[...] Earlier this week, Utah’s Jack Thompson-authored video game bill was pulled by Utah Attorney General Mark Shurtleff because he believed the bill would be found unconstitutional. This, of course, sent Thompson into a whirling tizzy and caused him to do the typical press release pimp-slap against Shurtleff. [...]

First off, I would like to say that allowing JT to defend his crap on the condition that he had to pay all court costs is a great idea because it would not only force him to accept responsibility for his actions, it would put him out of business for quite some time while he ran around trying to scrape up that kind of cash.
Now, in regards to JT's letter, the number of obvious fabrications/misconceptions it contains is staggering.
First off, in regards to the "sworn testimony," when did testimony make reality? Just because the serial killer swears on the stand that he is innocent doesn't make him so.
Also, a 40% miss rate by big companies is not really that bad, but I would like to question this statistic. The NIMF's latest report card said that big business was actually very effective at catching these people(I think, someone please verify for me), and it stated that the majority of the blame lay with the parents who did not bother to check ESRB ratings or what their children were buying/playing.
The Bully thing has already been stated so much that I won't bother rehashing, but JT's repeated statements that games like GTA and Doom train people to kill is laughable. As anyone who has shot a real firearm (or even a pellet gun) can tell you, a video game is in no way similar. A video game does not teach you hand control or how to counteract rifle sway. It does not teach you stance or how to eliminate the stutter in you hands. It does not teach you how to cock, load, eject, or reload the weapon, as most of this is done automatically in the game. It does not teach you how to sight a target properly(in real life, you don't often see people pressing a button to select and scroll through a list of all nearby targets), and it definitely does not teach you how to deal with recoil, sound, jamming, etc. Only an idiot would say that a person can train to use a weapon, and apparently one of those idiots is Jack Thompson.
To the remarks about the Louisiana AG, it should be noted that he had nothing to present beause JT threw a hissy fit like a spoiled girl and left with his "experts" and "evidence" and left the AG with nothing, although I highly doubt that even with that crap the judge would have considered the matter any harder.
"Tell it to the cops in the ground in Fayette, Alabama."
This coming from the man who taunted and mocked a man who committed suicide. Jack Thompson is the last person who should be talking about respecting the dead.
His comments on the free market system are ridiculous. This country was founded on the principles of laissez faire, a cornerstone to any successful and true democracy, and to suggest that free market is wrong or should be limited severely to make it NOT free is preposterous. Maybe JT should go to a third world country where the people are ruled by a dictator and there is no Constitution or freedom of speech or video games. Maybe then he will be happy.
"There is more evidence of the harm done by these games than there is that second-hand smoke causes lung cancer."
Hmmm...I must have been sleeping the day the surgeon general came out and told the population that video games can harm you and that second-hand smoke isn't harmful to you. Aside from the obvious fact that one is a psychological study and the other a chemical study, I find that this statement is ridiculous. I would like to question exactly where it is that JT digs up his research, because it is very unlikely that second-hand smoke, which has been around as long as there have been cigarettes and tobacco, has been studied less than video games, which have been around only since around the 1970's.
In conclusion, I would like to suggest that Jack Thompson shut his big egotistical mouth and listen to sounder minds. The fact that this man managed to pass a psych exam still astounds me because of the number of insane things he tries to do. I personally suspect him of senility or a huge Messiah Complex, but if not, then I have only one question for Jack Thompson. What the hell are you on?

@ Brokenscope and Sen. McCoy

Thanks to the both of you for the replies.

@ Benji

Such a law would be doable, constitutionally, provided that there were a government organization that would review ALL media that came out and rated it. That means every episode of a TV Show, every direct-to-dvd movie, every magazine, book, comic-book, console game, PC game, arcade-only game... Essentially, if it passes along information, whether factual or fictional, it would have to be rated by this agency (and I say agency because such a thing could not be just a panel - it would be HUGE). To do anything else would make the bill unconstitutional because of a lack of equal protection. Even then, there might still be legal challenges based upon the first amendment.

Such an agency would require billions of dollars annually to run, and would slow the production of every source of media's release to the US Public. It would set the US back YEARS behind every other country in the world, and all because some parents didn't want to actually have an interest in what their children were doing.

"Here’s an offer for you: If and when the bill is passed, step aside, and I’ll defend it, free of charge, as a deputized special assistant attorney general of Utah… '


So, Jack wants to bypass the will of the People of the State of Utah, who elected the AG, and become one himself. Hrm... sounds like something that's Un-American there, Jack.

Uhg.. We don't even have to criticize this guy any more... It's so pitiful that he thinks he's putting up a logical, and furthmore, infallable, argument when all he's doing is proving that he cheated his way through college to become the spectacular lawyer he is today.

Honestly, I think he should've stopped and realized that he's been screaming that a law that was tossed out for being unconstitutional will not be constitutional anywhere else just because he made it. 90% of his argument is "I said it, therefore it must be right! You're all just too stupid and you've been brainwashed by the ESRB!"

I really think poor JT never had pong when he was a kid, so he turned into the evil game hating psychopath we know today.

"Crusading Attorney and Author of Out of Harm’s Way will speak on how violence in media (particularly VIDEO GAMES) is destroying youth by re-wiring their brains, causing involuntary violent behavior patterns."

Re-wiring their brains? Involuntary violent behavior patterns? Is the Eagle Forum really suggesting that video games are brain-washing today's youth and turning them into mindless killing machines?

After reading the entire letter (not all of which I am quoting, but read it and follow in order):

"I am in Salt Lake City later today to address Saturday morning your state’s chapter of Eagle Forum, which was founded nationally by the great conservative activist and thinker, Phyllis Schlafly."

Yeah, that'll help your case. After having been interviewed by NBC and denying that you are homophobic, you turn around and admit siding with an organization that is a known hate group against homosexuals (one only has to visit the official website and read their articles opposing same-sex marriages to see that). Frankly, a lot of what appears on that site seems oddly familiar. Almost as if I'd seen some of the stories on another radio host's website. Hmmmm....

Real bright idea to bring up "Hot Coffee". If the AG really is an "enthusiast" of video games, then it's highly probable that you are overlooking the fact that he may know the Truth, the Whole Truth, and Nothing But the Truth about the case. From the fact that, playing the game alone was insufficient to access the code. To the fact that it required additional coding by "modders" to access the code. To the fact that, without additional modding, the characters in the scenes were clothed. To the fact that the nude scenes required additional "modding". And I have not doubt that the AG is also well aware that Take Two was punished by the government for its acts. Nor would I be surprised if the AG, being an "enthusiast" of video games, is well aware of how the ESRB operates.

"Having learned nothing, the ESRB last year put a “Teen” rating on another Take-Two game and then put its stamp of approval on it, allowing it to be shipped to kids all over the world. Then a gamer found a sex scene in the game, which required its re-rating to a “Mature” game. Have you not been following all this, Mr. Shurtleff, as you endorse the ESRB ratings?"

Uh, no, John Bruce, it's rated "T" for Teen. All one has to do is go to the ESRB website, put "Bully" in the search bar, and hit Enter. Perhaps it's your own bigotry that wants it rated "M". After all, that "sex scene" which you claim was found, and reported previously as having written the FTC about, was merely... a kiss. Moreover, a kiss between the male Player Character (PC) and male Non-Player Characters (NPCs). Strangely enough, while the ability of two boys kissing gets a "sex scene" claim from you, you do not make the same claim when the male PC kisses female NPCs. Fascinating. I would think the AG would like to know that you just intentionally tried to lie and misinform him.

And next we have the FTC "sting" (official term "study") crap again. As usual, John Bruce, you fail to mention that the same study was performed over previous years, all the way back to 2000. And each year the study was performed, the incidents of failure to follow age limiting policies DROPPED each year. Proving, not failure, but rather, IMPROVMENT each and every year.

"Stop and think about that just one minute in the midst of your busy schedule. What if 7-11 had a 40% failure rate in ID-ing and selling beer and wine to nine-year-olds? Would you then enthusiastically defend the “free market” as an adequate means of protecting children?"

Oddly enough, you don't point out where such laws FAIL. After all, as with store created policies, the law has a major loophole. Even if a retailer follows policy/law, an individual of appropriate age can still obtain, legally (policy or law), the materials you refer to. After which, where that material ends up...

Age limit laws catch rare violators because enforcement cannot be done 24/7. The actual way to prevent violations is to encourage other consumers to be aware of age limiting policies in place by retailers and, when witnessing a violation, report the act to Merchant Associations, at the least. Having a watchful and active community (not over "appropriateness" but over policy) is far more effective than an occasional law enforcement agency spending money more on failure than success.

"I don’t take a back seat to anyone as a defender of liberty and individual responsibility."

No, you just simply don't take responsibility for your own actions. It's everyone else's fault. But then, we also see your comment as a lie because, it's not the shooter's fault for killing someone, it's the video game's fault. That's what these lawsuits of yours are about. Devin Moore and Cody Posey are just two examples. They aren't responsible. The overall lives they've had aren't responsible. Video games are responsible. After all, you then proceed to, as always, blame video games for violent acts commited by individuals. So much for "individual responsibility".

As to NIMF and Dr. Walsh, everyone is entitled to their opinion. Oddly enough, John Bruce, you don't point out that (1) NIMF does NOT support legislation but rather parental responsibility in making decisions and (2) This past year's report cards focused the bad grade on PARENTS. Funny that you failed to mention that.

"This is a constitutional bill. I ought to know. I drafted one nearly identical to it for Louisiana, and we got it passed unanimously."

Ya know, there was a word recently bantered about that had to do with this type of bragging and self flattery. Gee, wonder where I saw it? Nevertheless, there is one important fact: State Legislatures do not make decisions as to whether a bill is Federally Constitutional or not. Federal Courts do.

"He put forth no evidence because he wanted the law to fail. "

Uh, no John Bruce, there was no "evidence" because YOU held back the supposed "evidence" (and even if you had provided your "evidence", it would have still failed, but then, we won't know now, will we?) as proven in your OWN publicized letters/emails during that time. If GP is reading this, I hope he will link to that particular story, Thanks. It's on this site. As to you, John Bruce, what happened to "individual responsibility"?

Although those brain scan studies are outright misinformation as well, this line is most interesting:
"...and the American Psychological Association’s findings of a direct causal link between violent video games and teen aggression!"

Gee, John Bruce, I do believe that an interview with GP and several members of the APA PROVED that to be a lie. Really, John Bruce, are you missing that part of the brain that deals with retaining what you've learned or do you have some abnormally large part of the brain that forces you to just simply lie and deceive others?

"No evidence? There is more evidence of the harm done by these games than there is that second-hand smoke causes lung cancer. The notion is utterly absurd."

Actually, John Bruce, the "evidence" you refer to about video games is "subjective" as well as highly "interpretive". That's how most psychology works. Not to mention that individuals are affected differently for a great many reasons. And much of that complexity is not studied nor is it even compared/contrasted to other mediums. Therefore, any such results tend to be slanted towards a DESIRED result, rather than one obtained with a massive amount of varying data proving or disproving a theory.

Also note that research into second hand smoke is far more recent that supposed studies into the effects of various media formats on an individual. Therefore, your comparison in that alone is misleading. I have not even pointed out the differences in chemical versus psychological reactions yet.

"Here’s an offer for you: If and when the bill is passed, step aside, and I’ll defend it, free of charge, as a deputized special assistant attorney general of Utah."

Ah yes, the old "My way or My way". And if YOU fail, as usual, who will you blame then? You didn't even take responsibility for your own loss in FL over the case against Bully. Who will you scapegoat if you loose in Utah?

Free of Charge? Here's a much better argument (and put it in writing, notarized as a legally binding contract):
If the bill passes, and John Bruce defends the law in court, and the bill is struck down... John Bruce has to pay the court costs that the game industry will sue for out of his own pocket. Let him even do the appeal all the way to the US Supreme Court. But if he looses, ALL the court costs must come from his OWN pocket.

C'mon John Bruce. You're that all fired sure that YOU can succeed, put your OWN money where your mouth is. Heck, I could have gone as far as saying not only should you have to pay for ALL the court costs, but that you had to publically admit that it was SOLELY YOUR FAULT that it didn't pass constitutional issues. Not the fault of the game industry, not the Utah AG's fault. Not the Utah legislature's fault. Not even the fault of the judges who ruled against you. YOUR fAULT ALONE. But, I suspect you're too cowardly to take "individual responsibility" that far.

"This is a constitutional bill. I ought to know. I drafted one nearly identical to it for Louisiana, and we got it passed unanimously…"

and then it got shot down for being unconstitutional.

"And maybe you do not know about the “Hot Coffee” scandal that broke in July 2005 in large part because of my efforts which revealed that Take-Two, the makers of the Grand Theft Auto games, had knowingly embedded interactive oral and anal sex scenes in their game, which necessitated a world-wide recall and rerating of the game. The ESRB had completely dropped the ball."

I think everybody here knows about the Hot Coffee scandal but there's a new take here on it I didn't hear before. Anal sex? Mr. Thompson must have quite the perverted mind if he sees that in those pixels. Then again, he equated boy-boy kissing to homosexual sex.

the reference to Congress is in regard to the June, 2006 hearing as reported by GP:

http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/306226.html?

JT's take that the House decided the ESRB is a "sham" is his spin. But the hearings WERE contentious and the ESRB DID take a beating during parts of it. It was not Pat Vance's finest performance.

BTW, this was the hearing that Jon Stewart skewered so comically on The Daily Show:

http://gamepolitics.livejournal.com/310875.html?

@Nuiembre- that would be Elder Scrolls IV Oblivion. However the ESRB contends that the violence dictated the change to the M rating.

It's easy to know who to like and dislike. It's hard to know what is BS and what is fact. We all know this web-site and these comments we make are biased. It doesn't mean our facts aren't facts it just means we aren't neutral in terms of what we want to happen in the future.

That said, I try to disprove someone in my own head by taking them seriously and sort of trying to get on board with them just so I can see eye to eye. That is the best way I know to cure myself of my own biases. I started out looking as JT as a fanatic who wants his 15 min of fame. I haven't completely left that notion, but I'm now in the place to try and cure myself of my biases against him. I have to say though, he doesn't make it easy. He's a lawyer and to me that reads no different than "learns the laws to manipulate the truth."

As someone who is trying to believe JT, it's hard to see all this evidence. It's not hard to see why people believe him and believe in him. However, I haven't seen this undeniable evidence yet, and I will continue to look for it. That's a big statement coming from someone studying to become a game designer.

-Mustasio

@IanC:
Closest match is http://www.joystiq.com/2006/09/28/dissecting-rockstars-formula-joystiq-p...

Most likely, he's allegedly referring to a reference to Kimberly Thompson. This testamony isn't stating that the esrb is a sham, but merely provides recommendations on how to improve the ESRB (e.g. have people play a segment of the game rather than simply watch a video).

Kimberly's testamony also focuses on a more abstract version of violence, including "abstract violence" such as ghosts chasing pacman (and vice versa) but still gets an 'E' rating. There's also the case where there's the games are similarly rated 'M', but have differing levels of graphic violence. An interview is shown here: http://www.joystiq.com/2006/08/23/violent-pac-man-researcher-responds/

In any case, it's still nothing to worry about.

Seems like a fairly typical temper tantrum response from Mr. Thompson. That bit at the end though is a really, really bad idea. We in no way want someone like J.T. just appointed to any kind of position like that. That state's attorney general is an elected position. If he really wants a job with them so bad run for office in his own state.

"And the judge was right, because the Louisiana AG took what we call “a dive.” …because he wanted the law to fail. The video game industry… threatened Louisiana… that if it sustained this law, it would pull its video game software design studios and other operations out of the state. Thus, the State blinked… "

OBJECTION!!!

Actually, the industry would have, and had every right to sue the state of Louisianna, then costing them more and more money in the long run. And even if the development houses just left, then many jobs and alot of tax revenue, gone. Why? Because Jack Thompson had to have his way. That or he wants to increase unemployment and homlessness. Game developers need to eat too.

Does jack actually pay attention to whats going on? mabye he should go live in germany, they hate media over there too it seems.

Strange a guy who hates media thumps his chest over his tv apearences.

@RTFM - you know, I get that quite a bit. And I realize how unpopular Thompson is among the gaming community. However, please remember that this is GamePOLITICS.

The man is right in the middle of Utah's legislative initiative regarding video games. He is on the offensive against Utah's attorney general. It's all enormously political and it revolves around video games. It's what we do here.

If you would prefer to read about cheat codes, game reviews, etc, by all means, there are plenty of sites for that. But however you feel about Thompson, when he is involved this deeply in a political situation, how do we not cover it? WHY wouldn't we cover it?

Breaking news! Scientific research on video games supporting Thompson has been found!

here!

And I quote:
"Playing video games can satisfy deep psychological needs and, at least in the short term, improve people's well-being, new research shows."

Oh, wait... That's good news. Suck it Thompson. I really hope someone in the audience brings up those recent articles.

Ohhh! Damn! A whole letter! I missed the link at the top. more to take apart :D

(Did you not know that sworn testimony before the US House of Representatives last year established that the ESRB rating system is a sham? There are “Teen” rated games that have more violence in them than some “Mature” rated games. The ESRB does not even review the entire games before rating them. And maybe you do not know about the “Hot Coffee” scandal that broke in July 2005 in large part because of my efforts which revealed that Take-Two, the makers of the Grand Theft Auto games, had knowingly embedded interactive oral and anal sex scenes in their game, which necessitated a world-wide recall and rerating of the game. The ESRB had completely dropped the ball.)

You have use the Oral and anal before. From what I've seen of Hot Coffee There is no "oral" Also as far as I know The ESRB didn't drop the ball. Once they got wind of what happened, They got ON the ball and changed the rating.

(Having learned nothing, the ESRB last year put a “Teen” rating on another Take-Two game and then put its stamp of approval on it, allowing it to be shipped to kids all over the world. Then a gamer found a sex scene in the game, which required its re-rating to a “Mature” game. Have you not been following all this, Mr. Shurtleff, as you endorse the ESRB ratings?)

Wow Thompson while Bully was getting stamped with a "T" rating Another Take Two game, Rockstar Games presents Table Tennis was being stamped with an "E" rating. Imagine that.

(Stop and think about that just one minute in the midst of your busy schedule. What if 7-11 had a 40% failure rate in ID-ing and selling beer and wine to nine-year-olds? Would you then enthusiastically defend the “free market” as an adequate means of protecting children?)

Let's twist this back around. 60% success rate.

(But go tell your free market tales to the six parents of three girls shot and killed in Paducah, Kentucky, who are my clients, whose three daughters were shot and killed by a 14-year-old video gamer by the name of Michael Carneal who trained on Doom to kill them because he was sold the game despite his age.)

Hey, I'll tell them that myself! Hey, you there! Doom did not train Michael Carneal to kill your kids!

I mean listen to yourself. You use the same line to anyone who makes that Argument. You sound like a broken record.

(Go tell your free market fantasies to the families of three policemen in Alabama whose loved ones were shot dead by Devin Moore, after he trained for months on Grand Theft Auto: Vice City. I was on 60 Minutes about all this maybe on an evening that you were, as you say in ads paid for by the video game industry, playing video games with your children. Devin Moore, at the age of 16, walked into the Wal-Mart SuperCenter in Jasper, Alabama, and was able to buy Vice City, no questions asked, with no parent in sight. Is that your definition of a free market that works. Tell it to the cops in the ground in Fayette, Alabama.)

I guess for how much I have played Vice City or any Grand Theft Auto I must be trained up enough to be a cold blooded killer. And an expert marksman. I wonder if the Goverment will give me a job as a assisan.
...Oh wait. That won't happen 'cause videogames can't train to kill. They can't train you to effectively use a gun. You sound like a broken record.

(Take-Two unleashed on the world the game Bully this past year. It is a Columbine simulator in every sense of the word. The ESRB rated the game “Teen” without ever playing it to conclusion. At the conclusion the hero of the game has to turn his school upside down with violence involving explosives and slingshots to the face to win the game. That is how you, the player, win the game. The National Institute on Media and the Family, headed by Dr. David Walsh, a clinical psychologist who yearly gives Congress, at the request of Senator Joe Lieberman, its “Annual Video Game Report Card” actually played the Bully game, Mr. Shurtleff, and he is appalled. He says it is really a “Mature” game masquerading as a “teen” game. Your prized ESRB ratings are a total sham.)

You are still harping on that huh? Still sore that it got sold and you couldn't stop it? I still see that you are still using David Walsh amd the NIMF's names after you were told many times to stop. Also have you forgotten that The NIMF gave the videogame industry on it's last report card all good grades and scolded the Parents?

(You cannot be allowed to defend this bill, if it becomes law, because you have already made clear that you will NOT defend this law. Oh, you will go through the motions, and then smile as it is ripped apart, so that you can, on behalf of the video game industry that promotes you, say “I told you so.”)

So you are going to step up and defent the bill so it will pass without problem. No It will fail no matter who's defending it.

(Step aside. Lawyers who want to protect children from predatory entertainment companies are ready to do the job you took an oath to do.

Regards, Jack Thompson)

Just one "Lawyer" you. I don't really see any other lawyer doing this but you.

- Warren Lewis

@tony selby

Last that was heard, Thompson declared it a "win" when the judge said "he would come back to the case in june 2007"

in his letter he references the Devon Moore case, does anyone know what has happened with that case since he was thrown off of it? or is it sitting aside waiting to get it's turn in court?

Since when does something being said before Congress make it true?

A single attorney offering his services is bogus. When was the last time any court case of this magnitude involved a single Attorney? JT needs to set aside his Grisham novels and remember he operates in the real world.

His offer to defend the law might be more attractive if he upped the ante on passing it. "If the law passes, and then is found to be unconstitutional, I will personally pay, out of my own pocket and any future legacy I may leave my family, the expenses inccurred to pass the law in legislature, the costs to defend the law (including paying for the services of the other state-paid attorneys and clerks who will have to assist me in the defense, as well as the court costs themselves), AND the trial expenses incurred by the ESA and/or other involved parties from the game industry."

Er, that previous post should be signed:

nightwng2000
NW2K Software

Nightwing -- I haven't visited the Eagle Forum's website, but just to clarify something for you: "opposes gay marriage" is not the same thing as "homosexual hate group." You should be careful with such rhetoric as it makes valid opinions less so.

I think he's also got a nack for telling A.Gs (if not EVERYONE ELSE) how to do their jobs....

Didn't he say similer things to the Louisannia AG about how to do his job?

Video games are destroying children's minds because they're rewiring them? Oy vey. I'm sure that explains why the crime statistics have gone down since the 90s. Yeah. Glad to see JT's got his priorities set. Its not gangs, or drugs, or parents not being more attentive with their children. Nope. Its video games. *sigh*

One day JT will stop blaming everyone else for his failures and instead take some responsibility for all the f'ups he's had.

Muetank (and others),
Thanks for the clarification on the game that the ESRB changed the rating on. Still, it's fun to call John Bruce on his errors, so many that they are. :)

Also, I think the ESRB pointed out that the rating change wasn't due to the mod but some other factor. I can't remember if GP pointed out that fact in this article, but I do recall that GP and other sites reported about the change in the rating and that it had to do with other factors.

nightwng2000
NW2K Software

Petty threats? Ultimatums? Demands? Is Jack becoming a terrorist?

Who is he to tell an AG that "You have no idea what you are talking about." Jack has no idea what HE'S talking about. I can compare Jack's statement (specifically, the tact) with a girlscout trying to sell cookies door to door. Although, instead of politely asking the person to purchase the cookies the girlscout punches the person in the gut and runs off with their wallet.

JT said - "even to the extent of doing tv ads endorsing the ESRB game rating system… "

Why is that bad thing? Doing adverts about the ERSB to help parents understand the system is a great thing IMO.

Oh and could someone fill me in on this "sworn testimony"?

"This is a constitutional bill. I ought to know. I drafted one nearly identical to it for Louisiana..."

Hmmm...isn't that kind of like someone from Philip Morris saying, "Cigarettes don't cause cancer. I ought to know. My company manufactures them." Or like someone from Exxon saying, "Oil consumption doesn't contribute to global warming. I ought to know. We process the oil into fuel"?

You know, if a programmer from Rockstar were to come out and say "'Bully' is perfectly fine for players of all ages. I ought to know. I programmed the game myself," Laddy Jack would jump all over that statement.

There is no evidence that these games make people violent and change the thought patterns of people. He is starting to get more ridiculous. He needs to stop trying to get violent video games banned and restricted. Jack Thompson is a bum and I hate that protest that they had outside of Rockstar Games about a year and a half ago pictured above. I've read all about that protest and their demands that they made to Rockstar Games. Actually just because of that protest, whenever I go to buy a game made by Rockstar Games in the future, I'm not going to buy it on the internet. I'm going to buy it at the store because, at the store, I'll be contributing directly to Rockstar Games and I urge all you gamers to do the same contribute to Rockstar Games and make that strike backfire.

On topic, that legislation will never make it and I think it's irrational to place the blame for violence in real life on images on a screen. Blaming a make believe thing for something real is childish and irrational. Saying that violent video games cause real violence is as childish as saying that if children watch cartoons about genies, they will stop studying and think that a genie will give them three wishes. You see what I mean? Images on a screen don't make people believe any differently than they did before they played or watched it. There is a difference between fantasy and reality and watching fantasy on a screen doesn't blind it out. That takes care of his BS ideas that video games cause violence.

GP,
I don't know if you'll see this, but while John Bruce is obviously taking on the Utah AG, has he made any comment at all regarding the senator who has pulled the law? Or is he holding his breath on that so far?

nightwng2000
NW2K Software

@Sen. Scott McCoy

Thank you sir for telling us that.

@Calvinball
I think they are trying to rationalize the usage of the utility committee the same way the claim that the FCC has jurisdiction over games.

I'm going to assume that cable is a public utility in utah. That leads them to assume that they have jurisdiction on the images on a TV screen be it cable or games.

They tried to argue that the FCC has jurisdiction over games because they are played on the TV. However the FCC only has jurisdiction over the airwaves, symbolic or real, the lines and shows that are actually transmitted over the airways to homes. They have the jurisdiction because they license the frequencies.

That is the only way they can rationalize the utility comities jurisdiction on the issue.

Sorry got my date wrong it will be heard on Tuesday, Jan. 23. Same committee.

@Calvinball

It really shouldn't be going to Public Utilities and Technology. It should go Judiciary (a committee of which I am a member). It is going to Public Utilities because the make up of that committee is more sympathetic to the bill.

Scott

"And the judge was right, because the Louisiana AG took what we call “a dive.” …because he wanted the law to fail. The video game industry… threatened Louisiana… that if it sustained this law, it would pull its video game software design studios and other operations out of the state. Thus, the State blinked… "

wow, what a crock. I just looked that one part. is he really trying to convince the AG that the industry as a collective threatened to pull out of lousiana?

I gotta admit, he has reached a new level.

The final possibility is that he's trying to point out the utter incompetance of the Florida Bar through his own actions. We know he's had a long-standing dispute with the very place that gave him his legal status, and it might be that he's making an example of himself in order to prove their inadequacy and/or corruption. A potential reason for why he's held off on revealing the connection for so long would be that he's waiting for a win - a large, undeniable win - in order to use it as ammunition against the Bar. In this case, Thompson would be acting intentionally absurd in order to achieve his goals. Another supporting facet of this argument would be that he expresses a very directed, caustic hatred towards gamers, which may be use to imply a parallel to racism. Gamers are one of the few as-yet legally unprotected minorities, meaning that he can make his point without fear of an immediate and focused public/legal backlash.

Does anyone else have any theories surrounding Thompsons actions that doesn't revolve around him being insane/self-serving? Being a man of science, I don't like exclusively commiting to a theory until all other possibilities have been exhausted. If, at the end, we can safely say that all other alternatives are either impossible/improbable, only then can we be intellectually satisfied with our decision.

@Wookiee:

If you ask me, that's the smoking gun that settles the debate between whether he's doing this for the kids or if he's doing it for himself. He just wants to be in the media; no sane person would assume that sending out emails that are quite plainly brimming with hate, paranoia and egomaniacal banter to his allies would help his cause. Even less sane would be CC'ing said emails to the press or any form of public media. The only possible explainations for such actions are that he's either:

a) More concerned with getting his name in print and other media than actually persuing his cause, possibly for financial, political or purely egotistical gain, or:

b) A schizophrenic sociopath. He has no sense of social concience, refuses to take responsibility for the negative effects of his actions, shows egomaniacal and paranoid tendencies, speaks in a disorganised way, and seems to actually enjoy (Or at least actively pursues) isolating himself from potential comrades by (Attempting to) intentionally creating a large group of enemies.

B is the only answer I can come to that doesn't involve Jack being a pure egotist, he's seen time and again that his insistance on making his spats public isn't helping his cause. Sure, it's making his name more known (And certainly unanimous with Videogame Activism), but he is not the cause, unless A is true.

To give Thompson the benefit of the doubt, there is a third, yet unlikely, possiblity. It could be that this is all part of a multi-stage plan, where getting his name known is only a means to an as-yet-undisclosed end. It could be to point out the medias obsession over controversy rather than actual news, or it could be that he's merely getting his name known using the best method available (That being controversy) before actually striking with a good, logical argument against video-games, such as having the vocal spread to let a wide range of parents know about the ratings system or otherwise. However, while this could be a good strategy, it seems unlikely in Thompsons case. He's faught battles too similar to this prior to Video Games, and if he didn't strike soon with logic, then his reputation would be far too shattered to be able to get his point across meaningfully.

"Volcanman Says:

January 20th, 2007 at 5:24 pm
The three things that will cause the apocolypse to happen are as follows:

1. Thompson finally gets one of his bills passed in a state
2. Hiliary Clinton becomes President
3. Hiliary gets more of Thompson’s bills passed throughout the country''



4. All Games Banned, for exception on ''kid-friendly" Disney movie related cash-ins
5. Nationwide underground gamer uprising causes rebellion inwhich the nation is rebuilt in the gamer point of view


...sweet


If lawyer get pissed cuz they think the game teach kids to kill, why not attack the Military for training kids to kill, a 17 y/o with detailed knowledge on combat tactics, multiple weapons training-including M-16's, M24b's, Squad Automatic Weapon (SAW), Explosive such as Claymores and Grenades, hand to hand combat, as well an ENCOURAGING and REWARDING and often INCITING aggresive behavior...

Games didnt teach me to kill, i learned tactics and strategies to survive games. the military taught me to kill

Wow, that was really off topic.

(Take-Two unleashed on the world the game Bully this past year. It is a Columbine simulator in every sense of the word. ... with violence involving explosives and slingshots to the face to win the game.

Odd, I could have sworn that Columbine involved people being shot with guns, not slingshots. And people dying. And the perpetrators committing suicide at the end of their rampage. I'm pretty sure that we'd have heard about it by now if Bully was any of those things.

The funny part of all this is that Mr. Shurtleff isn't a fan of violent video games. Or even games in general as far as I can tell. He just has the uncommon common sense to realize that precedent is heavily against the constitutionality of these laws, the research required to overcome the constitution is shaky, unconvincing, and sparse at it's best, and that everyone would be better served if they just skipped the costly legal battle that he knows he can't win. Instead of a doomed court fight, he'd rather go straight to teaching parents that games these days contain things they may not want their kids to see, and how to determine which games those are. Yet in Jacko's eyes, this makes him a horrible person.

The thing that always strikes me as funny is that we aren't alone. Nearly all of us here are in a position where we have had no formal legal education at all and only a very small window into the legal world. Nevertheless, we can see the fallacious arguments and laughable behaviour of this two-headed imbecile. The golden shiny wire of hope in all this is that the professionals aren't going to miss the things that even we can see.

Picture the scene of someone receiving one of these mass emails from JT and reading it over. When I do it, it's always Danny Glover looking bemused for a moment and shouting, "What the hell is this guy on?"

Just read in here where someone suggested Jack should pay the Industry's legal fees when his bill flops in court - BRILLIANT.

Let's let Jack defend his bill, and make him liable for all the legal costs once it fails. That'll teach him.