@Konstruct:
You might be getting bills confused with laws. Its pretty common for bills (unpassed laws) to get tabled without ever being voted upon, etc when their sponsors realize they arent going to pass, etc, but once a law is passed and somebody challenges it (and the courts take up the case), then the courts pretty much will eventually rule on it. A court cant have open cases that they just forget about and die without a ruling (i think?), even of one side is just going ot conceed the point (prob not happen in the CA case), then the court needs to issue a rulign saying that one party prevails and then settling issues like resitution, etc. I expct the court int he CA case is just dragging their feet on the issue for no good reason, have they even had a formal hearing on the permanent injunction yet? Once they have that, im sure they will rule in favour of the game industry fairly quickly afterwards.

I think this means that with mounting losses, states are starting to listen to Jack Thompson a little less. This is very good that people are starting to doubt Jack Thompson and he is losing the war against violent video games. This a truly great day for Take-Two Interactive and Rockstar Games. The video game industry is going to win this war. A few more rulings in favor of the video game industry and politicians will find something else to attack.

Actually, they are attacking it because of the fact that they want to reduce violence and violent video games don't even make people violent. What they should do, if they want to reduce violence in society, is go after gun control laws. They should be trying to put gun control laws in place to make it illegal for private citizens to own guns. GUNS KILL PEOPLE NOT VIOLENT VIDEO GAMES. I've heard that many violent video games come from Japan and in Japan it's illegal for citizens to own guns. I've also heard that people almost never shoot anyone in Japan because they're not suppose to have guns. Thos are the laws that we should have here in America. Go after the real problem, not violent video games.

Figures that hogue would say someone's arm is being twisted to remove a bill. I bet Jack, the guy ho wrote it is thinking the same thing.

Humans were killing each other with there fists and with long metal rods forged in a fashion that made them stronger and allowed them to be sharpened.

Daniel, that last post of yours was such a gross oversimplification that I don't even want to address it. Just give it a rest, why don't you?

Daniel this is not the place or the time. Drop it. Bring it up if an article directly brings gun control into the equation, otherwise leave it alone.

Daniel.

Do not bring up gun control. Do not bring up gun control.
Just to make myself clear

DO NOT BRING UP GUN CONTROL.

Its a touchy subject, just as religion is.



It is a good thing that the AG is willing to bring up education. Hopefully something we will see more of in the future. Hopefully.

@Blitz

It's a concession to the bill supporters. He can't turf it altogether, or they get mad. So he gives them a compromise "at least wait to see how OK turns out, since we based this heavily on their version". Bill gets delayed, and the supporters sit warm and fuzzy in the belief that OK will pass and their bill will be fine.

The sh*t storm will be when OK's copy gets chucked, Because then some idiot in Utah will actually have the gall to go "but maybe it will work here"...

I read everyone's comments and it had me thinking, banning video games won't decrese violence in the country, there's still other forms of media that contan violence. And banning citizens from owing their own guns won't decrese violence, there are more than one way to kill a person. I do believe that there should be some type of restriction of M games you know like when store owners ask for ID when you go buy some smokes, and that's being done here where I live. I think that's better than banning video games out right or putting them in the same catigory as porn. And to Daniel in response for law enforcement in Japan allowed to carry guns and not citizens; that law dates back to the Meji era when no one except law enforcement could carry swords. Now in this century, guns have replaced swords. Off topic I know but something intresting I thought I would share.