and Full Metal Jacket. A small group of hatians being offended... does not warrant pissing on the bill of rights. All comedy is offensive, ALL SPEECH IS OFFENSIVE... LIFE IS OFFENSIVE... Just look at it, listen and take your pick.. anything can be deemed offensive. Trying to ban a game is offensive... EVEN MORE OFFENSIVE...

    15. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by clarkcox3 · · Score: 4, Informative
      The faculty or act of expressing or describing thoughts, feelings, or perceptions by the articulation of words.

      I'd say that that covers a character in a story (which is all GTA really is: an interactive story) saying "Kill the Hatians" (or whatever the actual quote is).

      Also, there is precedence for interpreting "speech" in the first amendment to encompass the larger concept of "expression", for instance, when the Supreme Court struck down the Flag Protection Act in U.S. v. Haggerty and U.S. v. Eichman. So, according to the Supreme Court, flag burning is constitutionally protected "speech"

      "if there is a bedrock principle underlying the First Amendment, it is that the Government may not prohibit the expression of an idea simply because society finds the idea itself offensive or disagreeable"
      --Supreme Court Justice William Brennan

      There are other examples of non-verbal expression being interpreted as "speech". For example the decision in Tinker v. Des Moines, the Supreme Court said that the right of public school students to wear black armbands in protest of the Vietnam War was protected by the First Amendment.

      --
      There are no tiger attacks in my area and it's all because this rock I'm holding keeps the tigers away.
    16. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by mcpkaaos · · Score: 5, Funny

      but at least no one gets offended

      I'd like you to know that I own a pet store. I sell, among other things, kittens. If video games promote the willful act of freely distributing kittens with no means of compensation for the giver, then I could be out of a job. I would lose my house, my car, my boat, and my wife, so used to living the expensive lifestyle afforded her by my kitten sales, would leave me (and probably for one of those communist animal shelter bastards). My children, starving and shoeless, would be forced to prostitute themselves on the cold, wet streets of San Diego. Imagine my poor kids, street urchins all, the painful chafing of sand between their naked toes[*].

      For shame. I can't believe you could be so insensitive, you, uh, insensitive clod.

      Then we can all sing songs and dance amongst the trees and kittens and give flowers to each other and everyone will be happy, or else.

      And my brother, the florist...

      [*] On the behest of Mark Asparagus, Michael Jackson is excluded from this suggestion.

      --
      It goes from God, to Jerry, to me.
    17. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by sterno · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A game is absolutely not freedom of speech. And I'm a liberal (well, mostly). A game is a (usually) commercial attempt to engage our minds, hearts, and wallets through software.

      A book is (usually) a commercial attempt to engage our minds, hearts, and wallets, through ... paper.

      A newspaper is (usually) a commercial attempt to engage our minds, hearts, and wallets, through... well paper again.

      A song is (usually) a commercial attempt to engage our minds, hearts, and wallets through lyrics and musical sounds (or sometimes not so musical if you've ever heard any power noise)

      Do you get my drift or shall I continue?

      The difference is that you /watch/ Scarface, but you /participate in/ Vice City. You don't watch the fictional leader bash in someone's head with a baseball bat (switching movies), you choose to do it yourself, and that's where the battle-line is: Do we allow or prohibit people from living out fantasies inside a computer game?

      I participate in books. I read them and I have to imagine what the world looks like and what the characters do. I can live out my fantasies in books, or even in television. I mean who wouldn't like to go ride around on the Starship Enterprise and almost kill people because to actually kill them would violate some principal or something.

      There is no facet of life where we ever prohibit people from engaging in fantasy, and every indication is that it's a necessary part of the human mind. We act out an agression fantasy in a video game, or by reading fight club, or by watching fight club. We do this to get out the urge to really go kill people in the real world.

      I have killed virtual hatians. I have derived enjoyment from killing virtual hatians. I don't hate hatians, or much of anybody in fact, but in the context of the GAME, it's quite fun. I go around and see how many cops I can kill before they get me, and it's a hoot. We have friends over and take turns going on violent rampages. And then we go home and sleep peacefully without ever a thought of grabbing a samurai sword and decapitating random passers by. I see nothing immoral in this act because IT IS A GAME.

      There is zero scientific evidence to suggest conclusively that there is a link between people playing violent video games or watching violent movies and then being lead to commit those acts. Yes, some people, already posessing of violent tendancies will go and commit various acts inspired by these media. But it's never been proven to be the cause, it's always the symptom, and more often than not it's just a cheap legal excuse to try to get a lighter sentance (the game made me do it; how can you put me in jail for life?)

      Before video games existed some of the greatest attrocities in human history were committed. People read Catcher in the Rye and decided to assassinate presidents. There's no sign that the violence in these games is hurting anybody, and it may in fact be helping. I know that logging on to a game and blowing the crap out of people for an hour or two is stress relieving. I do that and then I don't feel any urge to take my anger out on my wife or my pets.

      So, relax and go kill some virtual hatians. It'll all be okay.

      --
      This sig has been temporarily disconnected or is no longer in service
    18. Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech by jadavis · · Score: 4, Informative

      GTA is not in violation of any obscenity laws since it's not a public display. Nobody is forcing anyone to look at it. The only violation that even makes sense is that it incites violence.

      However, inciting violence requires a lot more specificity than what is shown in GTA. They don't say "kill the hatians that live at 123 Maple Ave".

      --
      Social scientists are inspired by theories; scientists are humbled by facts.
  2. It's just a game..... by mike300zx · · Score: 5, Insightful

    People are getting to dang PC if they can't seperate the goings on within a game to what's actually going on in real life. This does need to be allowed to stay in stores if for nothing else then for free speech. If a particular retailer doesn't want to sell it than so be it, but an all out ban on a game being sold is stupid.

  3. 0th3r m3d14 by Deraj+DeZine · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Yet if all of the game's anti-Haitian material was put into a book, people would call it free speech...

    --
    True story.
    1. Re:0th3r m3d14 by -kertrats- · · Score: 4, Insightful

      If this was put into a book, no one would be saying anything at all. You've got to realize, the morons that try to sue over things like these are illiterate.

      --
      The Braying and Neighing of Barnyard Animals Follows.
    2. Re:0th3r m3d14 by jmt9581 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Something about your post reminded me of an old joke:

      Q: What's the difference between pornography and art?
      A: A government grant.


      :P

      --

      My blog

  4. Banned? by BoldAC · · Score: 4, Funny

    I was thinking about selling my copies of GTA on ebay. However, if it's going to be banned, it's soon going to be worth a mint.

    Maybe I should wait, huh?

    AC

    1. Re:Banned? by badfrog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      There's probably way too many copies on the market to make it a rare collectible.
      Which makes another interesting point, most people that want the game have it already, banning it isn't going to make it go away, it's just providing more free advertising for it.

  5. Why Tort Reform is neccesesary by Crashmarik · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Anyone who is famillar with the florida courts can understand why Rockstar Games wants the lawsuit moved to the federal system.

    This case illustrates a deeper problem. The very nature of the legal system lets irate idiots inflict a death of a thousand cuts. There is no barrier to be overcome to bring a lawsuit. No penalty for bringing a frivolous lawsuit. Just the sound of society grinding down, under the weight of too many lawyers.

  6. Argh! NYPost Is Not Credible! by the_mad_poster · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Slashdot can REALLY get on my fucking nerves now and then. I think I'm going to have to use a Louisville slugger to beat this point into the editors' and submitters' thick skulls...

    The NY Post is NOT a credible news source. The NY Post is a TABLOID RAG that INTENTIONALLY writes up utterly ridiculous bullshit for the sole purpose of entertaining and/or selling magazines (and, it might be noted that the NY Post sells like week old baked horseshit, and for good reason).

    I'm in Pennsylvania and they sell the NY Post here. However, they pull a dirty trick - most places put it with the regular newspapers instead of with crap like National Inquirer and Weekly World News. Then, people buy it and mistake it for upstanding journalism with some level of integrity. They wrote the piece to incite people. I mod the entire NY Post staff, and the writer of that article in particular, with -1 Flamebait.

    PLEASE stop thinking that the NY Post is a newspaper. It is a tabloid, nothing more. It doesn't represent popular opinion, and, in fact, when they write garbage like that, it doesn't even necessarily represent the NY Post's opinion. It's JUST A TABLOID.

    --
    Alito: A vote for Alito is a punch in the eye to put that bitch back in her place!
    1. Re:Argh! NYPost Is Not Credible! by LostCluster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Tabliod" in a technical sense is any newspaper that appears in the smaller format used by the NY Post, NY Daily News, Boston Hearld, San Francisco Examiner, and may other newspapers. It's the opposite of being "broadsheet" which is the size used by the New York Times, Boston Globe, USA Today and Wall Street Journal.

      Most "tabloids" in the newspaper business aren't intentionally inacurate like the Weekly World News or The Onion are, but they are using the tabloid paper shape to try to make themselves more attractive to riders on trains and buses, and other people on the go. As a result, most tabloids also tend to go for the "stories that move newspapers" more than stories that are of "news value" that broadsheet newspapers seem to prefer. Like it or not, more common New Yorkers will spend their subway rides talking about the story that is on the front page of the Post than the Times on any day that the two papers disagree on the top story. Nobody admits to caring about J-Lo, but somehow if you put a picture of her on the front page the newspaper does sell more copies...

      The NY Times gets caught printing all sorts of inaccurate information all of the time, just read their corrections and retractions if you want proof. It's not really a matter of the credibilty of the Post so much as it is the story selection.

      The fact is, nearly every media outlet in the world is trying their best to be unbiased and credible (and those who aren't really easy to detect, such as Weekly World News and The Onion) yet most end up failing because the opinion of the editors and reporters almost always shows up in the story selection and placement. There will always be complants from people with views on the extreme sides of the scale that every popular media outlet will is biased against them for allowing the opposite side from them to speak. A news outlet is doing its job properly when it's getting roughly equal complaints from both sides.

      You can't just toss a news artcle out just because it appeared in the Post. Their telling of the story might be a little more sensationalized, but that alone doesn't make it untrue.

  7. Dear Mr. Byron, by pdk · · Score: 4, Informative

    Dear Mr. Byron,

    I recently read your business editorial in the December 29 issue of the New York Post. I am glad to see that you are open to letters and responses concerning your rather harsh defamation of Take Two Interactive. Many in your position prefer to hide in semi-anonymity when writing such provocative words, but you rather than do so have included your e-mail address. I do admire your ability to present an argument irrespective of what I hold as my own position.

    I am an average man living a rather average life in Toronto, Canada. I was born here, raised here and love living with the freedoms I have. Freedoms my grandfather fought for in the Second World War. I am a professional computer programmer and part-time philosophy major at The University of Toronto. I enjoy writing and reading among my hobbies. I am a very evident pacifist. I deplore guns. I despise violence. I am so against it that I can hardly stand to watch the news.

    You may wonder why on Earth I was even reading your editorial at all. Well, the fact is, I am also an avid gamer. As you may have soon realized, as no doubt you have received many similar letters from other video game fans from around the USA and the World at large. A link to your article has been making the rounds through the gaming news world. After all, we are a passionate bunch, with strong views about our favourite hobby and many of us will defend our Right to purchase, play, and discuss video games of all sorts. It seems fair, if you ask me, since we do live in The Free World.

    Now discounting the SEC's charges of fraud, of which I cannot really make any sort of argument against, I would like to take a serious posture against what you have said. I take issue with your skewed portrayal of video games, video gamers and the state of Take Two's production values. I am very tired of defending the video game world to obviously ignorant individuals. Not to take it personally against you, after all, you do seem highly educated, but rather misinformed. We must stop riding the Scare Tactics Train to the Media Circus surrounding many recent real-world violent acts through out the World and domestically and start taking a hard look at the real reason that they happen. Video games are not it.

    I will grant the accusation that Take Two's Grand Theft Auto series of games depicts violent acts. If I attempted to deny such a fact would be just outrageous and quite impossible to do. Also the fact that much of the line-up of games that they produce for the Playstation 1 and 2, Gameboy, and PC contain some violent content would be equally difficult to ignore as fact. What I do want to say is that this is no different from the equally easily accessible media in the Western world such as movies and television and in books and newspapers.

    Each year, from the hallowed studios of Hollywood, billions of dollars are spent on thousands of movies depicting gore, violent acts, sex, drug use, and all manner of objectionable activity that is portrayed in less detail in any of the recent Grand Theft Auto video games. To name only a few such as The Godfather would be an exercise in futility as examples of such films. Yet the same such movie is lauded as one of the all-time greatest movies.

    In fact, just checking the heralded internet resource, imdb.com ( http://imdb.com/top_250_films ) names it the greatest by almost 700,000 more votes than its runner-up. In fact, a quick browse of the same list makes it evident that they find violent films to be quite highly regarded. It includes recent action flicks such as The Matrix, adventure films as The Lord of the Rings and older suspense movies such as Psycho and "Ultra-violent" dramas such as A Clockwork Orange. It would be quite arguable that these same movies are not as high quality as we grant them, and they all feature extremely graphic violence and other objectionable acts.

    Yes, these movies are all rated R (Restricted) in the USA. The film industry is self-regulating in it's r

    --
    Paul K.
  8. Revised line: by Jazu · · Score: 4, Funny

    "Kill these particular Hatians, but treat all other Hatians with dignity and respect!"

    --
    My joke got modded as Insightful and my insight got modded as Funny.
  9. From an american italians perspective by t0qer · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I should be suing the HBO for the soprano's, I should sue MGM for the Godfather, I should sue tristar for Goodfellas.

    Every time some idiot hears that i'm italian, suddenly they start thinking i'm some stupid mafia goomba, and they start doing the whole Robert Di Nero accent when they talk to me. Fact is, I was raised in California, and so many of my family members were trying to hard to be "American" that most of them talked like John Wayne.

    But I do enjoy afformentioned films and shows, as well as GTA. It's not like rockstar made a game that promotes Haitian genocide. They just did the whole voodoo momma stereotype(which *IS* a part of Haitian culture, just like the Mafia is part of my heritige)

    I think these people need to get a life. It's a game, liven up.

  10. Re:This is very simple. by AntiOrganic · · Score: 4, Insightful
    If this issue should be decided anywhere, it should be in the courts.

    If this issue should be decided anywhere, it should be in the marketplace, not the courts. Capitalism is a democracy in and of itself in that if something is too racist to be sold, no one will buy it and the company will either change its tactics or be put out of business. And the marketplace, unlike the courtroom or legislature, is a place where every person can cast their vote individually. Special interest lobby groups have no undue influence on the open market.
  11. From the Post article... by Aardpig · · Score: 4, Funny
    People, this is insane. This is 10,000 times worse than the worst thing anybody thinks Michael Jackson ever did to a little boy - or than any lie the feds think Martha Stewart ever told them, or any line in any song that Bruce Springsteen ever sang that rankled a cop in the Meadowlands.

    So, by spending many entertaining hours playing Vice City, all the time aware that this is fantasy and the acts I commit in the game have no bearing on my real-life conduct, I have been committing acts far worse than fucking little boys? Sheesh, I had no idea!

    In fact, I wouldn't pay too much attention to the New York Post. It is, of course, another lying gutter publication from Rupert Murdoch, the bloated impotent turd who's attempts to take over the world will hopefully fail when he dies of a extremely-painfull coronary.

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  12. Other games by Reorax · · Score: 5, Funny

    I've been told to kill Germans in tons of World War II games and no one's complained about that...

    --
    This sig is only here so people stop skipping the last lines of my posts.
  13. Hmmm by Aardpig · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From the NY Post article:

    In Tennessee last summer a motorist was killed and his passenger wounded when two boys - aged 14 and 16 - played "Grand Theft Auto" and then decided to go out and take sniper shots at cars, just like in the game.

    I find it peverse that GTA is held to blame in this particular case. More to the point, what the fuck were two underage boys doing with access to shotguns?

    --
    Tubal-Cain smokes the white owl.
  14. Re:You're missing a lot of gray area..... by MillionthMonkey · · Score: 5, Informative

    and secondly, commercial speech (they are selling a video game) can be highly regulated.

    Bzzzt, wrong. The restrictions on commercial speech do not apply to the content of the game itself. Rockstar's commercials promoting the game, however, are subject to restrictions on commercial speech. Rockstar cannot claim, for example, that the game adds two inches to your penis, or helps you learn how to successfully deal with police.

    Commercial speech has not appeared in many video games so far, and it's difficult to imagine how it really could. In Crazy Taxi, passengers get in the cab and always want to be taken to places like KFC (beautifully rendered, logo and all). If a game comes out where you have to go to KFC and gorge on buckets of greasy chicken to keep your health points from going to zero, then the game makers (along with KFC) might conceivably be playing with the possibility of commercial restrictions. But movies have been getting away with product placement payola for a while now, so I wouldn't bet on it.

  15. Ahh but you see by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

    That presents a real problem. Guns are very tightly regulated through legal channels. IF you wish to buy a gun from a legit dealer, you must be of proper age (18 for long guns, 21 for hand guns). When you declare your intent to purchase it, they will take your personal information, and call the police with it. The police then use that to do a background check via NICS. If that should return any number of red flags, such as being underage, have a felony conviction, having outstanding warrants, having domestic violence convictions, or having been comitted to a mental health facility, the sale will be denied.

    So this means that underage kids have only two real methods of getting guns:

    1) Illegal dealers.
    2) Their parents.

    This was a case of #2. Well then, that would mean that the parents are to blame for permitting their kids to have unsupervised access to firearms. That implies personal responsibility on the part of the parents. That is the one thing the world seems to not be about these days, is responsibility for ones own actions. Parents blame their kids behaviour on videogames or TV. Heck, leaders of dictatorships blame their countries' problem on the US.

    Also note that the parents of the kids that did this don't hav a lot of money, not nearly as much as Rockstar Games does. So they are a perfect scapegoat. It's not our (our meaning parents) fault that our kids have no morals and access to weapons, it's those eveil video game companies that, conveniantly, we can try to milk for cash.

    Same sort of thing happened with the firearm industry on numerous occasions. People sued firearm manufactures when a death occured and one of their guns were used. The lawsuits were almost universally unsuccessful so the shark lawyers ahve moved onto new targets, by and large, though firearm lawsuits are still tried from time to time.

  16. Re:Sigh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    If you don't like the game, DON'T BUY IT!!! Nobody's pointing a gun at you to force you to buy.
    Actually, that scene is in the next version of GTA.

  17. I kill all the Haitians I see... by teamhasnoi · · Score: 4, Funny
    as well as screw hookers in the back seat of cars I carjacked from their owners. I provide bank robbers with getaway vehicles, run over seniors, beat police officers with golf clubs then shoot them with their own guns.

    I help scummy lawyers get their cocaine back, and run it for the Mafia. I often stand on rooftops and snipe at passerby with a rocket launcher. I sometimes will run around city streets with a flamethrower and burn random people.

    I like to run into the police station and preceeded by grenades and clean up with a machine gun. I drive on the beach and run over people who are sunbathing.

    I beat most hookers with a baseball bat, take their money, and buy guns with it. I can sometimes be found running over moped riders, waiting 'til they get back on, then elbowing them in the throat and stealing their bike.

    I drive on the sidewalks. On golf courses. In parks and malls. I run over anyone I see. If I'm on foot, I'll run up to someone and kick them in the head. Sometimes I'll beat them until the blood spreads in a spreading pool.

    I blame my parents.

  18. Re:Let me play devil's advocate by YomikoReadman · · Score: 5, Interesting
    I grew up in a military household, with a father who was an officer in the US Navy. This means that for over half the year on average, my mother who worked in excess of 50 hours a week was the only parent raising myself and 2 siblings. As a result of this, I was in the same situation that these children who have gone out and 'played' GTA and committed other senseless acts of violence were, from a standpoint of the amount of time my parents were around. It is quite likely that they saw more of their parents, mostly due to the fact that one of their parents was not gone for 6 months out of the year. However, that does not mean that my parents were not involved in everything I did, from school activities, to the friends I hung out with to all of the video games I played. The reason that there is a deluge of comments about "where were the parents?" is not so much a literal one, but a figurative one pertaining to why were they not more involved.

    I feel that a large part of the issue here is that all the parents of children who do these things is that the parents don't get involved in their lives, so in a somewhat desperate cry for attention, or perhaps to lash out at what they perceive to be a society that carries no love for them they act out the one thing that brings them comfort; a violent video game. While I don't think that the games are entirely to blame, I'm sure that with access to firearms and other weapons they would be quite capable of finding source material in movies or TV, the issue at the heart of all of this is parental involvement, moreso the appalling lack thereof which has come to be the norm in todays society.

    --
    I have no regrets, this is the only path.
    My whole life has been "UNLIMITED BLADE WORKS"
  19. Heartburn (Re:A Game Is Freedom of Speech) by bwcbwc · · Score: 4, Insightful

    As a resident of South Florida, this case makes my head ache. Based on the facts of the case as I understand them, the game should not be banned, either by the government or by Walmart.
    1) The offensive phrase apparently refers to a competing criminal gang made up of Haitians, not to the Haitian community in general.(?)
    2) If incitement to virtual behavior that would be illegal in reality is deemed inappropriate, the entire genre of first person shooters and much of several other genres would be illegal as well.
    3) If virtual child porn is legal, how can virtual racism be illegal?

    On the other hand, Haitians have to be the most oppressed people in the western hemisphere. First, their home country is a wasteland, then they have to risk life and limb to get here, then (unlike Cubans) they have to hide from immigration because they don't get amnesty just for reaching shore. Finally, if they do get through all that, even African-Americans pick on them. In public HS here "Are you Haitian?" is the same as "Are you stoopid?" (see Disclaimer)

    Finally, the parent comment is one of the best balanced discussions of this issue in the whole thread. It doesn't just discuss the specific issue of the lawsuit, but it addresses the broader issues of morality in media consumption.

    Disclaimer: The phrase "even African-Americans" is used to indicate that this is a case of black on black racism (or nationalism), it doesn't mean "even the lowly black folks pick on the Haitians".

    --
    We are the 198 proof..
  20. Conservatives still don't like big government. by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Interesting

    That's (part of) what conservative means.

    Just because "Republican" has meant "conservative" for several generations doesn't mean they are now. Political parties change beliefs from time to time. The Republican party used to be the progressive/liberal party, if you recall.

    Conservatives are stil Conservatives. Our Republican adminstration, however, isn't ver Conservative at all. Bush has a very large government that has sought to increase federal and executive power at every turn.

    People need to dissociate their political beliefs from political parties. The party that used to represent what you personally believe may change to represent that which you abhor.

    The downside is you don't get to vote in primaries. The updside is you can remain true to your actual beliefs, instead of subverting them to the cause of someone else.

    Anyone who isn't an indepenent is a tool, or someone who wishes to wield tools.

    --

    The enemies of Democracy are
  21. LOTR?? by willtsmith · · Score: 4, Funny

    I've heard that the American-Orcish community is protesting the recent LOTR movies and video games. Apparantley it sterotypes Orcs to be ugly, misformed, drooling, fiendish blood drinking monsters.

    Luckily for them, the Orcs are currently in charge of Congress so a ban on anti-Orc material should be forthcoming ;-)

    --
    -------- -------- Support Wesley Clark for president!!!
  22. How about a parent rating system instead? by GnuVince · · Score: 4, Insightful
    Instead of banning a game to make up for the incompetance of many parents to correctly educate their children, why don't we simply ban bad parents instead?

    I mean, what is this? My parents educated my brothers and I very well, and when they said "Don't watch this" or "Don't play this game" because they thought that this material wasn't appropriate for us, we didn't. We learned to obey our parents, to trust their judgement even if sometimes we disagreed with them. I am now 20 years old, I am an adult, they no longer really tell me what to do or what not to do: they know that I am responsible and that I will do what is right.

    So instead of asking to ban games, give better parenting lessons to the future mommies and daddies, teach them how to educate their kids, how to make them understand that some things are not for them.

    Here we got GTA3 about two years ago. Me an one of my brothers were old enough to play according to my parents, but not our baby brother. It didn't please him that he couldn't play, but as far as I know, he respected our parents' decision until they said that it was okay, that he could play.

    Also, once kids obey parents, it's easier to convince them that Vim is the superior editor ;)

  23. From Ku Klux Klan rallies to Grand Theft Auto... by btakita · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If the Ku Klux Klan has the "right" to march down Skokie (a Chicago suburb that is home to many Holocaust survivors), then Take Two has the "right" to make Grand Theft Auto.

    I don't what this game promotes and how it influences some people, but America was created with free speech in mind. Unfortunately, people with poor taste are also allowed free speech.

    But then, I'm sure the British thought Thomas Jefferson, Patrick Henry, and the mighty John Hancock had poor taste and poisonous words that should be silenced.

    Besides, people still make the desicion to act violently.

  24. Re:wtf? Is this purely american? by forkboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The problem isn't necessarily that everyone needs a cause here...it's that their causes are self-serving and inane. Very few take of the cause of, say, ousting corrupt politicians or punishing dishonest corporate offices. For some reason they take on causes like banning a video game or a book because it offends their sensibilities. (Yet somehow being taken advantage of by those in power doesnt offend them) I'm not sure exactly why this is.

    But yes, you're right on the money. If folks would mind their own damn business, half this countries problems would go away. Imagine it, Political correctness and frivolous lawsuits could be a thing of the past!

    --
    This message brought to you by the Council of People Who Are Sick of Seeing More People.