Slashdot Mirror


Jack Thompson Served With Order to Show Cause

cli_rules! writes "DailyTech has reported that Jack Thompson has been ordered to explain himself. 'Therefore, it is ordered that you shall show cause on or before March 5, 2008, why this Court should not find that you have abused the legal system process and impose upon you a sanction for abusing the legal system, including, but not limited to directing the Clerk of this Court to reject for filing any future pleadings, petitions, motions, letters, documents, or other filings submitted to this Court by you unless signed by a member of The Florida Bar other than yourself.'"

18 of 299 comments (clear)

  1. Next up... by imasu · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Jack Thompson sues court for defaming him!

    1. Re:Next up... by jez9999 · · Score: 5, Funny

      If you think about it, courts are murder simulators, or at least very damaging to society. I mean, you can go there any day of the week, and see ruthless criminals! This would definitely damage impressionable young childrens' minds.

    2. Re:Next up... by peragrin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      going to court and seeing jack thompson escape justice over and over again would definitely damage impressionable young minds.

      --
      i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
  2. Buttt, but.., by mangu · · Score: 5, Funny
    He *did* explain! In his own words:

    I shall now, through a new federal lawsuit, deconstruct The Florida Bar ... This court has threatened Thompson. He does not threaten back. He hereby informs this court that he will see it in federal court.

    So,you see, the Florida Bar means nothing to Jack Thompson. I guess not even Chuck Norris scares him...
    1. Re:Buttt, but.., by Nero+Nimbus · · Score: 5, Funny

      Maybe it's time for a Jack Thompson Facts page.

    2. Re:Buttt, but.., by osu-neko · · Score: 5, Funny

      I guess not even Chuck Norris scares him...

      That's prima facie evidence for an insanity defense.

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  3. Re:This is great news by djmurdoch · · Score: 5, Funny

    I especially love that he never brings up the 99.9999999% of normal people who play violent video games and DON'T kill people,

    You're exaggerating. There's no way it's more than 99.9999%.

  4. Message for Jack Thompson by FoolsGold · · Score: 5, Funny

    This message goes out to your legal career:

    BOOM HEADSHOT!!!

    Sincerely,
    Gaming community.

  5. *Sigh* by kitsunewarlock · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I've said it here before and I'll say it again.

    This article's existence on slashdot is depressing. Why? Because giving the even a second of any of our days to cover this over-hyped, attention-mongering fossil is beyond the common sense and rationale we, as human beings capable of accessing the vast wells of knowledge known as the internet, should be capable of having. In the end we are all attention mongers to some extent I guess...

    Then again, I just wasted at least 20 seconds on this post.

    --
    Ginga no Rekshiya Mata Each page.
  6. Oh, it gets even better... by Hannah+E.+Davis · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Game Politics unearthed a filing that may well be what got him in trouble in the first place:

    http://gamepolitics.com/2008/02/22/did-this-document-bring-florida-supreme-courts-wrath-down-upon-jack-thompson/

    From the article:

    "The court described one of Thompson's recent filings in detail. [Thompson] dubbed it a "children's picture book for adults," interspersing images with text in his motion due to "the court's inability to comprehend" his arguments.

    Images included "swastikas, kangaroos in court, a reproduced dollar bill, cartoon squirrels, Paul Simon, Paul Newman, Ray Charles, a handprint with the word 'slap' written under it, Bar Governor Benedict P. Kuehne, a baby, Ed Bradley, Jack Nicholson, Justice Clarence Thomas, Julius Caesar, monkeys, a house of cards," the order said."

  7. Had the time of my life? by SoundGuyNoise · · Score: 5, Funny
    This court has threatened Thompson. He does not threaten back.

    Nobody puts Jack Thompson in a corner.

    --
    You never expect irony, do you?
    Want to be a professional wrestler? Visit www.iyfwrestling.com
    @iyfwrestling
  8. What's sad... by uxbn_kuribo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Is that once he's disbarred, he'll blame the gaming community, and still go on Fox News being the world's biggest douche, and have plenty of ignorant people around to believe that the gaming community did this to him. Just because he won't be a lawyer anymore won't stop him from being a massacre chaser and ranting like a madman on TV.

    --
    No portion of this post may be rebroadcast without the express, written consent of Major League Baseball.
  9. Link to "picture book" by Baldrake · · Score: 5, Informative

    The "picture book" is here. (Warning, this is a word document.)

    His basic premise in creating the book was to make his arguments crystal clear, through illustration. In fact, his submission is a wandering and apparently pointless scree. It's reminiscent of the kind of rants people write when their WoW account is suspended.

    I can well understand the court's reaction. It isn't because of the fact of using a picture-book style; it's the lack of any coherent argument in said picture book.

  10. Re:Nice, but.... by gnasher719 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    forsooth, I as well have a stack of guns, and numerous bad days. The reason i don't shoot people is because i'd rather have a bad day where i live, Vs. a bad day in a federal prison, which comes with a lot more surprise butsecks in the showers. not down with that, so i don't shoot people. Are you serious? The reason why you don't shoot people is that you don't want to go to prison?

    If that is the only reason then you are not human and should be shot immediately.
  11. Re:Nice, but.... by SendBot · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The attacker in the most recent episode of a domestic mass shooting purchased his weapons 100% legally, as did a man who shot his estranged wife 6 blocks away from where I type this. He likely would have killed himself too had not someone I know personally wrested the gun away from him.

    Look at all the ordinary people who fell in with the pro-war sentiment prior the iraq occupation, and how their attitude that violence is a legitimate solution to a falsely perceived threat has affected this country and the world since then.

    I like guns, but I don't like shooting people unless it's paintball or video games. I wouldn't say "gun culture" is a problem, rather "violence culture".

  12. Re:Nice, but.... by boyko.at.netqos · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I always thought the first step of dictators to exert more control over the populace (according to historical trends) was invoking a terrifying internal and external enemy, followed by creating a prison system outside the rule of law, developing a paramilitary group of scary young men to terrorize citizens, setting up an internal surveillance system, harass citizens' groups, engage in arbitrary detention and release, target civil servants, artists, and academics with job loss, control the press, cast dissent as treason, and suspend the rule of law.

    Confiscating guns seems to me to be, if anything, purely optional, and is almost always done AFTER an armed resistance would have little to no effect anyway.

    --
    I used to work for NetQoS. I no longer do, but want to keep the excellent karma attached to this account.
  13. Wrong indeed by K.os023 · · Score: 5, Informative

    You are wrong: Canada does NOT have more guns per capita than the US. If you have any statistics to back up what you're saying I'd be interested in seeing them.

    --
    Ahhh, what an awful dream. Ones and zeroes everywhere... and I thought I saw a two.
  14. Re:Nice, but.... by gruntled · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Oh for God's sake. The American Revolution would never have happened if the people who lived here had been able to vote.

    I have a concealed carry permit for work reasons, but anybody who thinks a fully automatic weapon, or a 50 caliber sniper rifle, or any other firearm you care to name, is going to hold off a squad of United States military personnel trained and equipped with enough firepower to bring down a mechanized infantry unit is freakin' delusional. Trust me, it's not fear of your 45 that keeps the government from kicking down your front door. The vast, vast, VAST majority of the men and women who work for the United States government spend most of their time trying to protect your rights, not scheming about how they can oppress you, and they don't do that because they're afraid you'll "rise up," they do it because it's their job. Get a grip. Crazies give gun ownership a bad name.