September 10, 2007
Some California voters are backing Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger's appeal of a federal court ruling that the state's 2005 video game law is unconstitutional. And some aren't.As reported by the Press-Enterprise (Riverside):
Delia Flores, owner of Time Video in Colton, said she disagrees with the governor's action and fears a ban would hurt her business of renting and selling video games.
"I feel regulating it is overstepping the parental right on how they are raising their children," Flores said.
Justin Yang, owner of Mega Video in San Bernardino, which rents and sells movies and video games, said there are too many violent video games and they're not good for children.
"If more control goes on, I'm with that," Yang said.
A Schwarzenegger aide told the newspaper that the appeal was expected to take 18-24 months to resolve.
Meanwhile, Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA), author of a pair of unsuccessful video game bills in Congress, also threw his support behind Schwarzenegger's appeal.
The Press-Enterprise also interviewed a man who labors under the common misapprehension that it's okay for the government to restrict video game sales because movies already are regulated:
I think it should be governed just like the movies. Some of these games are just so advanced.
GP: Like the ESRB system, the well-known movie ratings are a voluntary compliance model, and do not have the force of law behind them. That is, a theater employee might be fired for letting a 12-year-old into an R-rated film but could not face a penalty imposed by the government.
Comments
"Failing legal career? Hardly, not with the federal court ruling that came out last week which your Dennis McCauley won’t share here. "
You seem to be completely capable of sharing court rulings and other legal documents yourself, as is apparent from your previous posts. So why don't you just share that with us yourself then?
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
Random Tower: Game News and Commentary
We must not be reading the same order, Jack, 'cause it sounds like you lil' federal lawsuit is careening towards dismissal, despite your dilatory efforts to the contrary. Highlights of Judge Adalberto Jordan's Omnibus Order of Sept. 7, 2007:
-Jack sued the Florida Bar and Judge Dava Tunis. Judge Adalberto notes: "the Florida Bar is not a proper defendant in this lawsuit...As an agency of the State of Florida, the Bar is not susceptible to suit under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 because it is not a 'person' under the statute." Hence, Jack seeks to add in a whole mess of individual folks, which he's apparently done in the newest version of his complaint--as I said before, we can't expect Jack to get it right the first few times. Hey, speaking of which:
-Judge Jordan: "Mr. Thompson is advised that further amendments to his complaint will not be permitted without good cause, as he has already been given multiple opportunities to amend his complaint, and it is unfair to require the defendants to file and re-file new motions to dismiss each time." Of course, I'm guessing the Bar won't have many problems filing new motions to dismiss, as they can build on the briefing they've already done.
-Judge Jordan also says, "as the record now stands, I would abstain from any claims that Mr. Thompson has raised against Judge Tunis under the doctrine announced by the Supreme Court in Younger v. Harris." However, the Judge is allowing Jack to file yet another new complaint, so he's not going to dismiss on Younger grounds...right now. Though he says that, "since Mr. Thompson has now moved to file a third amended complaint, and the defendants have agreed to his filing of the same...I express no view on what my ruling on Younger abstention will be with respect to the third yet-unfiled amended complaint," I'm guessing that, if Jack alleges anything like he's already alleged, the Judge will kick it out on Younger grounds just the same.
-Judge Jordan also chastized Jack for not putting forth his own evidence (in fact, the Judge repeatedly underlined the word "evidence") of the Bar's alleged bad faith after the Judge asked for it. The Judge noted that Jack continued to merely allege bad faith prosecutions of the Bar complaints: "Such filings by Mr. Thompson are clearly insufficient to meet his burden in proving an exception to Younger abstention."
-"Furthermore, any other claims that Mr. Thompson has raised, or may raise, against the Florida Bar itself are barred by the Eleventh Amendment." Jack can't proceed on any claims directly against the Florida Bar in this lawsuit--that is the word of the Court.
Basically, what it all boils down to is that the Bar and the Court have done Jack a lil' favor by allowing him to file yet another version of his complaint. However, the individual Bar/Court members that Jack is now suing will surely re-raise all the stuff they've already raised, and it looks like Judge Jordan would most likely (but not necessarily) rule in their favor.
No HOOAH?
Someone's bubble burst...
Baaaaa, I like Arnies movies, Baaaaa!
You know, if we Americans actually started to think for ourselves, instead of being sheep and told what to think, we might actually have a decent country again.
“If more control goes on, I’m with that,” Yang said. "
How about simply following the ESRB guidelines and not handing them out to children? Those rating stickers do serve a purpose after all.
Sad example, has his own store with games and movies and still does not recognize the difference between a game for kids and one for adults.
Or an even better idea, instead of having the government doing something how about he simply removes everything violent from his store? Movies and games.
Those who like it that way can go to his store, and everyone else goes to a store that has our violent stuff.
land of freedom to sue the man you rob because he defends his home, family and property.
heh, I just watched the 1984 film last night, funny that john hurt was winston smith and he ended up playing the 'big brother' in V for Vendetta....
Anyway yeah, its really sad that people would elect to have themselves shackled (metaphorically speaking) even if it is just on the games level, these things need defending at every stage. As the saying goes, the only thing evil needs to triumph is for good men to do nothing.
However I'm pretty sure that the appeal will be struck down just like the first time.
(that started out as a misspell but it more accurately shows the truth)
That would be the problem jack, the executive and legislative branch of government doesn't care what people think, at least the Judicial branch can still do it's JOB.
And no, most of the people who take the polls aren't nerds...
wait a sec, LOL is this a troll?
I'm going with the video store owner as the latter is neither surprising nor notable.
Yeah, because actually thinking is for nerds right? Kind of like how the Bush administration thinks things like reading and facts are for "queers", right?
I remember you claimed you didn't want to ban video games before, but here you are constantly saying you want games banned or rejoicing when something like that happens (i.e. Manhunt 2). You're a hypocrite and a liar.
It's the parents job to make sure their children aren't playing game they think are inappropriate. A game like Manhunt 2 is obviously not marketed at children, that's more lies on your behalf, but even if they were sold to children then you should be taking it up with the stores that violate that and not blame the video game industry for it all.
What we need is a SEP It seems to be working for the movie industry, so why not us.
I wish people would get over this. We don't need laws to regulate this. The guy who owns a game store and is in favor of legislation needs to be slapped. I can't believe what I read. If he followed the ESRB ratings, he would not need legislation to make him do his job.
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
Random Tower: Game News and Commentary
Okay, Jack, what part of your grandiose plot to rid the world of evil via video game legislation do you believe you've come out victorious on now?
Nobody cares what the voters think about the appeal. It’s a legal/ constitutional issue, and only nerds take polls on whether to do the right thing. Jack Thompson
You're right, we must be nerds. You, on the other hand, just plain don't do the right thing, do you?
Besides AssWipe Thompson, we already know how this will happen; the uber socialest California may pass the law, but guess what? The US SUPREME COURT WILL OVERTURN IT!
And just like it's been said, there is no legal backing to any of the MPAA's ratings, why should there be so for games.
NOBODY CARES WHAT YOU THINK.
It's obvious the law is not constitutional (quoting JT) DUH
Notice that Rep. Joe Baca (D-CA) who has two previously failed attempts at such laws supports the Governator's decision to appeal this law. However, neither he nor the Governator attempted to appeal either of his laws. Ladies and gentlemen, I give you a coward.
The ESRB and the MPAA need to join forces (the MPAA does have an interest in this in the long run), and release a series of public service announcements explaining that both rating systems are voluntary. They need to tell people that neither system is backed by the government and are not legally enforceable. Maybe, then, we will no longer have people saying this is OK because we already do it for movies. Don't think the movie industry has any interest in this? Well, who's the next scape goat after video games?
@ Jack Thompson
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you a red herring.
All these video game laws "to protect the minors" are going to kill the industry as a whole here in America. Is that what the government wants? Is this that secret agenda of JT's? Not the restriction of games to minors but instead the entire industry as a whole simply gone from America?
Horray for the democratic process!
Ah sorry. Missed this bit too.
Apparently no one is sharing it anywhere JAck, because the most recent thing I can find on any site is your little fun trick with Bush. Strange, your so fond of blowing your own horn, why having YOU 'shared' this ruling with us if its so amazingly important and totaly not just something in your head. I mean you arnt shy about posting totaly irrellevant things in other stories, surely you have no reason to hesistate now?
Thanks for the heads up on that. Could you share a link with us?
E. Zachary Knight
Divine Knight Gaming
Random Tower: Game News and Commentary
And yeah this topic is going to be fodder for jack because of the 'they dont actually play the games' is good for a sound bite, but when compared to the facts its irrelevant.
Thank you very much for sharing all that!
Where are you finding all this? PACER?
"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."
Watch it mate. Communism is a lesser evil against Fascism and, to a lesser extent, Capitalism.
Neat. It's always good to smack Jack in the face with these little bits of reality.
Where's that picture of him in the cowboy hat?
Democracy?
In theory communism is great BUT is doesn't work out in real life. Unless you want a government like Cuba or the former Soviet Union. Sorry but i prefer a capitalistic democracy to a socialist fascist state and yes communism and fascism can co-exist as communism is just an economic/fiscal system whereas fascism is a state where the government controls everyone and everything. All communist states are pretty much fascist to.
Perfect, Mr. Thompson, in one fell swoop, you've basically said that no one but the politicians themselves should have a say in anything or be able to vote. And to think i thought you couldn't be any more of a jackass.
“Failing legal career? Hardly, not with the federal court ruling that came out last week which your Dennis McCauley won’t share here. ”
He doesn't share them because you post them here before he or anyone else knows about them. What's the point of making an article about something if you do it for him without his permission?
And if he DID post them, then you'd slam him for 'going off topic' and that he's 'obsessed' with you. You're not a lawyer, you're a hack.
And you've only posted that whole finding about 5 times by now, I THINK WE FREAKING KNOW. And it doesn't help you.
I'll say it again. You get NOTHING. You LOSE. GOOD DAY SIR.
While what you say is true, Capitalists are more than willing to make good friends with Fascits. Look at Chavez. He was democraticaly elected. But the US government (Capitalists, some can be called Fascist) didn't get as much oil from him. So, they staged the infamous Coup'D'Etat in 2002 and replaced him with a Nazi. They also did it to just about every country in South America but Brazil.
And the list doesn't stop there. I won't go any further though, i'm already off topic and I really run the risk of offending a lot of people here.
my 2 year old brother is more mature than you. get a fucking life.
What do the mean, resolve? Like, process, bring to court, etc.? Or, just to get a ruling in court? Cause, here, I'll do that right now!
Law is still unconstitutional. It will be disposed. Appeal done. OMFG, look at how easy that was, and how much money was saved! It's like I just switched my car insurence to motherf'ing Geico! :P
They're just paying the Mob to snuff each other. It does take time.