TomWithTheWeather Posted October 22, 2005 Report Posted October 22, 2005 Is this first guy on morphium? He's just got to speak slowly for the old people, which I'm sure makes up the majority of viewers who tune in to this show.
kleinluka Posted November 19, 2005 Author Report Posted November 19, 2005 Update in the Strickland vs. Sony case taking place in Alabama, where the families of three law enforcement officers slain by a young gunman are seeking money from a host of defendents, including Sony, Gamestop, and WalMart. Their claims (or more correctly, their attorney Jack Thompson's claims) are that the gunman was programmed by and/or under the influence of the video game GTA 3 which caused him to commit the crime. In a move that should surprise no one, Judge Moore revoked attorney Jack Thompson's Pro Hac Vice license to practice law in Alabama for the case in question. The Judge told Jack Thompson that under Alabama law, he could not withdraw from the case. He then essentially turned around and kicked Jack off the case warning him that should he ever attempt to seek a temporary license to practice law in the state again, he would have to attach the ruling statement to the application. Essentially the judge determined that Mr. Thompson violated professional ethics in the case. The judge supported his reasons with an 18 page ruling. gamepolitics.com has some discussion going on the topic (mostly a lot of cheering), and there's a good article on the story at the Tuscaloosa News (which will require registration to read. This is, of course, all sideshow activity to the meat of the case. In addition to filing the motion to have Jack Thompson removed from the case (granted as noted above), they have also filed a motion requesting the case be dimissed for lack of merit. In the past, when similar cases have been filed (of the "games made him do it" type), they have been dimissed on the grounds that games, like books and movies, are covered by the First Amendment and our right to free expression.
Izuno Posted November 21, 2005 Report Posted November 21, 2005 Hmm.... Maybe Jack Thompson is just trying to get rich and famous? Does he have any other real motivation here? Hmm....
Kosmo Posted November 21, 2005 Report Posted November 21, 2005 Jack Thompsons stance against "everything that is harmful to children" might be everything if you really think about it. If children are so suggestible as he makes them out to be, then I'd say that even normal games like super mario bros. and zelda are bad for children, their minds are clouded and they don't know what is real and what is not. So why he just attacks violent games? My money is on what Izuno said, he just doesn't care about the cause, he saw a good market for a loud lawyer that represents the "masses against heartless game companies that don't care about little children." Now this is the part where I say "damn, he is actually smarter than he looks" but I know that is not the case so I woun't waste my time by making such statement. Jack is just very lonely old man.
Recommended Posts