Slashdot Mirror


Jack Thompson Faces Disciplinary Hearing

CoolC writes "Gamepolitics is reporting that attorney Jack Thompson is to face a disciplinary hearing before the Florida Supreme Court. The attorney faces five counts of professional misconduct, three of which are correlated with his ongoing campaign against violent video games. Thompson faces the possibility of disciplinary action up to and including disbarment."

231 comments

  1. i'm hoping... by macadamia_harold · · Score: 5, Funny

    Thompson faces the possibility of disciplinary action up to and including disbarment.

    I'm crossing my fingers in the hope that you misspelled dismemberment.

    1. Re:i'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

      If wishing a gruesome death on someone with whom you disagree isn't insightful, I don't know what is.

    2. Re:i'm hoping... by chaosite · · Score: 2, Interesting

      First of all, its not gruesome death, just the loss of an unneeded appendage. Second, its not just that I don't agree with Jack Thompson - the man is disgusting in his conduct.

      http://www.g4tv.com/attackoftheshow/blog/post/6292 72/Jack_Thompson_vs_Adam_Sessler.html

    3. Re:i'm hoping... by BakaHoushi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Daddy, daddy! Teacher says everytime a jackass gets a long overdue punishment, an angel gets an orgasm!"

      To describe his conduct as "disgusting" is the understatement of the year. Even outside video games, listening to the things he says (neo-conservative religious freak... I don't care where you fall on the political spectrum, that spells "jackass.") makes me sick.

      Disbarment is too good for him, but I'll settle for it.

    4. Re:i'm hoping... by Zeinfeld · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Reading through the comments it appears that his statements may well be the result of something other than his ideology. Such things happen. Quite why Slashdot has to treat each one as if it were an existential threat is beyond me.

      --
      Looking for an Information Security student project suggestion?
      Try http://dotcrimeManifesto.com/
    5. Re:i'm hoping... by BakaHoushi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      If I may quote his Wikipedia article:
      "In 1992, Thompson asked a Florida judge to declare the Florida Bar Association unconstitutional. He claimed that the bar was engaged in a vendetta against him because of his religious beliefs, which he said conflict with what he called the bar's pro-gay, humanist, liberal agenda."

      We may disagree, however, I think this line here pretty much says to me that Mr. Thompson is a huge bigot. He's going for the "persecuted minority" (despite being a Christian, which is hardly the minority) routine. This is incredibly disgusting to me on every level. Is it wrong to wish to see him fact the consequences of his actions?

      I admit, we're biased. But we're also human, and we're talking of a man who has personally attacked our character (well, the character of anyone who ever plays games, anyway), our hobbies, and has in general, made himself out to be our enemy, as if he feeds off of animosity. Is it surprising we should take some enjoyment in watching and criticizing his actions, in hopes that they may be his downfall? Sorry if this is a bit of nonsensical rambling, but I see no reason we shouldn't be upset at him.

    6. Re:i'm hoping... by rbochan · · Score: 4, Funny

      I'm hoping he gets a cameo as a corpse in the next GTA release.

      --
      ...Rob
      The American Dream isn't an SUV and a house in the suburbs; it's Don't Tread On Me.
    7. Re:i'm hoping... by aplusjimages · · Score: 3, Funny

      No he needs to be the boss you kill at the end. I'm betting that he will be the most killed big boss ever in the history of video games.

      --
      Can I bum a sig?
    8. Re:i'm hoping... by faffod · · Score: 0, Redundant

      Is it wrong to wish to see him fact the consequences of his actions? I don't thing that there are any facts that consequenced his actions.
    9. Re:i'm hoping... by Tim+C · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I assume you're trying to make a pun, but I don't think dismemberment means what you think it does. While the definition doesn't call for it, the word certainly has (for me at least) connotations of a gruesome death.

    10. Re: I'm hoping... by LordEd · · Score: 2, Funny

      There's a violent solution. You must be a video game player.

    11. Re:i'm hoping... by Shads · · Score: 4, Informative

      He won't get disbarred unfortunately. That man has been to more ethics hearings and such than most attorneys every go to.

      Check out his entry on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(attorn ey) crazy shit... Janet Reno, Two Live Crew, Madonna, Time Warner, Howard Stern, dozens of companies, and even the florida bar... he has a long and colorful history and has had several visits with the florida bar people to consider disbarment. They really don't like him much.

      --
      Shadus
    12. Re: I'm hoping... by Sj0 · · Score: 4, Interesting

      What are you talking about? He pressed a button. There's nothing violent about pressing a button.

      NOW, sending tens of thousands of troops to a foreign country in a war of aggression and occupation and subjugation which results in 40,000 civilian casualties. THAT is violent.

      But I guess context is a silly thing. We don't need that.

      --
      It's been a long time.
    13. Re:i'm hoping... by X0563511 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      That would be disembowelment...

      --
      For large sets, this will be our guide even unto death, for the LORD will work for each type of data it is applied to...
    14. Re:i'm hoping... by bladesjester · · Score: 2, Informative

      Given the arteries and veins that run through your appendages, unless the bleeding was stopped, he would indeed die. Furthermore, even if the bleeding were stopped, it would be possible to die from pain and shock.

      --
      Everything I need to know I learned by killing smart people and eating their brains.
    15. Re:i'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I didn't think slashdot made a distinction between a neo-conservative religious freak and someone who has religion. I thought slashdot considered anyone who had faith to be a freak.

    16. Re:i'm hoping... by Martix · · Score: 1

      may be this is the right spelling Disembowlment

    17. Re:i'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't thing so, huh?

    18. Re:i'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      HAHAHAHA i was about post exactly the same thing and i saw this first post. It's funny how people can be thinking the same thing.

    19. Re:i'm hoping... by BakaHoushi · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Oh, but I know there is a difference.
      For example, in my own experience, someone who has religion is someone who believes in God/a god/whatever. He follows its principles.
      A religious freak is someone who says "I believe this, so follow it, too, or burn in Hell."

      There are some key ways to tell the difference. For example, no sane religious person would ever seriously use the term "gay agenda." Mr. Thompson has made it very clear that he's anti-gay, and on a number of occasions spoken like gays are out on street corners, handing out pamphlets to try and convert you.

      A religious person finds comfort in his own beliefs. A freak finds comforting in condemning those who don't follow his beliefs.

      Part of the reason we don't see many truly religious people in the news is because they're being tolerant and quiet. That's not newsworthy. Some jackass marching down Main Street to have minority group/religion/whatever put in death camps, however, will be plastered all over.

      So, Thompson is loud, irritable, stubborn, intolerant, and closed minded. Combine this with his often stated "strong faith" and you've got the model religious nut. Believing in God don't make you nuts. But if you are nuts and believe in God, oh, the shit you can try to pull...

    20. Re: I'm hoping... by soft_guy · · Score: 1

      What are you talking about? He pressed a button. There's nothing violent about pressing a button. What if the button launches a missile that actually kills people? How is the act of pushing a button different from the act of pulling a trigger?
      --
      Avoid Missing Ball for High Score
    21. Re:i'm hoping... by NormalVisual · · Score: 4, Interesting

      He won't get disbarred unfortunately

      The difference is that he's before the FL Supreme Court now, the same people that just two months ago fired a renegade district judge for egregious behavior when no one else would. They don't seem to tolerate such misbehavior very much, especially when presented with a record like Thompson's. Here's hoping he's forced to find an alternate career. :-D

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    22. Re:i'm hoping... by oSand · · Score: 2, Funny

      No, 'disbarment'. When they remove the rod that is up your ass.

    23. Re:i'm hoping... by Torodung · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Mr. "5, Informative" said:
      >If I may quote his Wikipedia article

      You may... but if you're really going to tell us what Jack Thompson thinks, you should quote *Jack Thompson*, who said:

      >"wedding of all three functions of government into the Florida Bar, the 'official arm' of the
      >Florida Supreme Court, is violative of the bedrock constitutional requirement of the separation
      >powers and the 'checks and balances' which the separation guarantees."

      from the *same article*.

      To paraphrase: A branch of the government, especially a non-elected one, should *never* regulate ITSELF. That actually makes a good deal of sense, don't you think?

      I dislike Jack Thompson for his smearing, his wild accusations, and his consistent histrionic bullshit, which can be quoted voluminously (so why quote a paraphrase?), but he is still a lawyer, and he is a *competent* lawyer who understands exactly what's gone wrong with the law.

      His tragedy is that he uses that information to get his way, instead of as a point of reform. That's not unique amongst lawyers, because the system does not reward ethical behavior, it rewards whatever sticks to the wall. He knows what's wrong with this country's legal system, and I would welcome his disbarment because it might turn his crusade in the right direction: against that corrupted system.

      He isn't a nutjob. People IGNORE nutjobs. He's EFFECTIVE and that bothers us because it shows us how easily the legal system can be manipulated to punish unsubstantiated wrongs.

      --
      Toro

    24. Re:i'm hoping... by Alsee · · Score: 3, Funny

      it appears that his statements may well be the result of something other than his ideology.

      I guess it's possible he has a brain tumor, but I think his Invisible Friend is a far more likely explanation.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    25. Re: I'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can launch real missiles in GTA now?

      Kewl. I want that button.

    26. Re:i'm hoping... by graznar · · Score: 1

      despite being a Christian, which is hardly the minority

      I'd really like to know America you're living in. There are "Christians" (like Mr. Thompson) floating around (e.g., I think about 50-60% of Americans claim to be Christian), but Christians, i.e., Jesus-following, God-loving, Bible reading Christians, have dropped to about 30% (or lower...that was in 2001).

      I would, though, like to find this America you speak of.

      --
      [ check out my ruby book @ http://ww
    27. Re:i'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dismemberment? Oh, that's nothing considering that all the fatalities I can perform on him.

    28. Re:i'm hoping... by pupstah · · Score: 1

      Outside of /. no one really cares about Jack Thompson. Its like entertainment news and white trash.

      --

      -- pupkick

    29. Re: I'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ". There's nothing violent about pressing a button."
      NUCLEAR LAUNCH DETECTED!

    30. Re:i'm hoping... by bytecolor · · Score: 1

      Whatever happens, he will always have a job waiting for him as a well revered Fox News legal analyst.

      --
      bytecolor
    31. Re:i'm hoping... by kennygraham · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because only the ones you agree with and like are "real" christians. Oh the joys of "no true scotsman".

    32. Re:i'm hoping... by BakaHoushi · · Score: 2, Insightful

      When I say "Christians" I mean people who self-identify themselves as such. Believe me, if I could define people by their actions and not their stated beliefs, there would be many fewer Christians in America. (So, as an example, "Christian" groups who go on and on and on about the "sinful" nature of, say, gays (since I already brought them up). Let's pretend, for a second, that being gay, for some unknown reason, is a sin. What happened to "Judge not lest ye be judged?" By their own faith, they're supposed to leave the judging up to God.

      So, yes. True Christians, in my experience, are rare. People who still call themselves as such, however, are not.

    33. Re:i'm hoping... by roguebfl · · Score: 1

      Assuming Hilary is poltically niave enough to take him on as such.

      can you see jack playing second fiddle?

      --
      --Rogue, who's existance has yet to be disproved
    34. Re:i'm hoping... by caitsith01 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Mr "+5 Insightful" said:

      To paraphrase: A branch of the government, especially a non-elected one, should *never* regulate ITSELF. That actually makes a good deal of sense, don't you think? ...as opposed to the way that Congress sets its own ethical rules, and the President signs a little memorandum explaining what his version of the laws he signs off on is and purports to exercise direct legislative power under the guise of the 'war' on terror?

      At some point each arm of government has a degree of autonomy. Separation of powers means that each arm may not usurp the others, NOT that each arm may not regulate its own activities insofar as they are within the scope of its power.

      Oh, and "especially a non-elected one" - you mean one that actually has an incentive to set up favourable rules and regulations to ensure re-election..?
      --
      Read Pynchon.
    35. Re:i'm hoping... by flyingsquid · · Score: 1

      Also, he is facing some very serious charges. I hear one of the charges he's facing is that he used an aimbot.

    36. Re:i'm hoping... by abb3w · · Score: 1

      He isn't a nutjob. People IGNORE nutjobs. He's EFFECTIVE and that bothers us because it shows us how easily the legal system can be manipulated to punish unsubstantiated wrongs.

      If he was manipulating the legal system soley to make it look like the [CENSORED] [CENSORED] [CENSORED] [CENSORED] [CENSORED] [CENSORED] [CENSORED] [CENSORED] mess that it is, that would be one thing. He bothers us because he's manipulating it to push his own execrable political agenda.

      --
      //Information does not want to be free; it wants to breed.
    37. Re:i'm hoping... by jamstar7 · · Score: 1

      I dislike Jack Thompson for his smearing, his wild accusations, and his consistent histrionic bullshit, which can be quoted voluminously (so why quote a paraphrase?), but he is still a lawyer, and he is a *competent* lawyer who understands exactly what's gone wrong with the law.

      They gave him a license and let him 'practice' it?

      --
      Understanding the scope of the problem is the first step on the path to true panic.
    38. Re:i'm hoping... by superpulpsicle · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You can slaughter a million people in GTA and still go to heaven. The religious nonsense has got to stop. If Jack Thompson really cares about violence he should be harrassing the president instead, not some kid with a playstation controller.

    39. Re:i'm hoping... by tsm_sf · · Score: 2, Funny

      I've never understood the 'scotsman' analogy argument. There's a rule book set down for being a Christian, and it's pretty easy to see who plays by it and who doesn't. In fact, there's really just a take on the golden rule: "Love your neighbors as you love yourself". It's a pretty simple metric.

      --
      Literalism isn't a form of humor, it's you being irritating.
    40. Re:i'm hoping... by csplinter · · Score: 1

      Personally, I'm hoping for chemical castration... and by chemical castration I mean dipping his nuts in to a vat of some sort of highly corrosive acid.

    41. Re:i'm hoping... by mgabrys_sf · · Score: 1, Funny

      Naw. GTA mini-game. A roomfull of cloned Thompsons in a rogue genetic's lab. The twist - there's a door and entrance ramp large enough for a car to drive through and into.

      Wet sloppy gibby meat fountains ensue with 5.1 Dolby Digital sound of bone crushing sound effects. Instant 100 million seller. Rockstar finally shores up Take 2's horrible financials, Thompon bumps into a pitcher of water in Flordia and dies screaming "I'm melting - what a world what a world". Then I wake up. Damn. Someone do this already.

    42. Re:i'm hoping... by jZnat · · Score: 1

      Uh, pretty much every gamer out there that knows about Thompson hates him. Trust me, Slashdot doesn't represent a large portion of the gamer population, but we tend to reflect it.

      --
      'Yes, firefox is indeed greater than women. Can women block pops up for you? No. Can Firefox show you naked women? Yes.'
    43. Re:i'm hoping... by Kierthos · · Score: 1

      You know, if Thompson's grasp on reality is really getting pretty shaky, wouldn't it be worth it to make up some "Convert to homosexuality" brochures and 'accidentally' hand him one, just to see the reaction?

      --
      Mr. Hu is not a ninja.
    44. Re:i'm hoping... by sgilti · · Score: 1

      Damn, that's violent! I bet you play video games.

    45. Re:i'm hoping... by StoatBringer · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, it seems hard to find two Christians who could agree on what those rules actually are. The rulebook itself is not exactly clear on a number of issues.

      Oh, and the "golden rule" predates Christianity by a long, long time.

      --
      Cress, cress, lovely lovely cress
    46. Re:i'm hoping... by chaosite · · Score: 1

      ... Several unneeded (by him, anyway) appendages, then.

    47. Re: I'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you are referring to the Iraq invasion and if your figures are right "40,000 civilian deaths", the Iraqis are MUCH better off now than they were under Saddam. He was killing on average somewhere around 35,000 a year on average over his "rule" of that country. No matter how you slice it, he killed over 40,000 Iraqi civilians over any three year period of his rule you select.

    48. Re:i'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Christian, I'm not supposed to hate but dammit, Thompson os a wolf in sheep's clothing, no different from Pat Robertson (who I consider to be one of the most evil men on the planet). It's damned hard to forgive that sad excuse for a human being.

      There's one obscure reference to homosexuality in Leviticus. Nowhere does it say drinking is a sin. But the neocon "Christians" forget completely about that commandment not to covet other's property (that's the purpose of business, after all) and the numerous places it says straight out that usary (charging interest on a debt) will put you right in the flames, even the New Testament speaks out against usary! Do you work for Capital One? You're going to spend eternity with Robertson and Thompson.

      They also are against helping the poor and are unforgiving. If you want to judge Christianity, don't look at Christians. We Christians are all sinners. Don't look at the Old Testament; that's the Jewish Bible (the old covenant was superceded by the new covenant when Christ was executed for your and my evil deeds).

      If you want to judge Christianity, read the book of Matthew. Don't listen to asshats like Robertson or Thompson; they pervert the Bible's message.

      I always find it hilarious when somebody in a four thousand dollar suit who decrys homosexuality is caught in an adulterous relationship. When it comes to sin, adultery is one of the "big ten." Worshiping money is there, also.

      Love the sinner, hat the sin. Thompson and his ilk make it damned hard to be a good Christian.

    49. Re:i'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a common (originally intentional?) misquote from the original text- the proper version goes something like "Judge not poorly, lest ye be judged..."

      That makes a whole lot more sense to this AC. At some point somebody co-opted the quote to have something snappy and 'Christian-y' to say to people who dare to have a negative opinion of a person.

    50. Re: I'm hoping... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Joke <---
      .
      .
      You <---

    51. Re:i'm hoping... by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 1

      In fact, there's really just a take on the golden rule: "Love your neighbors as you love yourself"

      I prefer the Platinum Rule: Do unto others as they do unto you. (I.e., treat people according to their own standards.) Jack needs to be persecuted into bankruptcy.

    52. Re:i'm hoping... by admdrew · · Score: 1

      So, I'm not quite sure what you're trying to get across here. Do you feel that 30% of Americans must constitute a minority? Or, are you claiming that a non-devout Christian is not Christian?

      First, the whole 'minority' thing, in terms of traditional racial majority/minority. According to the 2000 census (PDF):

      Percentage of US population:
      White - 75%
      Hispanic or Latino - 12.5%
      Black or African American - 12.3%

      Now, a look at religious statistics. According to 1998 data (PDF) (couldn't find anything newer, and the Census Bureau doesn't typically collect religious data):

      Percentage of US population:
      Protestant - 59%
      Catholic - 27%
      None - 7%
      Other - 5%
      Jewish - 2%

      If you're still hard set on only 30% of Americans being 'real Christians,' I'll point out that Wikipedia notes that "[a] sociological minority is not necessarily a numerical minority -- it may include any group that is disadvantaged with respect to a dominant group in terms of social status, education, employment, wealth and political power." In my opinion, I don't believe that describes the group of people you allude to.

      Second, I'd get deeper into your insinuation that the not practicing one's religion to a full extent would invalidate their belief, but it appears that other posters have already responded regarding that. When it comes to defining a 'real Christian,' StoatBringer makes a good point:

      it seems hard to find two Christians who could agree on what those rules actually are. The rulebook itself is not exactly clear on a number of issues."
    53. Re:i'm hoping... by Torodung · · Score: 1

      Mr "+5 Insightful" said:

      >>To paraphrase: A branch of the government, especially a non-elected one, should *never* regulate
      >>ITSELF. That actually makes a good deal of sense, don't you think?

      caitsith01 said:

      >...as opposed to the way that Congress sets its own ethical rules, and the President signs a
      >little memorandum explaining what his version of the laws he signs off on is and purports to
      >exercise direct legislative power under the guise of the 'war' on terror?

      No. Not as opposed to those examples. Those are both excellent examples of the same thing. The biggest problem with any lawmaking body is that they tend to make laws that favor themselves. Human nature. Who watches the watchers? In the executive, it's the same problem with cops. Who enforces the law when the people who control that enforcement mechanism break it?

      I believe you may have misunderstood the difference between a governmental body governing how it will operate, and a governmental body having *regulatory authority* over itself. The former is just common sense, the latter is a disaster in the making.

      The second example, that of President Bush, is less a case of "checks and balances" and more a case of usurping legislative authority, which, as far as I'm concerned, is an *impeachable offense*, rather than an administrative problem.

      Just so we can get our politics straight. ;^)

      >At some point each arm of government has a degree of autonomy. Separation of powers means that
      >each arm may not usurp the others, NOT that each arm may not regulate its own activities insofar
      >as they are within the scope of its power.

      Right again. The former is *expressly* forbidden. The latter is a problem dealt with by the tradition of "checks and balances," which is really what I was referring to in the first place. Thompson mentions *both*, BTW.

      >Oh, and "especially a non-elected one" - you mean one that actually has an incentive to set up
      >favourable rules and regulations to ensure re-election..?

      No. I don't mean there's any problem with an appointed branch of government, nor that the Judiciary should be elected. Here in Illinois, all judges are subjected to a totally broken judicial retention vote on the general ballot (so many ignorant people vote "YES" that even a man who was universally panned by 10 separate judicial review societies was *retained*). It's a disaster.

      Don't mistake me for Tom DeLay on this matter. I think he's an ass.

      I just think that a special problem of any appointed body is that it needs an independent oversight committee or things tend to get out of hand. This usually starts as an elite oversight committee, as in the case of the initial Parliament overseeing the King of England, and comprised of tax-paying propertied Lords.

      In this case, the oversight committee is a State Bar Association, consisting of highly educated, and thus almost invariably propertied, lawyers. Jack Thompson pointed out that the Florida system is, in fact, quite inbred, that the Florida Supreme Court had too strong an influence in the body that regulated it, and the court paid him $20,000 to keep that secret to himself and not continue his suit.

      That is a textbook definition of corruption, and a *problem*.

      I think the solution is independent, *representative* judicial review boards (because, as with the Illinois example, public polling *fails* due to voter incompetence). Such a system should be very difficult to engage. Only for the most egregious cases of corruption and/or incompetence.

      I welcome any better suggestion, because that too is far from a perfect solution.

      --
      Toro

    54. Re:i'm hoping... by nomadic · · Score: 1

      To paraphrase: A branch of the government, especially a non-elected one, should *never* regulate ITSELF. That actually makes a good deal of sense, don't you think?

      The Florida judiciary is for the most part elected. Judges, even Florida Supreme Court justices, can be voted out of office.

      And none of the branches of government in Florida regulate themselves without oversight. The Florida Supreme Court is granted sole authority to regulate the practice of law, and the legislature and electorate could take that authority away if they wanted.

      and he is a *competent* lawyer who understands exactly what's gone wrong with the law.

      Membership in a bar as a requirement to practice has been around for CENTURIES. You make it sound like at some point it was different.

      He's EFFECTIVE

      How? As far as I can tell his case history reveals a lot of failures. Most of the stuff he gets in trouble for is him stupidly venting, rather than him promoting his case, which reveals a certain ineptitude.

    55. Re: I'm hoping... by Sj0 · · Score: 1

      Playing moral calculus with lives is the sort of monstrosity which allowed Saddam to rule in the first place. Continuing to do so only proves that we're not that much better.

      --
      It's been a long time.
  2. uh by waspleg · · Score: 0, Redundant

    *kid from simpsons voice* HA HA

    and i can't wait to kill people with a high powered rifle when i get home from work, i wonder if i can get jack thompson skinned hostages for counterstrike.

    waspleg

    1. Re:uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nelson!

    2. Re:uh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      > i wonder if i can get jack thompson skinned

      A poster earlier in this article wanted him dismembered, and now you want him skinned ? Sheesh, you gamers.....

      (Appropriately, my captcha for this posting was "murder" :)

  3. Department by agent+dero · · Score: 4, Funny

    "disbarment-we-can-only-hope"

    Come on, let's try not to show such a bias here on slashd...oh, wha? That Jack Thompson?

    I wonder if tarring and featherings are allowed in the florida legal system... Seriously though, isn't this a textbook case of "people getting what they deserve?"

    --
    Error 407 - No creative sig found
    1. Re:Department by Maestro4k · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Seriously though, isn't this a textbook case of "people getting what they deserve?"

      Definitely, but given his history he'll probably sue the Florida Bar (again).

    2. Re:Department by BakaHoushi · · Score: 5, Insightful

      --What the FUCK?

      So, let me get this straight. He sues the Florida Bar Association because he basically says its an evil communist terrorist organization planning to turn everyone gay, and that it's blatantly disregarding the Constitution (Please note: I exaggerate his wording, but either way, it's full of shit) and destroying America.

      So he settles for $20,000 out of court. "You're destroying America! Stop it now!" "How about we just give you some money?" "That's fine, too!"

      Damn, this guy is the ultimate sleezeball. If you ask me. Jack Thompson is a shining example of everything wrong with America these days (bigoted, sue-happy, uninformed but with LOUD AND STRONG OPINIONS).

    3. Re:Department by bigbigbison · · Score: 1

      If I recall, he already is. I think Gamepolitics said he is.

      --
      http://www.popularculturegaming.com -- my blog about the culture of videogame players
    4. Re:Department by ettlz · · Score: 1

      I wonder if tarring and featherings are allowed in the florida legal system...

      As I understand it, your U.S. consitution forbids the use of "cruel and unusual" punishments (emphasis mine). I believe tarring and feathering to be either cruel or unusual, but probably not both.

      IANAL.

    5. Re:Department by Rodness · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Personally, I think his sentence should include cross dressing in a hooker's outfit, getting picked up by someone in a sports car, getting fucked, dumped, gunned down, and then run over.

      That'd be fantastic.

    6. Re:Department by Saxophonist · · Score: 1

      Definitely, but given his history he'll probably sue the Florida Bar (again).

      Gee, I wonder where they're going to get a good enough lawyer to defend against that lawsuit.

    7. Re:Department by nuzak · · Score: 0

      > So, let me get this straight. He sues the Florida Bar Association because he basically says its an evil communist terrorist organization

      Of which he is a member. Isn't the irony jus' hee-larious?

      --
      Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
    8. Re:Department by oSand · · Score: 2, Funny

      "If you ask me. Jack Thompson is a shining example of everything wrong with America these days (bigoted, sue-happy, uninformed but with LOUD AND STRONG OPINIONS)." These days? Just how long have you been alive?

    9. Re:Department by aj50 · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, that would go some way towards proving his point about violence in video games causing voilence in real life.

      --
      I wish to remain anomalous
    10. Re:Department by Don_dumb · · Score: 1

      On the other hand, that would go some way towards proving his point about violence in video games causing voilence in real life. NO, as people KEEP having to point out, it proves that video games (art) imitates life.

      When will society learn, that correlation (or similarity) does not equal causality.
      Were drive-bys and joyriding around before or after gangster rap and GTA?
      --
      If this were really happening, what would you think?
  4. Wrong State by Nastard · · Score: 1

    Too bad it's not happening in Texas.

  5. Thompsons wild accusations finally his downfall? by T0wner · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "You're the guy who wants to give (Grand Theft Auto publisher) Take-Two my scalp. You chose to believe people that you knew were thieves and liars, and now you are their useful SLAPP Bar complainant... These are your corporate criminal buddies, Judge Moore. These are the folks with whom you made your bed, the folks whom your good friend said he could fix the case." JT and evidence never have gone hand in hand.

  6. Finally justice. by Trendy.Ideology · · Score: 4, Interesting

    At least actions like these will (hopefully) help to dissuade people from just blindly attacking and blaming videogames for everything that goes wrong in thier lives... Holding this person accountable for his gross misconduct is the first step towards really making progress against all these anti-videogame warmongering dimwits. It's about time someone put thier foot down and said "No." to all these figureheads shooting thier mouth off without knowing what the hell they're talking about.

    --
    In the end, the only thing that matters is how much fun you had.
    1. Re:Finally justice. by BakaHoushi · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If you believe that this will help end people blaming other things on their problems, I've got this great Bridge in Brooklyn I'm itching to sell cheap.

      But seriously, before video games, it was rap music (in fact, it still sorta is), D&D, comic books, rock and roll, movies... And if you want to go back far enough in history, violence was caused by witches and Jews.

      Color me cynical, but as much as I'd love to stop seeing parents blame todays massive surge in teen violence (which, if I may be so bold, would like to point out DOESN'T EXIST. Despite school shootings being all over the news, these are still isolated incidents and overall, youth violence is way, WAY down) on video games, I know it'll only be temporary. Something will ALWAYS be society's scapegoat. In recent years, it's felt like America is easily the worst when it comes to this random blame-game (if simply because I have friends in Europe who point out lawyers don't carry the same negative stigma over the pond, where many of these lawsuits would be laughed out of court), but it's still all over the world. In 2010, gay marriage will be causing all of society's ills. In 2015, it'll be gay divorce. In 2600, it will be people who haven't converted from Christianity to Oprahism, and in 4576, it will be those of us that refuse to welcome our new cockroach overlords.

      Wherever people go, the scapegoat will always be right behind. ...All the same, even though in the long run, it will change little, I can't wait to see this jerkoff finally get what he has coming to him.

    2. Re:Finally justice. by MWoody · · Score: 5, Insightful

      As much as I'd like to believe that's true, that's not really what this mess is about. And it's important that all involved understand that, because if Thompson was guilty of nothing more than a wildly unpopular - among a certain group, anyway - and conservative worldview, then we'd have no hope of him being disbarred.

      No, what this is about is Jack Thompson, a crazy man practicing law. What exact view he presents, and whom he attempts to target with his wild accusations and lawsuits, is not the case here. He's a flat-out frothing-at-the-mouth smearing-shit-on-the-walls lunatic that is nevertheless certified to practice law in Florida solely because the last time they tried this he threatened them with a civil suit.

      It's important that the gaming community at large not gloat too much should this go the way I so sincerely hope it does - i.e, that Thompson is removed to a position in society where he can do minimal harm. If we start waving the flags and claiming victory over those who ignore the research and continue to claim that video game violence produces killers, then we risk making a nutjob a martyr, and watching three more spring up in his place. The sensible long-term response is, "regardless of my views on gaming and media censorship, it's good for ALL Americans that this man is out of the discussion, and we can continue to argue for our rights with those opponents who approach the issue with dignity, respect, and above all, sanity."

      That's not to say this news doesn't make me happy in my pants. Oh, it does. It VERY MUCH does.

    3. Re:Finally justice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As much as I'd like to believe that's true, that's not really what this mess is about. And it's important that all involved understand that, because if Thompson was guilty of nothing more than a wildly unpopular - among a certain group, anyway - and conservative worldview, then we'd have no hope of him being disbarred.

      Being conservative does not equate to being stupid, despite what the popular of us is. jack Thompson is to the Conservative view point what Ted Kennedy is to Siber Driving and Swimming.

      He (Jack Thompson) is a certified nut-case who is better described as a Liberal; i.e. he thinks he is the smartest person in the room, knows whats best for society, and has made it his personal crusade to make the world safe for everybody by changing social laws (read: communism); whether they want it or not. I hope he gets the fate he deserves: disbarment

    4. Re:Finally justice. by Dragonslicer · · Score: 1

      I would much rather have such a decision dissuade people (and their lawyers) from filing frivolous lawsuits of any kind.

    5. Re:Finally justice. by Fordiman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      But... but... can't we PRETEND that he's the example of the everyday neo-conservative uberchristian freak?? I mean, much of the US does that for mid-east terrorists, pretending they're examples of muslims. Why can't I assume Jack Thopson is the official spokesmoron of the religious right?

      --
      110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
    6. Re:Finally justice. by Fordiman · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "Being conservative does not equate to being stupid"

      No, but toeing the party line would.

      Just so's you know.

      "(Jack Thompson) ... is better described as a Liberal; i.e. ... knows whats best for society, and has made it his personal crusade to make the world safe for everybody by changing social laws."

      Hm. You mean like trying to overturn Roe v. Wade? Or perhaps outlawing gay marraige. Yeah. Those damned liberals. Always thinkin' they know what's best.

      Seriously. The second I hear 'liberals are like this' or 'conservatives are like that' I know the speaker has immediately gone into an irrational defensive mode.

      Jack Thompson is a conservative; he's almost a reactionary. He's trying to use the legal system to 'protect' the citizens from a new form of content, which is a very conservative thing.

      The fact that he's a nutjob has nothing to do with that. There are conservative nutjobs and there are liberal nutjobs. Please, accept your own nutjobs. No one else will.

      --
      110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
    7. Re:Finally justice. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nerd boner!!

    8. Re:Finally justice. by Cheeko · · Score: 1
      There was a great little bit of commentary in the Economist a few weeks ago pertaining to how video games are just like any new form of media in history. There is a subset of the population that declares it evil because the young adopt it agressively (young being under 35-40). Eventually the populace ages and it becomes accepted and common place.

      Examples they quoted were novels and the waltz during the 19th century. Motion pictures, jazz, rock and roll, the radio, TV, etc, each saw their own resistance due to their "evil demoralizing impact on society"

      There is a link to the article on the Economist's web site, but its premium content, you'll need to pay to see it, but I'll throw the link up for anyone who subscribes or wants to track it down at a library or something.
      The Article at the Economist

    9. Re:Finally justice. by Trendy.Ideology · · Score: 1

      I've seen exactly what you're talking about in so many places in my life. I wonder now, with video games, and computers, and the internet already having been attacked by these types of people, when they're accepted at large, what new type of media will replace them, to be attacked and blamed for all society's ills.

      Thanks for sharing a link to the article, but I couldn't read it without purchasing a subscription.

      --
      In the end, the only thing that matters is how much fun you had.
  7. If Only... by gunny01 · · Score: 1

    Hopeful he'll start a walk towards Washington with a mission to ban all forms of electrical entertainment. Y'know, with the support RV and everything. I need a good laugh.

    --
    kill all the fucking niggers
  8. no, it's a good thing by artifex2004 · · Score: 5, Funny

    Too bad it's not happening in Texas.
    If we got him down here, the electorate would, without a doubt, try to put him into public office.
    1. Re:no, it's a good thing by Derosian · · Score: 1

      Kinky Friedman would never stand for it. =)

    2. Re:no, it's a good thing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Texas is north of Florida. So it would be "up here". Especially as Jacko is from South Florida.

      Posting from Florida... (Orlando)

  9. Meh... by kitsunewarlock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This just proves that Thompson is just an over-hyped nut-job idiot. The fact only 2/5 of these charges have anything to do with video games continues to discredit him in my eyes not only as a lawyer but as a nut who claims that "videogames are evil." Don't get me wrong, I think video-games are awesome, but cameo'ing him in webcomics and screaming his name at people who claim games are evil is like saying all hippies are like Manson, right? This guy's name isn't even worth mentioning in such cases...I feel bad that he has a slashdot article this late in the game even dedicated to him...I don't think its worth it...

    Its like saying "lunatic charged of murder cases thinks he should be able to kill people!" Who cares...in both cases its some stupid crazy loon getting what he deserves...

    --
    Ginga no Rekshiya Mata Each page.
    1. Re:Meh... by Trendy.Ideology · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I don't think there's ever a time where it's not good to spread information.

      "I feel bad that he has a slashdot article this late in the game even dedicated to him...I don't think its worth it..."

      I rarely turn on the news, or read the paper. Slashdot is one of two "news" sites I read, the second being primarily video game based site. So if not for new sites like Slashdot, and other specialty news outlets, I very well may not have known about this extremely relevant piece of information.

      Over the last several years it's been a tad bit demoralizing to see logic and reason go out the window in the USA, in favor of a policy of scapegoating. Killed your brother? Blame violent music. Robbed a store? Blame GTA. 8 year old that swears like a sailor? Blame TV and the media at large.

      You're a bad parent? Don't worry, we can fix that. Here, blame these guys. Everyone's doing it, it's all the rage.

      If you're fat, it's McDonald's fault. If you can't read warning labels or use common sense, whoever made what hurt you, is to blame. Clearly they should have warned you that you were retarded before selling you a product that's designed to do damage, like a knife, or a product that's been served pipping hot for as long as anyone's been alive, like coffee. Clearly you needed to be told not to spill hot coffee on your lap.

      So taking a good look back over the last several years, and all the madness... It's refreshing to see a stand being taken against these trends. If left unchecked, people like this, and attitudes like these, will lead to the widespread disappearance of personal responsibility.

      --
      In the end, the only thing that matters is how much fun you had.
    2. Re:Meh... by grumbel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      ### If left unchecked, people like this, and attitudes like these, will lead to the widespread disappearance of personal responsibility.

      Jack Thompson might be a nutjob, that however doesn't mean that violence in video games and other media isn't a problem. You know, personal responsibility is a door that swings both ways, just because people should take care about themself or parents about their children doesn't mean that McDonalds, the cigarette industry or video game developers should get away with selling whatever they feel makes them the most money while totally ignoring the consequences. They have responsibilities as well.

      I am not saying that video games should be banned, but its sad that there is so very little room left for meaningful discussion of such topics. You either get the 'every should be banned' nutjobs or the people who want everything totally free and unregulated, no matter the consequences, while in the end the best would probably be something in between those two extremes.

    3. Re:Meh... by aussie_a · · Score: 1

      Well I had sex with your wife last night. I'm guessing telling you after you had just found out your father died would be a bad time to spread that information ;)

    4. Re:Meh... by aussie_a · · Score: 4, Interesting

      or the people who want everything totally free and unregulated, no matter the consequences, I have not seen anyone on this article put forth this opinion. The "problem" is, no-one has proven there are any consequences so people wanting everything totally free and unregulated no matter the consequences look exactly the same as those who want everything free barring no bad consequences.
    5. Re:Meh... by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 1

      Slashdot is one of two "news" sites I read, the second being primarily video game based site.

      That's actually rather frightening. There aren't more like you out there, I hope.

    6. Re:Meh... by BakaHoushi · · Score: 1

      To be fair, where else can you get "news?" CNN? MSNBC? FOX?! I think I'd prefer people just get NO news, live in a bubble, and have no opinions at all, than get their news from those places.

      Me, I don't get my news from any one place in particular. I do find a lot of links to stories from the AP and the BBC a lot, though.

    7. Re:Meh... by Trendy.Ideology · · Score: 1, Offtopic

      Slashdot is one of two "news" sites I read, the second being primarily video game based site.

      That's actually rather frightening. There aren't more like you out there, I hope.
      I certainly fucking hope there's no more of me running around.

      Otherwise my secret is fucked.

      I can't let people know the secrets of spending more time doing things that make me happy, and less time worrying about the world around me.

      The world at large, foreign affairs, and global happenings, have yet to smack me in the back of the head for ignoring them... yet. So, I'll cross my fingers, and pray to probability, that they do so soon, and bring me to my senses, that I should devote more time to reading/watching the news.

      This is what you want, yes?

      Honestly, I don't care for the most part. I'm 21, I work anywhere from 36 to 54 hours a week. I have better things to do with my free time, like, things that are enjoyable, and I have things I care about more than the "news" on any given day. The only reason I'm currently spending even this much time on a news site is that my current job has a fair amount of dead time where I can browse online, while nothing is busy. If the news floats your boat that much, more power to you. Otherwise keep it in your pants chief, cause I aint having any of it.

      It's kinda hard to not have a pretty good idea about what's going on in the world around you unless you literally live in a cave. I get my daily news second-hand from my co-workers, and at my second job, dealing with customers. I'd have to try extra hard to IGNORE the world around me.

      Why you needed to be a douchecock and say that, I can only guess. But if I wanted to be told to watch/read the news more, and how important current events are, I'd go to an old folks home. As it stands, the Daily Show and the Colbert Report, are all the news I want/need.
      --
      In the end, the only thing that matters is how much fun you had.
    8. Re:Meh... by kinzillah · · Score: 4, Informative

      Sorry, but I feel it should be pointed out, that McDonald served that lady's coffee scalding hot. 180-190 degrees, which is enough to give you 3rd degree burns in 7 seconds or less. She was hospitalized for 8 days, and required skin grafts. Had McDonalds served their coffee at the normal serving temperature of around 150 degrees, she would have been in some pain for a day or so, probably needed to go to the hospital to get checked on, but that's about it. Why did McDonalds serve their coffee so hot? So they wouldn't have to brew a new batch so often.

      So yes, it's her fault it spilled. Is it her fault she got 3rd degree burns from it? No.

      --
      Douglas P. Price
    9. Re:Meh... by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful

      People have been enjoying violence for millennia. Cock fighting, boxing, bullfights and the Roman arena are all examples of it. I had not heard that any of this, no matter how distasteful, have lead to the horrors that nutjobs like Thompson seems to think video games do.

      Perhaps instead of blaming violent entertainment, we should be looking at why we so enjoy watching people get the shit beat out of them.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    10. Re:Meh... by Trendy.Ideology · · Score: 1

      Since we have no way to prove such a conjecture, I think it's rather pointless to speculate about what would have happened had it been 150 degrees instead of 180-190.

      I will say this though, that it was only an example, more meant to illustrate the frequency of frivolous lawsuits, rather than call attention to that specific instance.

      --
      In the end, the only thing that matters is how much fun you had.
    11. Re:Meh... by geekoid · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Actually is is critical that the McDOnalds incident in your ecample gets pointed out, because there are not as many 'frivilou' lawsuit as people seem to think.

      After researching this topic for a few year I came to find out that:
      a) Most lawsuits the seem frivilous in the media do so because the facts are not presented.

      b) Many 'classic' examples of frivilous lawsuits never really happen and many were started by insurance companies and other anti-Tort orginizations. Example : Person stands on open oven door and the oven falls on her crushing her legs. The is false and was given out by an insurance lawyer as 'prrof' that people should not be allowed to sue companies.

      c) Sure there are some, but in the whole scope it's not really that bad. It is alos the only real tool we have when fighting against corporations.

      d) Many people 'Threaten to sue' and that will get in the media, but it rarly gets past that point.

      You have fallen into a classic media trap. You only hear about lawsuits and since there is never any followup, you think everyone is suing for everything.

      We dont need to confecture about 150 degree coffee because we can easily tell the difference between 150 and 190 degrees F.

      And finally, people know what conjecture means, there was no reason to be snotty and link it like you are the only human being on Slashdot that know what it means.

      --
      The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
    12. Re:Meh... by cgenman · · Score: 1

      Anyone who says that The SIMS is smut that is destroying our children is simply adding noise to the discussion. It's the same thing as saying that marajuana is as bad as meth. Loud, uninformed shouting that everything is a problem does nothing to recognize or deal with the real issues.

      Jack Thompson's noise being silenced would be a great thing for the debate at large. More mature and reasoned voices can now (hopefully) be heard.

    13. Re:Meh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's still a stupid lawsuit, regardless of how hot the coffee was (which is meant to be served hot!!)

    14. Re:Meh... by pissedoffamerican · · Score: 1

      I hate to veer off topic, but you can't seriously blame McDonald's for its customers getting fat, can you? They know what they're eating is pure shit. Same thing with cigarette companies.

    15. Re:Meh... by UnknowingFool · · Score: 1

      I don't think there's ever a time where it's not good to spread information.

      I think also that honest debate is always a good thing. The debate about the effects of video game violence deserves some serious discussion. Unfortunately it's people like Jack Thompson who reduce the debate to a Crossfire/Jerry Springer type yelling match that really hurts the voice of the side that has genuine concerns.

      My personal view is that those people who have trouble separating reality from fiction shouldn't play video games. Also video games should not be used as baby sitters. Parents should raise their kids and take responsibility. Just like TV and movies and books, every generation wants to blame the newest media: TV is evil. Before that, books are evil (Mark David Chapman claimed that Catcher in the Rye was his inspiration to shoot John Lennon). People who are mentally unbalanced can be triggered by things, but blaming TV, books, video games just lessens the fact that they were unbalanced to begin with. Just my 2 cents.

      --
      Well, there's spam egg sausage and spam, that's not got much spam in it.
    16. Re:Meh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The way I heard it was first the coffee was brewed so hot because McDonalds could buy the cheapest possible coffee and still extract some flavor; this was a conscientious thing they had to have the coffee makers specifically modified to operate at the increased temperatures.
      Secondly the cups for the coffee were systematically made cheaper and cheaper until they got to the point where the cups no longer had enough strength to function as a coffee cup with out a lid. I also understand that all this was suppressed as part of the settlement; so no its questionable that it was even her fault it spilled when she took off the lid.

    17. Re:Meh... by kitsunewarlock · · Score: 1

      I didn't know which to reply to in this discussion, but: Has anyone here *ever* actually *met* any of these "anti-video game" people? Ever been accused of being violent? Ever seen a game taken off the shelves permanently (I may be wrong. This is a legit question)?

      --
      Ginga no Rekshiya Mata Each page.
    18. Re:Meh... by xigxag · · Score: 3, Insightful

      video game developers should get away with selling whatever they feel makes them the most money while totally ignoring the consequences. They have responsibilities as well.

      there is so very little room left for meaningful discussion of such topics.

      Such topics are discussed ENDLESSLY. Ad freaking nauseam. The problem is this: One side has decided, arbitrarily, without any compelling evidence whatsoever, that videogames are harmful to children. The other side says, okay, before you go claiming I have "responsibilities" and abridging my rights to self-expression, show me your evidence that what I'm doing is harmful. And that's where things lie. The first side wants to pretend that the "evidence" step (and that whole little issue of parental responsibility) should be skipped over and we should move directly on to imposing restrictions. So when you say "discussion," if you mean "discussion of how far we should restrict video game manufacturers based upon a mere gut feeling that what they're doing is bad," that's not the discussion that the software industry wants to have.

      However, if forced, they will have the "let's enact a useless self-imposed 'rating' system to keep the think-of-the-children crowd at bay" discussion.

      --
      There are two kinds of people: 1) those who start arrays with one and 1) those who start them with zero.
    19. Re:Meh... by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Jack Thompson might be a nutjob, that however doesn't mean that violence in video games and other media isn't a problem.

      The problem isn't that there's violence in video games. The problem is that violence is far more accepted than sex. I like violent games, but I also like boobs - given the choice, I might pick the violent stuff half the time, but there's really no market for that stuff that I can tell, and I blame the freaky christian right (same one that had an aneurysm over Janet Jackson's pixelated nipple).

      The warped values towards anything sex related in this country is definitely a problem, but the presence of violence in games and media isn't causing much in the way of real world problems, aside from the whole thugged out teenager fad.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    20. Re:Meh... by Trendy.Ideology · · Score: 2, Insightful
      I don't want to search for it right now, but someone basically said something earlier in the thread, that implied that there needs to be some kinda of conscientious effort to better moderate videogames, even if Thompson is wrong.

      And to this I say "ESRB". It's there for a reason.

      More on topic, a response to your post;

      I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. The ESRB exists to guide parents on what little Jimmy should and should not be playing. As one of my two jobs is working at a store where we sell video games, I'm amazed at how many small children (Under 13) have parents that will buy the Grand Theft Auto games for them. Clearly a lot of these parents are not checking to see if little Jimmy understands the difference between fiction and reality.



      Frankly, I'm in the most profane and vulgar ways possible, fucking SICK of people ruining my life experience, in terms of digital media, by being fuck-ups. I extend this to everyone who's blamed video games, movies, music, TV, and any current form of media/entertainment for something stupid they've done, or their kid has done.

      Short and sweet; There's a lot of things in this world we don't want little Jimmy to get his hands on. Drugs, alcohol, porn, firearms, knives, your brand new expensive digital camera, etc.

      How do you keep those things out of little Jimmy's hands? Got an answer? Good. Take that and re-apply it to movies, music, video games, and anything else you'd like to blame for the way your kid turned out. There's warning labels on this stuff for a reason... Really people.

      http://www.bash.org/?628630

      [samsim] I heard about this guy who broke into a lion's den at the zoo
      [samsim] and got mauled
      [samsim] and people were talking about how there should have been better defences put up to prevent people getting into the cage
      [samsim] a friend of mine suggested setting up some kind of deterrent
      [samsim] for example, putting some sort of fierce animal in the cage, which would attack anybody who climbed in
      I think that about sums up my feelings on these types of people. We need more lion dens, and less Thompsons.
      --
      In the end, the only thing that matters is how much fun you had.
    21. Re:Meh... by MMaestro · · Score: 1
      I am not saying that video games should be banned, but its sad that there is so very little room left for meaningful discussion of such topics.

      I agree that there needs to be more meaningful discussion, but does the problem necessarily stem from the side of gamers and game developers? Ever since Doom 1 became the first posterchild for video game violence, the entire industry has been branded more or less as dangerous. When your products are branded as "murder simulators" its hard to convince the public anything else.

      As long as people like Jack Thompson are considered to be the "expert" on video games in the public observation, its hard to get anything done. If Jack Thompson was disbarred then it'd be easier to discuss the topic in public. Until then, all Jack Thompson has to say is "won't someone think of the children?!" and he'll win over million.

    22. Re:Meh... by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 2

      As it stands, the Daily Show and the Colbert Report, are all the news I want/need.

      Very well, then.

      You do make a lot of use of colorful phallic metaphors. Don't worry about it. Just be happy.

    23. Re:Meh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "I am not saying that video games should be banned, but its sad that there is so very little room left for meaningful discussion of such topics. You either get the 'every should be banned' nutjobs or the people who want everything totally free and unregulated, no matter the consequences, while in the end the best would probably be something in between those two extremes."

      That's because the politicians and the grant money are firmly in the "every should be banned" camp.

      Sure, there's other more reasonable research out there, but since it's not scaremongering, the media and the liberal/conservative nanny staters don't give a shit.

    24. Re:Meh... by Trendy.Ideology · · Score: 1

      I pride myself on my colorful phallic metaphors. Though my girlfriend just rolls her eyes at me when she hears it.

      Go figure, eh?

      --
      In the end, the only thing that matters is how much fun you had.
    25. Re:Meh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Coffee is supposed to be fucking hot. If I get a cup of coffee at 150 degrees Fahrenheit (aside:not that we use Fahrenheit over here much anymore), it's just going back. Coffee is supposed to *reach the customer* at 95 to 97 degrees celsius (~ 200 degrees Fahrenheit!).

      So the lawsuit WAS frivolous, and you can barely find a decent cup of coffee in the entirety of the USA. Thanks to some fat american suburbanite scalding her fanny, that situation will probably never change. McDonalds coffee is muck for other reasons, granted, I doubt even if it was adequately hot I'd buy it, but an entire nation suffering lukewarm coffee because a few members of that nation are total and utter morons, well, you're in an even worse mess than here in England...

    26. Re:Meh... by NeutronCowboy · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I like your sig. It sums you up perfectly. And sums up quite nicely why some Americans are embarrassed to be called Americans, and why the rest of the world just shakes their head at them (or worse). I live the Daily News. But if you think the world isn't already smacking you upside the head with what is happening... you're just ignoring it. And no, the people around you are not the world. Quite honestly, I don't care that you don't care. But the instant you come crying to me that the Iraq war is going badly, that globalization took your job away, that China is whipping the US at basketball or that the US is not the global superpower anymore, I'll smack you upside the head myself.

      --
      Those who can, do. Those who can't, sue.
    27. Re:Meh... by NaugaHunter · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I am not saying that video games should be banned, but its sad that there is so very little room left for meaningful discussion of such topics.
      Games have a ratings system, the same that movies do, and more than books do. Anyone can go to a library and read worse than you'll find in a game. Hell, have you read the so-called 'holy' book? Lots of violence there, not too mention the negative attitudes towards women in general.

      The only possible meaningful discussion is by psychologists and psychological researchers, and there in the realm of nurture vs. nature in behavioral studies in general. Unfortunately, it's not an easy subject to study in a laboratory as people frown on raising twins or triplets in controlled environments just to answer this question. There are too many variables in real life to attribute a person's attitude to any one influence, or to conclude that it would be markedly different under a slightly different attitude.

      This whole debate reminds me of the Simpsons episode "Itchy and Scratchy and Marge":

      Meyers: I did a little research and I discovered a startling thing... There was violence in the past, long before cartoons were invented.
      Kent: I see. Fascinating.
      Meyers: Yeah, and know something, Karl? The Crusades, for instance. Tremendous violence, many people killed, the darned thing went on for thirty years.
      Kent: And this was before cartoons were invented?
      Meyers: That's right, Kent.
      If you want to have some crazy logic, why not blame the labor laws? Kids wouldn't have time to play violent video games if they worked all day.

      Don't get me wrong; I don't think a six year old should be playing GTA unsupervised. But every kid is different in what he/she can handle, and it's up to the parents to monitor their children and help them deal with it. It is not up to the government to interfere in what entertainment I can access just because some kid, somewhere, can't handle it. I grew up with Daffy repeatedly getting his beak blown off and I haven't killed anyone yet; though I'm tempted to every time I see it on TV now with that part edited out. Thankfully the DVD isn't edited.
      --
      R: That voice. Where have I heard that voice before? B: In about 365 other episodes. But I don't know who it is either.
    28. Re:Meh... by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### The problem is this: One side has decided, arbitrarily, without any compelling evidence whatsoever, that video games are harmful to children.

      How about good old common sense? Do you let your children watch hardcore porn? Gruesome war documentaries? Horror movies? Now how exactly a child might react to all that depends on the age, his personality, his parents and a bunch of other things, but I think there is no question that it will react to such extreme stuff quite different then to the latest Disney movie. Age regulations aren't there for no reason, but for most part because of good old common sense and not because violent stuff makes you go Columbine.

      The question how all those violence influences people is a worthy one for discussion, but claiming that there is no influence is just plain ridiculous.

    29. Re:Meh... by grumbel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ### It is not up to the government to interfere in what entertainment I can access

      If you are old enough the government has of course no right to interfere with what you can access, but why shouldn't it have some say about what the kid can have easy access to? In Germany selling movies or games to kids below the rated age is forbidden, this however neither limits your access nor does it stop the parents from buying the games for their kids, even if they aren't old enough. The regulation simply puts power where it belongs: into the hands of the parents. I fail to see what is so bad about that.

    30. Re:Meh... by phorm · · Score: 1

      So they wouldn't have to brew a new batch so often

      Also, when your coffee is that hot, it quickly scalds most of your taste buds so you can't really taste the flavour. The caffeine is still there, which is what many want anyhow, but you can't taste the fact that the coffee is rather cheap and unpaletable (as far as coffee goes in general anyhow, I prefer mine with a generous dose of Irish Cream)

    31. Re:Meh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't even think psychologists would be a good place to go for their research into this kind of thing. There are still several of them who are biased and would love to see video and computer games banned forever as well. Keep in mind that Richard Feynmann himself once referred to psychologists as witch doctors...

    32. Re:Meh... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Perhaps instead of blaming violent entertainment, we should be looking at why we so enjoy watching people get the shit beat out of them.

      Well, you can start by learning about Evolutionary Psychology. Also, if really want to work your way back to the beginning of time, check out Paleopsychology. Either way, you'll find your answer...

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    33. Re:Meh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not only that, but McDonald's had a series of these incidents that were quietly settled out of court, which meant that they knew they served their coffee too hot and that people were getting hurt by it, and yet continued to do it anyway.

    34. Re:Meh... by NormalVisual · · Score: 1

      But this isn't a problem with Thompson per se, it's a problem with a large segment of the public accepting what he says without applying any critical thought to it. Certainly Thompson's disbarment should serve as a very public indication that the guy was totally off-base, but that won't change the minds of people that don't know how to apply any kind of analysis to what they're told. For those people that support his point of view, successful action against him will be seen merely as a victory by the evil forces he was ranting against.

      --
      Please stand clear of the doors, por favor mantenganse alejado de las puertas
    35. Re:Meh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't think people killing each other so other people can watch to be a horror?

    36. Re:Meh... by MMaestro · · Score: 1
      it's a problem with a large segment of the public accepting what he says without applying any critical thought to it.

      Is that necessarily a problem with the public or a problem with the lack of "experts" on the topic? Outside of the video gaming world, Jack Thompson is the ONLY person the public simply hears when it comes to video games.

      When was the last time you heard Will Wright, CliffyB or John Carmack talk on CNN/BBC/Fox News about video games? What about Satoru Iwata or Reggie Fils-Aime (besides the recent Wii launch)? How about Bill Gates or James Allard? (No, talking about Windows doesn't count)

      Simply put, the gaming world is portrayed by ONE man alone, Jack Thompson. You can't win a battle by ignoring your opponents if their goal is to kill you by any means necessary.

    37. Re:Meh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're probably trolling, but as Napoleon once stated, one should not assume malice when something could be adequately explained by mere ignorance.
      If you drink something at 95-97 C, it's boiling. Water boils at about that temperature, depending on ambient pressure and purity. Boiling water is what you cook meat with, are you trying to drink something or turn yourself into mush?
      It will burn your tongue, cheeks, and esophagus, to the point where you will need to be hospitalized.
      50 C is already enough to scald someone. Your internal bodily temperature is 37 C, so in order for something to be perceived as lukewarm it has to be below that.
      YMMV of course, but get a thermometer and see for yourself.

    38. Re:Meh... by Alsee · · Score: 1
      How about good old common sense?

      How about not NOT claiming some right to pull out a gun and forcibly imprison people who refuse to comply to your claimed "common sense" when all scientific evidence indicates that that supposed "common sense" is wrong?

      And yes, expecting legislation does ultimately boil down to claiming a right to pull out a gun and forcibly imprison people - to have police pull out a gun on your behalf - to enforce that legislation.

      And yes, the scientific evidence does indicate it is wrong. The crusader's rant and rail that society is decaying and that kids are getting more violent and they blame it on videogames or whatever else, and it's pure delusion. It's the standard fantasy of the "good old days", the fictional "Leave it to Beaver" good old days when things were better.

      This nonsense is best summed up with this fun old quote:

      Our earth is degenerate in these latter days; bribery and corruption are common; children no longer obey their parents; and the end of the world is evidently approaching. -- Assyrian clay tablet 2800 B.C

      Yeah.... kids respected their parents and were better behaved back when *I* was a kid. This Rock&Roll/HeavyMetal/VideoGame stuff is corrupting our children and making them misbehave and destroying their morals and making them commit crimes.

      They can cite "common sense" and "common knowledge" all they like, the FACT is that youth violence has been DECREASING for the last few decades. Youth violence has been decreasing since videogames appeared. It is well documented in federal crime statistics. Youth violence is way down in the last two or three decades. Way down. And for all of the crusader's claimed "common sense" and efforts to back up their claims, every study attempting to show violent videogames causing violent behavior have shown that no such effect exists. Elvis Presley didn't harm kids and videogames are not harming kids, and anyone trying to claim "common sense" otherwise is doing so exactly because there is not a single shred of evidence to back up their silly claims.

      claiming that there is no influence is just plain ridiculous.

      Recently Slashdot ran a story on this experiment which in fact turned out with gamers being MORE sensitive and MORE disturbed and MORE reluctant with non-game harm/violence against a virtual person.

      Maybe there *is* an influence. Youth violence is way down according to federal statistics, and it seems gamers may have higher aversion to non-game violence. Chuckle.

      And god-forbid a kid see something like a "Gruesome war documentary". They might develop an accurate grasp of war, and with an understanding that sometimes bad and ugly things happen to people. Yes, you're right... you do have a right to pull out a gun and forcibly imprison people to eliminate any risk that that might happen, that it is appropriate for you impose censorship legislation against "harmful information" and assign the right to the police to pull out a gun and forcibly imprison people to enforce that legislation.
      imprison people to enforce that legislation.

      Ohh... but you only want a law to help the parents. Well how about the exact same law criminalizing people who try to give Koran/Bible/Scientology/whatever religious materials to my kid? Between Rock&Roll, HeavyMetal, Gruesome war documentaries, violent videogames, and attempts to convert my kid to some other religion or indoctrinate him into some cult, I damn well say the strongest case for protecting the kids and giving the parents the right to decide and helping the parents control what their kids can and cannot be given by strangers, that the strongest case goes to religious materials. If parents should get some government-intervention criminalizing people to help parents controling their kids access to some videogame, they damn well no less deserve equal protection an

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    39. Re:Meh... by FLEB · · Score: 1

      This may be true, and common sense will get you to the point of "This should be studied." It may even help the question of "if" there should be regulation. However, it isn't enough to answer the finer points of "what", "why", and "how" regarding either the problem or the best solution. Without further scientific examination, the problem will only be solved crudely and ignorantly, groping in the dark on the word of hunches and assumptions.

      --
      Information wants to be free.
      Entertainment wants to be paid.
      You just want to be cheap.
    40. Re:Meh... by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### How about not NOT claiming some right to pull out a gun and forcibly imprison people who refuse to comply to your claimed "common sense" when all scientific evidence indicates that that supposed "common sense" is wrong?

      Which scientific study claims that extreme violence has no influence on younger people? I don't know any. Set a bunch random five year old in front of Doom3 and you might pretty quickly be able to proof that there indeed is some influence. I am not claiming that that video game violence leads to real one, just that there is influence and probably not a good one.

      ### Recently Slashdot ran a story on this experiment which in fact turned out with gamers being MORE sensitive and MORE disturbed and MORE reluctant with non-game harm/violence against a virtual person.

      Now I haven't read the whole study, but from the conclusion I can see nothing that the study has anything to do with gamer vs non-gamer, instead it simply claims that people react similarly when torturing a virtual character as when torturing a real one. That would pretty much proof exactly what I am saying, video games do have influence and just because its virtual doesn't mean it doesn't have an impact on you. This really isn't a surprise, I mean if the brain had a magic switch that would automatically get flipped and filter out any influence when we know something is not real then the whole movie industry would have gone bankrupt long ago. People scream, cry or get scared by movies all the time, even so they know perfectly well that everything is fake.

      ### And god-forbid a kid see something like a "Gruesome war documentary". They might develop an accurate grasp of war,

      At the right age, yes. If they are too young they will understand nothing of the documentary and just have nightmares for the coming weeks.

      ### Yes, you're right... you do have a right to pull out a gun and forcibly imprison people to eliminate any risk that that might happen, that it is appropriate for you impose censorship legislation against "harmful information"

      Limiting the access of younger people to harmful material has little to do with censorship, if the parents are ok with it, they can simply give their child access to it, the whole point is to make it harder for the child to get access to it themself.

      ### they damn well no less deserve equal protection and equal law criminalizing anyone giving the kid religious conversion materials.

      Which already is the case to some extent, christan teachings are kept out of schools.

      Anyway, back to the beginning: My point isn't that violent games should get banned or not, just that I would welcome some meaningful non-nutjob discussion about the issue. This isn't just a think-of-the-chidren thing, it is also a pretty gamer relevant one, for a simple reason: playing FPSs the whole day simply gets damn boring. Where is the storytelling? The non-violent interaction with NPCs and such? By restricting themself to violent content the gaming industry is stopping a whole lot interesting games from happening. The Sims or Myst pretty impressively demonstrate that there is a huge market for non-violent games, which is still in large part is still unexplored. It would be much easier to make the nutjobs shut up if there would actually be some serious alternative to the violent games, but so far there simply isn't, a handful of non-violent games doesn't change that.

    41. Re:Meh... by Watson+Ladd · · Score: 1

      But do they regulat the Bible? Genocide, rape, incest, human sacrifice, the list of nasty stuff goes on.

      --
      Inventions have long since reached their limit, and I see no hope for further development.-- Frontinus, 1st cent. AD
    42. Re:Meh... by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Which scientific study claims that extreme violence has no influence on younger people? I don't know any.

      First of all we are talking about fiction and games. Not actual extreme violence.

      Secondly, I don't know of any scientific study showing that pictures of pink sunflowers do not harm children. Imagine I claimed some right to pull out a gun and imprison people for depicting pink sunflowers. Imagine that I then attempted to turn any rational burden of evidence entirely upside down, saying "Which scientific study claims that pink sunflowers have no influence on younger people?". That would be silly.

      I haven't read the whole study, but from the conclusion I can see nothing that the study has anything to do with gamer vs non-gamer

      Someone asked about gamer vs non-gamer on the discussion link:
      Did participants stop the experiment earlier if they were not used to playing 3D-computergames? Did participants show lesser signs of stress when "killing" the virtual person if they have already gotten used to killing virtual characters in 3D-games before?

      No there is no evidence of this. In fact the regression analysis reported in the Section 'Skin Conductance Reponses' and the associated supporting information suggests the contrary, that there was a positive association between past computer game playing and the degree of arousal (just by looking at the skin conductance we cannot know that this was specifically stress, but it is likely to be so).


      Link.

      Limiting the access of younger people to harmful material

      Which is exactly why we should have this exact law against pink sunflowers. Pink sunflowers are harmful material. And my argument is valid and correct because I just said pink sunflowers are harmful.

      The people demanding this anti-game law have researched the issue to death trying to support their demands, and all they have managed to do is prove that these games are *NOT* harmful. Every single study they have either located or funded has produced the exact same results, that the games are *NOT* harmful.

      Saying "Limiting the access of younger people to harmful material" is pretty much Begging The Question. Saying that games are harmful, and then using that to reach the conclusion. Not only is it unsupported to say games are harmful, it is pretty well refuted that games are harmful.

      if the parents are ok with it, they can simply give their child access to it, the whole point is to make it harder for the child to get access to it themself.

      Take that statement with a generic "it". If the parents are ok with Pink Sunflowers, they can simply give their child access to Pink Sunflowers, the whole point is to make it harder for the child to get access to Pink Sunflowers themself. If the parents are ok with the Bible, they can simply give their child access to the Bible, the whole point is to make it harder for the child to get access to the Bible themself.

      If you want to make an argument that nothing should be available to minors, giving the parents the ability to control everything that the kids can and cannot get, then you could make a rational argument for that. However there has been no rational or valid argument why people who sell videogames and only people who sell videogames should be criminalized.

      Which already is the case to some extent, christan teachings are kept out of schools.

      (A) Not true.
      (B) It has absolutely nothing to do with this.

      The government cannot promote or favor one religion or one religious belief over another. The force of government cannot be used to promote or favor one religion or one religious belief over another. Someone acting in an official capacity as an agent of the government itself cannot abuse his power for

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    43. Re:Meh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      180-190 degrees, which is enough to give you 3rd degree burns in 7 seconds or less.

      Bullshit. I once working as a manager in the restaurant business before going into IT to reduce my stress level. The "Tea" tap at the restaurant put out water at 187F. Yes, I measured, with a well-calibrated themometer; it was a university town, a 24-hour operation, and I had a bored, drunken ChemE in one night. Having later experimented with a "human" subject (to use the term loosely) I must report that you can't get more than second degree burns and a lot of screaming without exposure of more than twelve seconds; I tried. (STFU; not only did the slacker deserve it, but the jury agreed to boot.)

    44. Re:Meh... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      I think it's terrible. I also see it as an activity that people have been doing for a long goddamn time. It didn't start with Karatika or some other video game like that. That's why guys like Thompson are not only fucking lunatics, but absurdly wrong fucking lunatics.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    45. Re:Meh... by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      The reality is that the large majority of humanity are completely chumps. They'll believe damn near anything you say once you've convinced them your an expert. In a perfect world, Thompson would be in a mental institution getting the treatment he so clearly needs. In this world, because the media gives him a soapbox and some sort of bizarre credibility, lots of morons (of which there are never a lack) line up to cheer him on.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    46. Re:Meh... by bjorniac · · Score: 3, Insightful

      No, it's not. See http://www.lectlaw.com/files/cur78.htm - McDonalds held a policy of keeping coffee at 185 degrees, when they knew that temperature is enough to cause serious injury. The judge called McDonalds conduct reckless, callous and willful, and in fact consuming the coffee at 185 would cause injury to the throat. If someone is handing out food (particularly fast food - intended to be eaten/drunk immediately) in such a condition that it causes harm once consumed, I think they're in the wrong. And now McDonalds serves coffee at 158 degrees. Lawsuit served its purpose - after 700 people complaining, 1 lawsuit took them to the cleaners and there's no problem anymore.

    47. Re:Meh... by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### Imagine I claimed some right to pull out a gun and imprison people for depicting pink sunflowers.

      Set a five year old in front of a sunflower and set it in front of a horror movie or Doom3. Which will 'influence' him more? I doubt that it will be the sunflower. Now I might not need the government to restrict video games, but how about rating them? Do you consider the ESRB useful? And if so, why, given that you consider video games having no negative influence on us.

      ### The non-nutjob discussion is that the nutjobs have already done an exhaustive search of existing studies and funded their own studies trying to support this.

      The nutjobs are looking for the wrong problem. There is no direct "play video game" -> "get violent" relationship, end of story, I don't need a study for that, that in turn however doesn't mean video games aren't influencing us, in probably negative or probably positive ways. So far I haven't really seen much study in how video games actually do influence us on a larger scale, which I think there is little point in denying. As said, its not about ban vs no-ban, its about what they do to us know, what they might to in 20 years when graphics will approach photo realism.

      ### The only reason the discussion is still going on is that the nutjobs keep harping on it and pushing for it.

      I don't think so. The main reason is simply that there is far to much violence in video games. I don't need some nutjob to tell me that, I just need to look at the available games. Maybe its just an evolutionary phase in the development that we will get over with sooner or later, but its definitely something that is limiting the medium as it is right now, because there is simply so much more that one could do in a video game.

    48. Re:Meh... by Don_dumb · · Score: 1

      Well I had sex with your wife last night. I'm guessing telling you after you had just found out your father died would be a bad time to spread that information ;) I dont know, it sounds like the perfect time to bury some bad news.
      --
      If this were really happening, what would you think?
    49. Re:Meh... by tm2b · · Score: 1
      I think it's rather pointless to speculate about what would have happened had it been 150 degrees instead of 180-190.
      /em? Um, what? Do you really believe that the behavior of liquids at different temperatues on human skin aren't pretty well understood?
      --
      "It is our blasphemy which has made us great, and will sustain us, and which the gods secretly admire in us." - Zelazny
    50. Re:Meh... by Targon · · Score: 1

      The real problem is that the "violent entertainment" is not what makes people violent, but something that is wrong with certain individuals. Some children are mentally defective, and enjoy hurting anything they can, including dogs, cats, pet rats, smaller children, bugs, you name it.

      In the past, these sorts of children were generally punished, and it was accepted in society that a child that is "a bad seed" gets punished. In today's society though, even a spanking is considered wrong. Parents are AFRAID to punish their children for being "bad", and that's the real problem with the world today. I am NOT saying that abuse is wrong, but a proper fear of punishment is how most children grow up with a proper sense that certain things are NOT acceptable behaviors.

      So, as a society, we need to make sure that those who have something wrong with them do NOT get access to "training materials". The key is to identify these individuals before they go too far and start killing real people. A normal teenager can tell the difference between fantasy and reality, so they can play violent video games and it won't be a problem. A dangerous teenager is one that will play a violent video game, or watch a movie, or read a book, and duplicate the violent actions they learn about.

      In most cases, a "mentally defective" person may get better with proper behavior modification techniques, but due to the fear of lawsuits, these techniques are not allowed, even if they are the best hope for society. As a result, proper treatment is often lacking for these people, and we have idiots like JT involved in their cases.

    51. Re:Meh... by Jtheletter · · Score: 1

      The facts of the case are that the woman received 3rd degree burns, it was documented at the hospital and is indisputable in this case. Also it is undisputable as facts of the case that the coffee caused the burns. Ergo you can call BS on the precise exposure time or temperature the OP stated, but the damage was in reality done. If a food product is so hot that exposure to it causes 3rd degree burns then it is likely unsafely hot. In this case this particular McDonalds location was serving their coffee well above industry standard temperatures and hotter than the guidelines given by the American Coffee Association. They had in fact received numerous complaints prior to this infamous incident that their coffee was too hot. The Coffee Association guidelines are in no way binding but when people (non-experts) say "coffee should be served at 200 degrees!" and it directly conflicts with the recommendations of an organization whose job is to give best practices then I have to side with the organization which has done more research than simply being a coffee drinker.

      Also I will point out that skin has different heat tolerances at different points on the body,and likely from person to person, thus just because you only got 2nd degree burns out of your "experiment" doesn't automatically disprove that it could cause worse burns to someone else.

      --
      -- I'm not a pessimist, I'm a realist. It's not my fault that life sucks so much. --
    52. Re:Meh... by jackbird · · Score: 1
      In the past, these sorts of children were generally punished, and it was accepted in society that a child that is "a bad seed" gets punished. In today's society though, even a spanking is considered wrong. Parents are AFRAID to punish their children for being "bad", and that's the real problem with the world today. I am NOT saying that abuse is wrong, but a proper fear of punishment is how most children grow up with a proper sense that certain things are NOT acceptable behaviors.

      Gee, if only there were a way to communicate to a child that violent behavior is unacceptable without resorting to violence, or a nonviolent way to punish a child...

    53. Re:Meh... by tomservo84 · · Score: 1

      Wow...(pull out a gun and imprision people)...you...(pull out a gun and imprision people)...seem...(pull out a gun and imprision people)...to...(pull out a gun and imprision people)...like...(pull out a gun and imprision people)...this...(pull out a gun and imprision people)...phrase...(pull out a gun and imprision people).

      I don't see where grumbel said ****ANY FUCKING THING**** like that.

      Yet your posts are LITTERED with it.

      Get a frigging life!

      --
      Agile Spaceport - You will never find a more wretched hive of scrum and villainy. We must be cautious.
    54. Re:Meh... by Anonymous+McCartneyf · · Score: 1

      Exactly how do you study Paleopsychology? Wouldn't that require a time machine?

      --
      There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
    55. Re:Meh... by DigiShaman · · Score: 1

      Correct. It requires the same time machine to study dinosaurs...

      Seriously though, just look it up in Wikipedia.

      --
      Life is not for the lazy.
    56. Re:Meh... by Anonymous+McCartneyf · · Score: 1

      In America, videogames are rated voluntarily. Games rated AO cannot be sold to anyone under 18 because of sex & violence, esp. sex.
      For this reason, no ordinary store in America stocks AO games. Since no one advertises AO games, this might not make that much difference. But it does limit access.
      M games don't have as much sex as AO games and can only be sold to people over 17. These games are easier to find, but there are still chains that won't carry them. Some of these chains dominate brick&mortar stores in flyover country.
      The thing is, in America, regulation tends to sweep farther than necc., no matter who is making it.

      --
      There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
    57. Re:Meh... by Anonymous+McCartneyf · · Score: 1

      Everybody uses the Associated Press. The American Broadcasting Corporation, the Columbia Broadcasting System, the (MicroSoft) National Broadcasting Corporation, the Cable News Network, FOX--everybody.

      --
      There is a fine line between recklessness and courage... -- Paul McCartney
    58. Re:Meh... by Alsee · · Score: 1

      Do you consider the ESRB useful?

      Personally? No.
      However I have nothing against people who do wish to pay attention to the ESRB, no problem with people who to make whatever personal decision they like based on ESRB info. Just so long they don't have any ideas about compelling anyone else to pay any attention to the ESRB.

      Now I might not need the government to restrict video games, but how about rating them?

      Game publishers, and book publishers, and movie publishers, and poem publishers, they all have the freedom to send (or not send) their work to anyone they like for a rating. The New York Times rates stuff, the Christian Family Values groups rate stuff, various magazines rate stuff, websites rate stuff, even Oprah rates stuff. And yes, if you like you can choose to send your movie to be rated by the MPAA or send your videogame to be rated by the ESRB. However both of those are entirely voluntary, and neither has any connection whatsoever to law. No more legal authority than Oprah's ratings. Virtually all movie theaters decline to admit children under 17 into MPAA R-Rated movies, and most movie theaters decline to carry unrated movies, however those are not imposed on them by force of law. Not enforced by men with guns. Virtually all theaters have the age-17 policy for R-rated movies for PR reasons, they know that having a half hearted "official policy" age limit for R-rated movies is worth it to keep the Family Values groups from protesting theater or otherwise making a nuisance of themselves. The fact that most theaters do not carry unrated movies has absolutely nothing to do with unrated content... the MPAA abuses their monopoly power to deny theaters access to any mainstream movies if they ever play a non MPAA(non-MPAA rated) movie. Any theater that plays an unrated movie... even if it is a cute little remake of Pinoccio or Frosty The Snowman, that theater is denied any future MPAA releases. You can run a theater playing MPAA-released (and MPAA rated) movies, or you can play indie releases and unrated foreign films, but the MPAA forbids you to do both. They won't do business with you.

      doesn't mean video games aren't influencing us, in probably negative or probably positive ways

      So do books. So do G.I. Joe and Barbie. So did Elvis Presley.

      If people want to talk about it, or study it, great, have at it. However I am going to jump in loudly when someone calls for legislation to forcibly restrict people simply because they dislike something, and I am going to jump in when someone defends the people calling for such legislation. Crazy claims were made about Elvis Presley's destructive influence and crazy claims are made about Harry Potter's destructive witchcraft influence, and crazy claims are being made about videogames.

      And even if the claims of harm weren't ridiculous, even the KKK have the right to publish their crap in pamphlet or book or even videogame form. Trying to legislate against "harmful ideas" is itself more dangerous and harmful that whatever is being targeted.

      there is far to much violence in video games

      (1) Almost all games are fundamentally about conflict, and violence is a pretty significant area/theme of conflict. Even chess is fundamentally about two armies of people slaughtering each other.
      (2) People buy what they want and enjoy, and the good old free market controls and adapts supply to that free choice. Country music makes me want to hurl, but the "problem" is that that's what a lot of people like, not that some singers produce it or that some stores sell it.
      (3) I think you need to look at the actual available games, and not just the ones that draw protesters and make headlines. There really aren't many graphically violent games. Only a few games go much beyond blowing up spaceships or other cartoonish level violence. I can't believe you claim the medium is limited. There are tons and tons of racing, simulator, sport, fina

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    59. Re:Meh... by Alsee · · Score: 1

      pull out a gun and imprision people
      I don't see where grumbel said ****ANY FUCKING THING**** like that.


      He was defending the people calling for legislation.

      Legislation means the use of force to compel people to to obey the 'we merely want X'. Legislation means enforcement by men with guns. Legislation utimately means forcibly imprisoning those who decline to comply. Some people miss/gloss-over the the fact that they are actually claiming the right to impose something on other people *at gunpoint* when they describe that they "merely" want X... that they aren't talking about censorship that they merely want an age check and parents can buy it if they want.

      Grumbel's particular comment was "How about good old common sense?", and I hardly consider it "common sense" to claim a right (or to defend people claiming a right) to use force against people because they dislike Rock&Roll or Heavy Metal or Harry Potter books... or videogames.

      By emphasizing the legislation issue and the force aspect... it was an screaming invitation for Grumbel (or anyone else in the discussion) to say they like the rating system and like the ESRB or whatever but that they have no desire to force anything on anyone and that they reject the proposed legislation and reject the people calling for such legislation. In which case I would have happily said something to the effect of "Oh good, then I have no argument with you". Grumbel has replied, but has not done that. He has not objected to my "guns and imprison" comments at all and has not complained "No, I did not mean that and do not support that". He did not do so even after my post beat that point to death, as you yourself pointed out. He still seems to be tacitly defending the people calling for legislation, and he is still being at best ambiguous on the issue of legislation and his personal support or rejection of the force implicit in legislating this matter.

      -

      --
      - - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
    60. Re:Meh... by grumbel · · Score: 1

      ### There really aren't many graphically violent games.

      Depends, most games don't allow you to shoot limbs of, but almost all of them focus on killing things. For me there is little difference if there is blood spilled or not, what matters for me is the options that the player has to interact with the game world and more often then not, those are limited to shooting, slashing or punching things.

      ### I can't believe you claim the medium is limited.

      How many recently released games can you list in which the core gameplay doesn't involve violence? How many of them are not sport games, not party games, not targeted at childrens and not abstract puzzle games? After the adventure genre died out for most part there simply are almost none in that region left. If a game involves more or less realistic looking people instead of cute cartoon figures, there is a good chance that the games focus is on killing them.

  10. We need to know what crazy loons are up to by BruceCage · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In essence I agree with you, sometimes it's better to ignore silly people. But in this case I believe Jack Thompson has quite a following among certain groups of people, if we were to ignore them they might be able to do a lot more damage. Instead, pointing out their flawed reasoning or mistakes such as this and discussing it openly can benefit "the cause".

    --
    Perfect is the enemy of done.
    1. Re:We need to know what crazy loons are up to by MightyMartian · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Jack Thompson wouldn't have a following if 24 hour news stations and web sites didn't have an insatiable need for new stories every hour or two. This guy would, at best, be buried on page 9 between stories about the nine month old Husky puppy that saved her owners from carbon monoxide poisoning and the dangers of oversharpening steak knives.

      Jack Thompson is just a member of that breed of attention addicts who will do or say anything to get their faces in the paper. The news media happily obliges these guys, because they're outrageous and clearly demented. They're following is just as demented, and are probably psychologically not all that different from the kinds of guys who end up in cults. If Jack Thompson belongs anywhere, it's on the Jerry Springer Show fighting transexual hookers and eighty year old sex addicts.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:We need to know what crazy loons are up to by kabocox · · Score: 1

      Jack Thompson is just a member of that breed of attention addicts who will do or say anything to get their faces in the paper. The news media happily obliges these guys, because they're outrageous and clearly demented. They're following is just as demented, and are probably psychologically not all that different from the kinds of guys who end up in cults. If Jack Thompson belongs anywhere, it's on the Jerry Springer Show fighting transexual hookers and eighty year old sex addicts.

      If Jack Thompson gets disbarred, he'd still be able to make money off the way that he lives. Sure he is a nutjob, but he is some what famous and in certain circles fairly well known. He could be newspaper opinion writer or worse still blogger. He could have his own show "I hate you and what you are currently doing!" I would either be a game show or something sort of like Springer except Jack Thompson picking a topic several people that follow said topic and him telling them that he hates them and wants them to stop. Oddly, I could've seen Jack Thompson making a good living as a traveling prist/preacher afew generations back. You know the type. The guys that travel around because no community would support them, but he picks every topic that your church or community is doing that is slightly different and says follow the Bible/rules set or burn in hell for his entire visiting period. Everyone sighs a breath of relief when the nut job goes, but there are some old senile folks that take up the mantra of young sinner wil burn in hell so you better do what we tell you for a few weeks. People like this have always made a living somewhere. Heck, the news guys follow him because its entaining to most normal people to watch the nutjob.

  11. Calm down... by optkk · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He's not been put away yet. And while we're at it, let's not hope for dismemberment, lets hope, that he gets to share a cell with somebody that was put away for a crime that was somehow linked (although incorrectly) to video game violence.

    1. Re:Calm down... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No. Lets hope he gets put in a cell with a big man named bubba, preferbly who was put in goal for rape............

    2. Re:Calm down... by SCPRedMage · · Score: 1
      And here I was hoping he'd get to share a cell with someone who believes in "situational homosexuality"...

      And believe that Mr. Thompson has purty lips...

      --
      My sig can beat up your sig.
    3. Re:Calm down... by Trendy.Ideology · · Score: 2, Funny

      "He's got a real pretty mouth on him, don't he?"

      --
      In the end, the only thing that matters is how much fun you had.
    4. Re:Calm down... by wboelen · · Score: 1

      I don't know any games that involve showers, soap, and dropping the latter.

    5. Re:Calm down... by kanweg · · Score: 1

      Could you care to comment on the rather ambiguous expression "share a cell"?

      Bert

    6. Re:Calm down... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh... they exist, try googling "yaoi dating sim". But not at work.

    7. Re:Calm down... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rapists are usually centre forwards...

  12. Can't say I feel sorry for the guy by jedkwon · · Score: 1

    I kind of feel like I'm in that one episode of Futurama with the time skips... Jack Thompson says video games are evil... ZZZZZT Jack Thompson brings lawsuit against video game companies..... ZZZZZT Found dead in a hotel bathtub....

    1. Re:Can't say I feel sorry for the guy by PunkOfLinux · · Score: 1

      That one was just on Adult Swim last night :D Anyway, moving on... this guy shouldn't be allowed to talk. I'll get the hot glue.

    2. Re:Can't say I feel sorry for the guy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      More appropriate than the last one would be (the combinations have to be weirder, your suggestion is too predictable :-)):

      ZZZZT Jack Thompson disbarred for courtroom antics ... ZZZZT appointed as Attorney General of Bush III administration ... ZZZZT was appointed to Supreme Court today ... ZZZZT found naked in Las Vegas hotel room playing the latest GTA: Washington DC edition for the XBox 720.

  13. Too Bad He Couldn't be Tried in Auburn, WA. by NeuroManson · · Score: 5, Funny

    Up here, there's a nice art deco building, started as a supermarket, then up until a couple of years ago, existed as a video game arcade. Now it's a courthouse. The irony would be mind boggling.

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  14. Jack was abscent... by JeepFanatic · · Score: 1

    the day they taught law at Law School. Seriously though, even if he is disbarred, we won't see the last of him. He'll still be out there "fighting the good fight", only just in the media instead of in the court room.

    1. Re:Jack was abscent... by Dachannien · · Score: 1

      Actually, after reading the e-mails that got him into this mess, it's clear that he missed the day they taught S'ing TFU in grade school.

    2. Re:Jack was abscent... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The media has always been where Jack Thompson does most of his "fighting", that he happens to be a lawyer is incidental.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:Jack was abscent... by PsychicX · · Score: 1

      Incidentally, this story is completely and utterly MIA from the major news organizations. Not one has even vaguely alluded to it. Just check Google News.

      Good thing? Bad thing? I don't know. But a little odd, if you ask me.

    4. Re:Jack was abscent... by kabocox · · Score: 1

      The media has always been where Jack Thompson does most of his "fighting", that he happens to be a lawyer is incidental.

      This is the summary post that says it all. It doesn't matter if Jack Thompson gets disbarred. He still knows the Flordia legal system and can still use it to sue any group that he dislikes just like any other citizen. If he can find any group people that slightly support his cause, he will keep on doing it. Nope, the only plus is that the Flordia Bar and other Bars would be able to disbar members that try Jack Thompson tactics. What fields do most ex-lawyers endup in? I'm slightly worried that Jack Thompson will shortly get into office or become a professional lobbist and become much more dangerous.

  15. Obligatory Penny Arcade Links by giafly · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Moral Kombat" - comic 5 Jan 2007.

    "Obviously he [Jack Thompson] didn't mention anything to the police department about his "Modest proposal" in which he asks that a game be developed in which players urinate on peoples brains and murder kids who work at game stores. He never mentions that he offered ten thousand dollars to charity and then said it was just "satire." He doesn't tell the police chief that Jerry and I just donated the ten thousand for him. I wonder why he left that part out?" - Penny Arcade

    Tshirts > Gaming > I Hate Jack Thompson...
    Virtually every living creature hates Jack Thompson, professional scold and slavering ambulance chaser. Squirrels, policemen, sea captains, fruit bats... - black t-shirt
    --
    Reduce, reuse, cycle
    1. Re:Obligatory Penny Arcade Links by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or even better from Scott Ramsoomair at VG Cats (with a toon to go with it).

  16. Repensum est Canicula by tomhudson · · Score: 2, Funny

    ... because we all know "payback is a bitch."

    Jack Thompson - this is your future!

  17. Devil's advocate by idiot900 · · Score: 1

    To echo the comments of the Penny Arcade artists (http://www.penny-arcade.com/2005/10/19):

    Jack Thompson, in my opinion, is an idiot who does a lot to hurt his own cause. If he gets silenced by being disbarred, it may actually be a net negative for the video game playing public, because he might be replaced by someone who is actually good at convincing people that video games are somehow the root cause of school killings.

    1. Re:Devil's advocate by Wordsmith · · Score: 1

      1) Dis-barring him wouldn't shut him up)
      2) It's not like it's a staffed position and they have to find a new scare-monger if he leaves; a more effective JT could show up at any time whether the current one's around or not
      3) Someone smarter would be just fine - they could be debated on the merits of their arguments.

    2. Re:Devil's advocate by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "Someone smarter would be just fine - they could be debated on the merits of their arguments."

      Not so - someone smart enough to be capable of real media manipulation will dodge any question where logic or evidence will show they're in the wrong. Ole Mad Jack just starts shouting.

  18. Too bad by sugarman · · Score: 1

    The "videogames-are-evil" crowd will still be around. Disbarring JT just leads to the likelihood that they'll hire someone competent the next time there's a litigious situation involving video games.

    Seriously, why would you want to get rid of an opponent that is such a raving loon that he ends up making you look good every time out?

    --
    --sugarman--
    1. Re:Too bad by Sigma+7 · · Score: 1

      Seriously, why would you want to get rid of an opponent that is such a raving loon that he ends up making you look good every time out?
      As you know, this opponent has recently tried to sue companies for releasing games (e.g. Bully). This procedure, known as vexatious litigation, ties up resources in court which may or may not be recoverable.
    2. Re:Too bad by tucara · · Score: 1

      I disagree with the whole "Devil you know" idea. Getting rid of morons who participate in public debate should be a goal no matter what side you're on. I'd rather have someone intelligent in the opposition so a real exchange of ideas can take place, even if it means I loose the debate. Otherwise you get the same talking points bounced back at one another for decades and nothing changes. There is an objective truth about whether or not violence/sex in video games is harmful to minors. Theories can be formed and tested, evidence can be presented and the subject can be laid to rest for a length of time. Having a JT on the other team just generates waste in furthering the discussion.

    3. Re:Too bad by pissedoffamerican · · Score: 1

      Luckily, as far as I've seen, the judges have realized in every case so far that this is 1st amendment territory and the cases haven't been won. I doubt a "better" lawyer would affect the outcomes of future cases.

    4. Re:Too bad by Fulcrum+of+Evil · · Score: 1

      Sounds like you'd rather have someone honestly debating issues. Good luck with that - most tv 'debates' are mere attempts at manipulation.

      --
      "We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
    5. Re:Too bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is an objective truth about whether or not violence/sex in video games is harmful to minors.
      Define "harmful" objectively.

      (Note: I agree with your basic point, which seems to be that for a given definition of harmful - such as "inspires real-life violence or creates a tendency to think in terms of violence in real-life situations" - whether or not violent video games are harmful to humans(or subsets of all humans, by age or other criteria) is something which can be scientifically investigated. I just dislike people throwing the word "objective" around - the question of whether various things can be considered "objective" is interesting in a philosophical sense, and we shouldn't pretend that it's solved quite that easily.)
  19. Umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I think the withdrawn offer to donate to charity was a bit odd, too, but as for the "Modest Proposal" part, I think they're confused if they don't know what he was talking about.

    I don't agree with a number of the things he's done, but I see no need to attack him for silly reasons.

    1. Re:Umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem is that the original A Modest Proposal is satire precisely because the titular proposal is completely ludicrous. Jack Thompson's proposal, on the other hand, is not at all ludicrous because game developers (unlike Thompson and his ilk) are able to distinguish between fantasy and reality, and thus do not mind making a game/mod in which the protagonist kills game developers.

    2. Re:Umm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a little wasted and unclear who said what when about what to who and why, I just want to know if anyone ever made the kill the videogame store clerk and piss on their brain game. In my imagine version you start out with a rusty pen-knife and work up to the Cranium Cracker 3000, chugging beer you find along the way to fuel your piss machine. After you piss on their brain they will turn on their former co-workers in a zombie like state for a few seconds before dying. Clerks toss cd's at you like ninja but you can find the WiiGrabber controller that you shove one end of down the pants of clerks you have cranially cracked and urinated on to attach them to you as cd firing satellite zombies ala Galaga(Galaxian?). Bosses would include store managers and delivery drivers of course. Customers would be handled somewhat like Deathrace 2000 scoring wise. I really got to crash.

  20. In the words of the Geto Boys by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    From "We Can't Be Stopped"

    Willie D-"I heard a news report, some laywer in Florida wants to take us to court!"

    Buswick Bill-"Somebody tell that country-ass hick, to go suck a dead man's dick."

  21. Re:Cock sucking twofo by Fordiman · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Fact: This is a spam post. I've seen it in at least three other places on /. this week.

    That, and I don't even know what Twofo is, but my guess is that Twofo is not only going strong, but pwns this AC's ass.

    --
    110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
  22. Re:Give em hell by DragonTHC · · Score: 1

    someone claiming perl is a bad language can't possibly be expected to think for himself without falling over on the pavement every time.

    you, sir, are a moron.

    Jack Thompson wasn't protecting kids. He was crusading against video games because his son wanted to play GTA.

    --
    They're using their grammar skills there.
  23. Re:Cock sucking twofo by Broken+scope · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    You claim its dead in the body, then turn around a say its dying. Make up your fucking mind before you post this spam shit you stupid fuck.

    People like you are first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes.

    --
    You mad
  24. Write. by geekoid · · Score: 1, Insightful

    If you know of an example of his misconduct, and can offer evidence, send it to the Florida Bar.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  25. DId it occur to you by geekoid · · Score: 1, Insightful

    that they tried to get someone competent and ended up with JT?

    Not all lawyers are media whores like JT, and the few that our are smart enough to stay away from cases like these.

    --
    The Kruger Dunning explains most post on /. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect
  26. Re:Give em hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    *Whoosh!*

  27. Re:Give em hell by mschuyler · · Score: 1

    Double Whoosh. That post went right over your head.

    --
    How about a moderation of -1 pedantic.
  28. YHBT YHL HAND by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject

  29. What motivates this guy? by merc · · Score: 2, Interesting

    This guy didn't just wake up one morning and get hit by an Atari 2600 being thrown out of a window. What happened that made him such an ardent opponent of gaming?

    John Walsh from "America's Most Wanted" is motivated by what happened to his son, what happened to Thompson?

    --
    It's true no man is an island, but if you take a bunch of dead guys and tie 'em together, they make a good raft.
    1. Re:What motivates this guy? by MightyMartian · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This guy didn't just wake up one morning and get hit by an Atari 2600 being thrown out of a window. What happened that made him such an ardent opponent of gaming?

      John Walsh from "America's Most Wanted" is motivated by what happened to his son, what happened to Thompson?

      He's an attention addict, who keeps getting his fix because everyone keeps on paying attention to him long after it's clear he's an immoral lunatic.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:What motivates this guy? by donaldGuy · · Score: 1
    3. Re:What motivates this guy? by JFMulder · · Score: 1

      This guy didn't just wake up one morning and get hit by an Atari 2600
      Actually, that's only part of the story. He was forced to play afterwards with the copy of ET that came with it. That is really what pushed him over the edge.

    4. Re:What motivates this guy? by DaEMoN128 · · Score: 1

      You see... what had happened was....

      Ummm... it involved an atari joystick that some irresponsible child had left on a couch.... and a... ummm... he was just minding his own business and sitting down to read the paper... and ummm ... they all laughed at him.. noooo.

      --
      Stop signs are only Suggestions
    5. Re:What motivates this guy? by Nunster · · Score: 1

      If he can convince a jury that these game companies, that are making billions of dollars a year worldwide are to blame. He stands to make millions of dollars himself. Simple as that.

  30. Re:Give em hell by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    YHBT. YHL. HAND.

  31. They'll never go away... by tech10171968 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The only reason the Jack Thompsons of our society are even given credibility in the first place is because of all these folks who aren't doing such a hot job in raising their offspring. The kids start acting up but the parents don't really want to take any blame in this, so the Jack Thompsons of this world provide them with a convienient scapegoat; doesn't matter whether that scapegoat happens to be Unreal Tournament, Marilyn Manson or MySpace - just as long as it's anything to give the parents something (other than themselves) at whch to point an accusatory finger. As long as folks are willing to shift the blame for their parental shortcomings (rather than owning up) there will always be another Jack Thompson to make them feel better about themselves (while harnessing this blame-shifting for political reasons, of course).

    --
    This space for rent!
  32. Come back and tell me about it ... by gd23ka · · Score: 0, Troll

    when they're nailing him to a cross. Unless he really gets hurt bad this is nothing
    to get excited about.

  33. Jack Thompson Is Like Freddie Krueger by Coucho · · Score: 0

    If you forget about him, he goes away!

    --
    *pSig = NULL;
  34. Ceramic =/= Styrofoam -- loses rigidity with hea by Mr+Jazzizle · · Score: 0

    It's supposed to reach the consumer that hot at a sit-down coffee shop with ceramic mugs, yes. This is a fast food restaraunt serving coffee in styrofoam cups to people in cars. McDs followed the suggestion for quality coffee when they should be thinking about safety issues involved in giving a person 180* coffee in a styrofoam cup that collapses from the heat when you take the lid off to add sugar. The lawsuit was iffy, but if you want good coffee, fast food isn't the place, and theyre ignoring the safety of the consumer. The issue isn't so much "Contents are Hot" as "Do Not remove lid, styrofoam collapses"

  35. We haven't seen the last of him... by Hannah+E.+Davis · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Unlike many, I don't actually hate Jack Thompson -- if anything, I pity him. He's trying to do what he thinks is right, even at the cost of his own career, and I gotta admit that that takes balls. However, I do strongly disagree with his methods. Writing caustic, barely-coherent letters to judges and insulting young children on the internet is typically not an advised course of action when you're trying to effect social or legal change. His conduct has been undeniably unprofessional, and for this reason, I hope he gets disbarred.

    One thing that we should keep in mind, however, is that crazy old coots like Jack typically don't vanish the moment they lose their jobs (see: Fred Phelps). He'll have a lot more free time all of a sudden, and I expect he will continue to portray himself as a martyr -- a man who sacrificed his own career to protect America's children (and all that drivel). Sure, he won't be as dangerous when he can't blindly sue anything that moves, but I expect that the media will still view him as the resident expert on video game violence.

    1. Re:We haven't seen the last of him... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's pretending to do what he thinks is right, in order to further his own career

      Fixed that for you.

      Writing caustic, barely-coherent letters to judges and insulting young children on the internet is typically not an advised course of action when you're trying to effect social or legal change.

      I agree. However, has it occured to you that his motives might not be "...to effect social or legal change"? That he might just be doing this for the publicity?

      He'll have a lot more free time all of a sudden, and I expect he will continue to portray himself as a martyr -- a man who sacrificed his own career to protect America's children (and all that drivel).

      Hmm, a household name, free time, popular with right-wingers, known for sacrificing his own career in order to "save the children". Well, that sounds like an electoral platform to me.

      Sure, he won't be as dangerous when he can't blindly sue anything that moves...

      How dangerous will he be when he's introducing federal anti-game legislation?

  36. I'm sorry Jack Thompson by Extradition · · Score: 1


    I'm sorry Jack Thompson [Oooh]
    I am for real
    Never meant for games to make you cry
    I apologized a trillion times
    I'm sorry Jack Thompson [Oooh]
    I am for real...

  37. Re:Give em hell by dcam · · Score: 1

    Haha I got modded flamebait. I was going for funny.

    --
    meh
  38. Here's what is really sad.. by Khyber · · Score: 1, Interesting

    You don't need a license in order to represent anyone, as anyone can be your lawyer, given enough knowledge of any situation and the related laws.

    Only a fool represents himself. Jack Thompson will more than likely continue practicing, no matter where he is.

    --
    Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
  39. Please Please by Private.Tucker · · Score: 0

    Please Please Guilty Please Please Guilty Please Please

    Disbar

    Disbar

    Disbar

    Go Go Go!!!

  40. Re:Give em hell by dcam · · Score: 1

    someone claiming perl is a bad language can't possibly be expected to think for himself without falling over on the pavement every time.

    Someone who can't read the article and at least agree with some of it can't be expected to do more than dribble and make goo goo noises.

    I digress.

    I was being sarcastic. I wasn't trying for flamebait. Somehow that seems to have passed over your head, like my finely honed article on perl.

    --
    meh
  41. He'll probably retire after the hearing... by JimatForemat · · Score: 1

    and blame his behavior on playing too much Law & Order.

  42. Re:Cock sucking twofo by that+this+is+not+und · · Score: 0, Offtopic


    People like you are first ones up against the wall when the revolution comes.

    There used to be a good response to that one: "There are 33-1/3 revolutions per minute" but with the rampant oversampling of CD drives these days, there's not a good modern equivalent.

    But go ahead and spin in place, rebel boy.

  43. Re:Cock sucking twofo by Broken+scope · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Spin? Hell I'm just in it for the kicks.

    --
    You mad
  44. Nuts by Dave+Parrish · · Score: 1

    Just a tad too late to be considered a Wintereenmas miracle.

    1. Re:Nuts by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's DECEMBERWEEN you heathen!

  45. Again? by edunbar93 · · Score: 1, Troll

    Thompson faces the possibility of disciplinary action up to and including disbarment.

    So this is what, the 6th state he'll be disbarred in? I suppose he'll just have to move to Nevada now.

    --
    "No problem. I have the capacity to do infinite work so long as you don't mind that my quality approaches zero."-Dilbert
  46. There's nothing conservative about them by dbIII · · Score: 1

    "Being conservative does not equate to being stupid"

    I find it truly bizzare that radical anti-intellectual Christian splinter groups call themselves conservative - paticularly the ones that seem to think it's all about making money and smiting people.

    1. Re:There's nothing conservative about them by Fordiman · · Score: 1

      "I find it truly bizzare that radical anti-intellectual Christian splinter groups call themselves conservative - paticularly the ones that seem to think it's all about making money and smiting people."

      Overall, I agree with you, but a couple points:

      1) There's a word for extreme conservatives, and it's reactionary. Radicals are the extremists on the other side of the spectrum.
      2) Conservatives are very likely to think everything is about making a buck; what do you think one tries to conserve in politics?

      What I find hilarious is that, while I understand conservatism, and am in some ways conservative, I'm almost certain that I haven't seen a conservative politician yet. Just republicans and democrats.

      Oh, sure, they like to use the illusion of conservatism or liberalism as their respective shouting boxes, but from what I can tell, there are only a few goals in politics: To get elected and paid, to avoid responsibility, to give business to your friends, and to remain in office. Of these:
          The first gives motivation to, effectively, lie and raise your own salary.
          The second gives motivation to avoid voting at all on touchy issues.
          The third gives motivation to waste tax money.
          Only the last seems to be any incentive towards the public good - when in fact, it's just more motivation to lie, in the shape of 'spin'.

      Really, a nice racket if you can get into it, but no way to run a country.

      --
      110100 1101000 1101000 1100110 0 1101111 1101000 1100011 1
  47. Are you sure? by mrchaotica · · Score: 2, Funny

    Effectively, they want society to regress to the Dark Ages. What could possibly be more conservative than that?

    --

    "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    1. Re:Are you sure? by dbIII · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I don't think so - they would be branded userers and heretics in the Dark Ages. The very Religeous Freedom they don't wish others to have is the only reason these Christianity Lite groups could form without persecution.

      By the way, I'm agnostic, but remain confused by the radical right wing Christian groups that appear to have lost the second half of their book somewhere and ignore most of the first half.

  48. Right by artifex2004 · · Score: 1

    like he's stood for anything before, besides making a buck? :)

  49. Bigots and "Persecuted Minorities" by some+guy+I+know · · Score: 1

    Mr. Thompson is a huge bigot. He's going for the "persecuted minority"
    But huge bigots are persecuted minorities.
    Everyone from the media to politicians to Slashdotters seem to be persecuting bigots these days.
    There is even thinly-disguised legislation against bigotry (e.g., the Americans with disabilities act, which discriminates against the "anti-cripple" crowd).
    About the only bigotry that isn't persecuted these days is that leveed against Arabic Muslims (Thanks, Osama!).
    --
    Those who sacrifice security to condemn liberty deserve to repeat history or something. - Benjamin Santayana
  50. Alternate Career by tinkerghost · · Score: 1

    He already has one, he's helping craft legislation here in MA.
    Doesn't that just thrill you to know?

  51. Wrong with America by Khammurabi · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Damn, this guy is the ultimate sleezeball. If you ask me. Jack Thompson is a shining example of everything wrong with America these days (bigoted, sue-happy, uninformed but with LOUD AND STRONG OPINIONS).
    While clearly an idiot, the fact that people like Jack Thompson still exist in America at least gives me some comfort that free speech is not being infringed on. It gives me solace that our democracy has not yet gone down an irreparable path.

    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    1. Re:Wrong with America by Chyeld · · Score: 1

      While I agree with the spirit of what you are saying, please don't fall into the fallacy of assuming that just because you can hear the droning of morons with loud opinions, we still have Free Speech. Unfortunately, many of the morons are droning on because they want to drown out those who actually need it.

      A room full of monkeys is not Shakespeare, no matter how big the room.