Where Politics And Video Games Collide

Now that I've read the case itself, some reactions:

Now he's not only claiming that Lee Malvo trained in sniping on Halo, but that the Army uses it to train snipers? IIRC, Halo doesn't even simulate gravity on sniping weapons. The base rule is pull the trigger when it's in your crosshoirs, which hardly seems to qualify as training. (point 9)

"Video game" should be hyphenated in point 11.

Point 12: This is one of the sadder attempts at spin I've seen. Recognizing something may not be good for kids isn't the same thing as community harm and recognizing parents will throw a fit isn't the same thing as copping to any sort of harm. Do we ban roller coasters because you must be a certain height to ride? Do we take the fact that libraries are typically separated into adults' and kids' books as a sign the adult books are dangerous and should be banned?

Point 14: I Best Buy is in violation of an out-of-court settlement (and I think he's mischaracterizing this), the thing to do would be to bring a civil suit specifically against them, not a public nuisance suit to ban a game. This is beyond the points that were amde earlier abotu the FTC considering cred cards valid for age verification as minors can't get them without parent/guardian approval. If they don't want Junior looking at porn and Halo, they can just not sign the form.

Point 15: This is the crux of his claim that Halo 3 itself, rather than Best Buy is a public nuisance, yet he backs it up only with a vague reference to news reports. Aren't you supposed to cite evidence?

Point 16: Again, what do false claims have to do with a nuisance suit? This sounds more like an issue for the FTC than the local courts.

Point 17: Prohibiting Microsoft from selling indirectly to anyone under 17 amounts to prohibiting them from selling it at all. Since hasn't named mail-order outlets beyond Best Buy in the case, presumably it would be Microsoft's job to make sure Amazon didn't sell to some kid in Pennsacola.

Overall: note the lack of any specific claims about Halo 3 or explanations why it falls under the public nuisance statute beyond vague claims that it's violent. He does cite (misleadingly) some studies on the matter, but does nothing to demonstrate these studies would apply to Halo 3. The closest he comes is citing a news story that the Beltway Sniper played Halo.

If he's lucky, the court will reject this at the first hearing, minimizing the damages Microsoft can counter-sure for.