@ Brokenscope and hayabusa75

I don't know how to not include Jack Thompson in the discussions about anti-game fanatucs when he's the main one. Every time I hear of someone protesting against violent video games, the name Jack Thompson seems to come up. He's the main one involved in this. By Rockstar is not guilty of anything, I mean guilty of crimes I don't mean that all their games are automatically top notch and perfect although I'm sure some are. Those protesters were protesting peacefully yes I'll give you that one, but they were making extortionist type demands and I think that anti-game actvists are the real thugs. I read on a website one time that Jack Thompson called gamers thugs. Well guess what, he's the real thug.

To quote Asok the intern, "My frustration has become searing psychological pain".

The right to protest peaceably is a fundamental right in this country. They were doing just that. That has to be the most idiotic statement I have ever heard from you.

Rockstar is guilty of one thing. Bad programing and Quality control.

@ Brokenscope

I guess I got carried away with that statement that gay people are all against violent video games. I'm sure they're not all against it. I just think that people who are against them are pansies and I didn't like the fact that I thought hayabusa75 was saying that I was gay which I'm NOT. However, why don't you go to google.com and try to find some of my other anti-Jack Thompson posts. You won't have to look far if you type in almost anything that has to do with Jack Thompson.

You're right I hate his guts and I would never make fun of gamers and violent video games because I am a gamer and I have fought against anti-game ideas quite a bit. I have defended violent video games a bunch for many years. Also, I think that Jotun posts good comments and that's why I compliment him. We're on the same side of the issue and we feel the same way about Jack Thompson. Seriously though go to those websites and try to find some of my posts about that lying pig and, by the way, thanks for saying that I insult Jack Thompson every chance I get. That's a huge compliment and I appreciate such comments a lot keep them coming.

@ Freekill

The only person I have insulted on here is Jack Thompson. I hate him because I've read a lot about him on other web sites. In fact, I've even posted things on other websites about him. If you would like to see them, go to google.com and type in something about Jack Thompson and you won't have to look long to find a Daniel post running down Jack Thompson. I hate his guts because I've read the things he says about games and gamers and it pisses me off. Type in Jack Thompson thinks he's Jesus.

He insults gamers and attacks games every chance he gets. That makes me mad because for years every time I hear someone running down those games and blaming them for things, it makes me furious. I can't stand it and that's why I'm the reverse of him because he can't stand to hear anything in favor of violent video games and I can't stand to hear anything against violent video games. Look at some of my other posts throughout the internet about that pig and also here at gamepolitics.com, the subject keeps coming up in the entries.

@ Daniel

Is Jack Thompson really worth all this fuss? Day after day, post after post, you spew the same crap about him. Do you feel threatened by him? Is that why you have to constantly repeat yourself every day, sometimes multiple times in one day?

...sorry if that sounded really rude but...sometimes it almost gives me a headache to read what you have to say, other times I am amused by it. Kind of like when Jack himself was on here, posting loud, annoying, and often repitious thoughts on those who didn't agree with him.

@ Brokenscope and hayabusa75

WOW! Where do I start? Brokenscpe, I'm flattered that you are always thinking of my posts. That's very flattering. I also have said before that a game is not automatically good if it's violent. I've played some games that are violent that SUCK! Not all violent games are fun. Fight Club is a good example. Also, haybusa75, I don't know if you're right that Jack Thompson isn't taken seriously because I have heard that he has been on 60 Minutes many times talking against violent video games and people listen to him.

Also, another thing that gets my mad is when I hear about the protest that took place about a year and a half ago. Jack Thompson led a Wahington D. C. group to New York to protest outside of Rockstar Games with signs saying that the makers of violent games were felons and should be prosecuted.

That pisses me off because I think, "What are they doing wrong? They're only trying to give people entertainment. Since when is that a crime?" They also made demands that included not realesing Bully under any circumstances and get this setting up a fund to pay for the damages done to anyone's car that could be linked to GTA. In other words, GTA was responsible for all auto accidents by anyone who played GTA. That's how crazy and how sick that man is and that's why I think he's crap. People take him seriously. Fanatics are taken serioulsy.

Let me get this strait, so you can't say I missed it. You're saying that fanatics are not taken serioulsy. If that's correct, then why is Jack Thompson being taken seriously by a lot of people? It just irritates me beyond belief when I hear about that protest that never should have been allowed to happen. The cops should have arrested the protestors because they're the real felons trying to extort money from an innocent video game company. Rockstar Games doesn't owe anyone anything and those anti-game jerks need to leave them alone because they're NOT GUILTY of anything.

@ hayabusa75

Hey, man, I don't like that last line, "Have you asked out Jotun yet?" I'm not queer or I would be against violent video games. Save those kind of remarks for Jack Thompson. I think that Jotun is dedicated to attacking Jack Thompson and trying to end this threat to our games. Jotun is a gamer and he's on our side and I'm giving him some support in his attacks against this threat, but I'm no pussy. I think that last statement was tasteless and uncalled for.

...
We believe in a constitutional right to tell whatever story you want. To create what ever art you want. To say what you think without government approval or fear of reprisal. We believe that parenting is a parental responsibility, a job that parents, not the government, is supposed to do. We believe that games are a creative medium which deserves the same protections as movies, book, paintings ,and poetry.

We strive for intelligent and open discussion. Creative thinking and informed opinions are what drives discussions on this site. Ideally anyways.

Many of us do not believe in the fuck all idea that everyone should be watching violent things every chance they get. We do not believe that violent and graphic material is something children need to see constantly.
In fact some of us find other things besides violence entertaining.

You see Daniel, we are not sure seeing as there is no proof of either position on videogames cause violence. You see buried between you post people sometimes discuss thing like for example "Are violent people attracted to games, or do games make people violent?" or "Are games, or other media enough to push someone who is unstable over the edge?"
and "What are the long term effects of games?" and even "You know... what if we are wrong, and there are some adverse long term effects of games and other media".

Your constant "well history shows" is the same kind of bullshit data that JT tries to throw. A decline in violence among youth, and an increase in sale of videogames is a correlation. However, anyone who has taken the most basics of statistics should know that correlation does NOT imply causation. Let me make that simpler for you. 2 things changing in a way that seems related does not mean one is a cause and the other is an effect. A third unknown variable could be causing both to change. Thus neither can be proven as such without extensive study of all factors involved.

Once again, you seem to completely misunderstand the point of the ESRB. Why do I bring them in, because that is your usual thing to say when you say everyone should play innocent violent videogames.

IT IS A GUIDELINE THAT EXISTS SO YOU CAN GET A GENERAL IDEA OF THE CONTENT WITHIN A GAME WITHOUT PURCHASING IT OR DOING EXTENSIVE RESEARCH. IT ALLOWS A PARENT OR EVEN THE MORALLY STRICT TO PICK UP A GAME AND DECIDE IF IT IS APPROPRIATE BASED ON ITS RATING. THE RATINGS GIVE A GENERAL GUIDELINE BASED ON WHAT SOCIETY TENDS TO RESERVE FOR ADULTS VS CHILDREN. THE ESRB DOES NOT SAY THAT NO ONE UNDER THIS AGE LIMIT SHOULD PLAY. IT SAYS THAT IT RECOMMENDS THIS AGE GUIDELINE.

read that one more time just to make sure you fucking get it.

"When you really look closely at Jack Thompson’s arguments, you can clearly see that his argument is that violent images on a screen can cause people to throw away their lives and that’s not true."

No, wrong. If not games JT would be going after violent books right now. The man honestly believes that all violent media is an affront to god. He has gone after radio and music as well. The man honestly believes he is doing the right thing.

Your policy of going out and buying a game out of spite , great just what the world needs more of, because Jack Thompson or some other anti-gamer gamer doesn't like it is stupid. Half the time it gives money for a shitty dev to make another pointless shitty and pointlessly violent game that will ride on the controversy till everyone realizes what a piece of shit it was and lets if fade into memory.

Sorry Daniel, what you know isn't a fact, it is an opinion. IT is what you think. You don't know anything, you think you know. You can't know since a lack of evidence against something does not make it true.

Now let me summarize.

Little tommy is most likely not ready to understand GTA:VC at the age of 6.

There is no proof one way or another on the issue of the effects of games. IT has not been studied.

History, thus far has never proved one of your points.

JT doesn't have games, he hates all media that goes against his narrow ideology.

THe ESRB is not a restriction, it is a series of ratings designed to make parenting easier.

Now in closing.

I tire, as I cannot speak for others on this subject, I tire of your posts. You only seem to post here for one purpose. To call JT and other activists idiots, turds, morons, idiots, fools, crap, shit heads, and a veritable cornucopia of creative derogatory terms. Did I say creative, sorry, I meant the same 10 names over and over. You do the same thing with most of your initial posts.

Jack thompson is an idiot. He needs to be put in a mental hospital. He is a bad lawyer. He is a piece of crap. He is an ambulance chaser. Sex is bad. JT thinks he is jesus. Games don't cause violence, they are innocent, violent videogames are good, everyone should play them. The violent videogame industry is gods gift to man. I refuse to see any other possible points of view. I also refuse to add anything to discussions in the threads. I am a history major so I should know that history proves that violent vidoegames are good. I've made posts all over the net. I hate jack Thompson. I insult jack thompson whenever I can.

Wow, I think I may have just summed up the general idea of every post you ever made with just about the same level of grammar and coherency.

I don't know how else to say it. You contribute little or nothing to the site. I always ask myself on a thread I didn't catch before morning classes "I wonder what vintage Daniel posted today, old Daniel with a hint of rational, or oblivious with a pointless comedic reference?".

Change your posting style, change the content of your posts, and contribute god damnit.

@ Brokenscope, hayabusa75 and Bigman-K

I don't mean to make our side look bad. My main argument is that violent images on a screen don't make people want to throw their lives away. When you really look closely at Jack Thompson's arguments, you can clearly see that his argument is that violent images on a screen can cause people to throw away their lives and that's not true. Also, by fanatical I don't believe any of the anti-gamers' lies. I'm not in the middle considering both sides because I know one is right and the other is wrong.

It seems to me also that sometimes you guys think that, in some cases, video games do cause violence. It seems to me that you guys haven't rejected the idea that images on a screen lead to violence entirely and that's why you think I'm a fanatic because I have rejected that argument entirely. That's why I think that violent video games are okay for everybody because I don't believe that they lead to, and inspire, violence. I think you partly agree with Jack Thompson sometimes.

I mean if you have rejected the idea that violent images lead to violence entirely, then why do you think that certain people shouldn't play violent video games? Obviously, you think that sometimes it does lead to violence. I think that's the difference between us is that I've said that these games don't ever cause violence and that theory is totally wrong and video games aren't to blame for anything. You guys seem to think that, for the most part, they don't, but sometimes they do.

@Daniel:

You completely misinterpreted my comment, as I knew you would. To quote Iago from Aladdin: "I think I'm gonna have a heart attack, and DIE from that surprise!"

BTW, have you asked out Jotun yet?

@ hayabusa75

You're right. I hate Jack Thompson and I'm the reverse of him. I'm like the extremist on the side of video games. I can't stop saying negative things about him because I hate his ideas, his antics and his lies. I know what you mean by top myself. Just as you think I can't get anyomre extreme, I do. I believe that violent video games are good and shouldn't be attacked because they're not harmful in any way, shape, or form. I totally reject the idea that these games are bad and influence people. Thanks for the compliment. You're basically saying that I'm like Jack Thompson in reverse and for that I say THANKS DUDE!!

@ Jotun

I think you're comment is AWESOME. These politicians are TURDS and they're acting very childishly by not giving up when they know they've lost. They're such idiots for not giving up and they're idiots even more for listening to Jack Thompson. Only someone with an I.Q. of -88,000,000 would listen to Jack Thompson. He's a bum and, as I read one time on another site, he is a manchild. He never grew up and people are stupid enough to listen to him that's the scariest part. You post great comments. Keep it up.

@ Bigman-K

Are you saying that Joe Lieberman is a Jew? I knew he was against violent video games and heavy metal music and a close friend of Jack Thompson, but I didn't know it was for religious reasons. I'm not against the Jewish religion, but I didn't know that Joe Lieberman was attacking violent media for religious reasons.

@ Brokenscope

My point is that America isn't nearly as violent as it once was. I can't believe you missed that. History proves that violence in America is in heavy decline. Before violent video games existed, America was a very violent place but not anymore. This proves that violent entertainment has nothing to do with real violence in real life. Violent video games mean a lot to me and they are being slandered by anti-game activists and I can't stand idly by when I know that they're totally innocent. History helps clear them and exhonerate them. However, anti-game activists wouldn't want to look at the overwhelming evidence against their lies because then they would have to find something else to whine about.

.....
Daniel, once I got beyond reading that comment I still wasn't sure what your point was or what proof you were offering. FInd a point and back it up.

@ Brokenscope

In light of what you said, I guess extortion wasn't the right word to use. The right word is abusive demands. Go to Google.com and type in Jack Thompson's protest outside of Rockstar Games and you won't have to look for long before you find the list of abusive mean nasty demands of the protestors. Also where did Jack Thompson come off calling Penny Arcade a little extortion factory? What is Penny Arcade anyway? I've been to their website and I just can't figure it out. I know why Jack Thompson hates them, but I know they can't be a real arcade.

I know about him calling us pixelantes, but I went to a website one time where he was calling us thugs. He said, "Video gamer thugs." He also said that our frontal lobes are fried from playing violent video games. Also, I've read that he said one time, "You don't shoot people in the face unless you're a hitman or a video gamer." That's a direct quote and I take offense at that because I'm a video gamer. If you go visit the sites that I've visited, you'll know why I hate him very badly. Any self respecting gamer would, and should, hate him very badly. He is a pig. Go to those websites and then tell me that I'm wrong. Also, where can I get an "I Hate Jack Thompson" tee shirt?

@ hayabusa75

I don't have a mental illness. I keep insulting Jack Thompson because he attacks violent video games constantly and I hate him for trying to get them banned, but I'm not crazy and I'm defending innocent games from an evil madman. I don't think he should be shot, but I do think that he should be disbarred. As I've said before, I don't condone real violence in the real world and if I did, I'd be proving him right and that's the last thing I'd ever want to do.

Also, history disproves Jack Thompson's lies. When do you think America was more violent forty years ago during the Civil Rights Movement when the Ku Klux Klan was killing people for having dark skin or now when the Klan is dead and everybody's getting along? Also, forty years ago there were no video games and America was far more violent back then, so let's look closer at that. America was more violent before video games, but video games make people violent? That doesn't add up somehow. Currently, we are only a culture of death when it comes to entertainment. Also, my defending violent video games and liking violent entertainment and images on a screen is not a phase I'm going through. Everybody I know thinks it is and that's why I like it when you say that I'm the reverse of anti-game activists.

@Bigman-K:

So what you're saying is we only have to put up with 4 more years of this? How comforting. =)

Seriously, I looked up Asberger Syndrome on Wiki and 90% of that stuff is right on target.

@Brokenscope:

Yes, I've found those to be quite enlightening. Stay tuned for a similarly dazzling lesson of my own on bartending (my job)...how to make a rum and coke!

Grahamr Says:
January 10th, 2007 at 11:22 am

Arrghhh!!!! Screw this copypasta legislation crap!!

In before Fresh Prince.

appeals to the morbid interest of minors in violence
is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the a town called Bel-Air. In west Philadelphia born and raised, on the playground was where I spent most of my days; chilling out, maxing, relaxing all cool, and shooting some b'ball outside of the school. When a couple of guys who were up to no good started making trouble in my neighbourhood, I got in one little fight and my mom got scared. She said "You're moving with your auntie and uncle in Bel-Air"; and
does not have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors.

Apologies to GP for spamming his comments with this crap.

"
appeals to the morbid interest of minors in violence
is patently offensive to prevailing standards in the adult community as a whole with respect to what is suitable material for minors; and
does not have serious literary, artistic, political, or scientific value for minors."

Arrghhh!!!! Screw this copypasta legislation crap!!

And they have recessed into an infinte loop of words...

I don't know, one goes down, another two pop up. It's kinda like playing constitutional whack-a-mole.

I know the politicians are doing this so they can look good to their constituents... I know the constituents are stupid enough to demand their taxpayer dollars are wasted on a feel-good-unconstitutional bill...

It's just sad, really, that they're so willing to throw the money away. This will be struck down like so many other bills as unconstitutional, and hundreds of thousands of dollars will go to waste once more, because people are stupid and don't want to think for themselves.

Second verse same as the first, difference is the AG in Utah probably won't try to defend the bill, as he's already working with the industry.

I'm 24 now but i used to be alot like Daniel back when i was between 17 and 20. I used to say stupid things like "I wish Lieberman was killed" and "Anyone who believes violent video games cause violence should be shot" stuff like that. I was pretty fanatic back in the day.

I find it amusing that Jack talks about the standards of an 'Average Person' when he appears in a film that states that almost 50% of the population play computer games (Moral Kombat). By that definition, the average person is a gamer.

What he should have put was 'in the opinion of Jack Thompson', and believe me, that falls a fair bit short even of 'average'.

@Bigman-K:

How much younger? Daniel says he's 20.

Incidentally, your post to Daniel looks a lot like what I used to write to him until just recently.

I think states are spending too much time and money trying to attack violent images on a screen. Violent images on a screen are in no way harmful or dangerous. They are good and very fun. I think people who are against them are jerks and need to be taken out of office immediately. They are the lowest of the low in my judgement. Who cares if people like to see violent images on a screen? Those images have nothing to do with the real world and don't influence people at all. These people are acting like morons and I hope they lose their positions in office. They are turds and pieces of crap. States, STOP IT.

@Prez Lincoln

"Dumba–es and me with a baseball bat?"

You see, that's the sort of retort that makes politicians THINK that we are all violence-crazed...

I wonder if Daniel has Asberger Syndrome. His constant repeating of himself and not getting other people's posts. He reminds me of me when i was younger and i happen to have it.

@Daniel

Daniel in essence most of us agree with you, Jack Thompson is a moron, violent video games are not harmful for minors (well at least older minors and teenagers), and anti-gaming legislation sucks but the way you act seems fanatical and over the top, sort of like a 180 of Jack Thompson. You got to calm yourself down a little and read through other people posts more throughly and think it through before you post a response. I hope you understand.

@Robb

Not sure which law your refering too exactly, but if the ESA thought it was a good idea, then 10 to 1 says that it was a law against explicit sex, not violence. In that case, the law is really just reflecting the same pronograpghy laws that exists for other forms of media and appling it to games. Bascially, its kinda of a law against porn video games (which the game industry doesn't make anyway...)... This law is meant for violence not sex, thus making this one unconstituional and the maryland law consitiutional.

@Monte

This was bothering me so I looked it up. It isn't a new law to begin with. It was an amendment to maryland criminal obscenity law. If you don't look at it carefully, it looks like carte blanche to just say: this is obscene, let's throw somebody in jail. I find the obscenity law to be very vague, but the current precedent is genitals, breasts, and sexual acts. It actually doesn't prevent nudity in medical documentaries or works of art that are not intended as porn, like in Schindler's List or the statue of David (those are examples, not equals). Ironically, a game like Trauma center could have nudity if it was educational and not something "they could get away with." I personally consider Trauma center non-educational, because we don't have "heal-all" spray, for example. The obscenity law should be a little more specific, but when you add VIDEO GAME to the list of things that could have obscene covers or content, it would have to be compared with porn.

So, yes, I agree that any law that equates violence as porn by lifting porn legalese off of most state's books, is wrong. It's almost as if they "copied" the wrong thing. Also, violence in a game is not real and doesn't make people commit it, no matter how influential. These are the things worth fighting.

I will keep an eye open for "creative interpretation" of the obscenity law on video games, though.

Doesn't a state AG *have* to defend a state's bill if it gets challenged?

Regardless of whether it's defensible in his legal opinion?

Wow...this again. While they're at it, why don't they outlaw books for minors? Why don't they outlaw television for minors? Even the news is as violent and "morbid" as some of these games are, why don't they outlaw the news? Music? Art often contains nude figures, according to Jack, outlawed. How is it not blatantly obvious that these bills are unconstitutional? Not even one of the newer amendments, the FIRST amendment is clearly violated by these bills. Ever heard of freedom of speech Jack?

Honestly, these politicians are so transparent, its just because they are too scared to go after an industry that could hurt them like the gun industry, alcohol industry, or tobacco industry. Instead, they choose to put pressure on what could easily be considered the weakest societal detriment, and they put all the pressure they can on it because the game industry is constantly villified by the media. Politicians need to learn how to actually focus on the REAL problems in our society such as crime, lack of education, drugs, or the wide availability of guns. How much money have they wasted on these worthless, unconstitutional bills that could have gone to better causes such as teachers' salaries or better equipment/funding for the police? Jack Thompson needs to learn how to grow up and stop wasting taxpayers money and time.

"appeals to the morbid interest of minors in violence"

A morbid interest in violence? What does that even mean? Is that the same thing as watching WWE or Football or Hockey? Is it the same as playing cops and robbers or cowboys and indians with toy guns? Should we be getting rid of the plastic lightsabers and inflatable punching bags that are sold at Toys R Us? What is so morbid about violence? It's not like a 7 year old comes home after school and tells his mom, "Mother, I've decided that I want to be an torturer and executioner when I grow up. I want to peel the skin off of innocent civilians and break every bone in their body before dipping them in acid until they die." Now THAT is a morbid interest in violence.

I don’t know, one goes down, another two pop up. It’s kinda like playing constitutional whack-a-mole.

I've found if you just lay across the table, you win every time.

Now if we could only find a big fatass to sit on Jack till he starts coughing up tickets.....

@draq

While it's a good idea "in principle" (although it can also be argued that it sets dangerous precedents in terms of delegating freedom to the government), the US Constitution is pretty clear that it's not allowed, both in terms of freedom of speech, and equality before the law (even when it comes to minors). In countries where "Freedom of Speech" is a little more flexible (like say, Canada), it's perfectly legal (up here, minors have fewer rights than their US counterparts).

Wow...this again. While they're at it, why don't they outlaw books for minors? Why don't they outlaw television for minors? Even the news is as violent and "morbid" as some of these games are, why don't they outlaw the news? Music? Art often contains nude figures, according to Jack, outlawed...While it's a good idea "in principle" (although it can also be argued that it sets dangerous precedents in terms of delegating freedom to the government), the US Constitution is pretty clear that it's not allowed, both in terms of freedom of speech, and equality before the law (even when it comes to minors)

=========================================================================

jackkatewinslet

 

[url=http://www.drugaddiction.net/utah]Utah Drug Addiction[/url]