Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A Millionaire's Home

August 1, 2008 -

Two girls accused of trashing the New Smyrna Beach, Florida home of Chick-fil-A restaurant chain founder S. Truett Cathy will be banned from video games as part of their punishment.

The girls, who caused $30,000 in damage are also banned from watching TV, must read a good book and complete a writing assignment. From the Associated Press:

In a deal Cathy worked out with their parents, the girls must write "I will not vandalize other people's property" 1,000 times... the pre-teens broke into Cathy's Florida home two weeks ago and sprayed fire extinguishers, threw eggs and left water running in the kitchen.

The 87-year-old Cathy... said he didn't want to prosecute the girls and leave them with a criminal record.

GP: There's no clear reason why video games were banned. It's likely the old-school notion that they somehow promote sloth. All in all, however, this is a very forgiving arrangement by Mr. Cathy. After all, the girls could have been made to eat at Chick-fil-A. Now that's punishment...


Comments

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

Whoops, missed it.

Well, that does explain a bit why Cathy was lenient with them. Probably figures that they can be straightened out without tossing them in juvie.

-Gray17

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

I don't think the parents are really blaming video games its just them punishing their kids.  Usually all things involving the TV was taken away when I was bad as a kid.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

I would have gotten the same or worse punishment for getting anything less than a 4.0.  Their parents have spoiled them.  The least they should get is a summer of volunteer work.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

i completely agree

the fact that they did vandalize the house in the first place tells you that they are spoiled and have no sense of action/ reaction.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

How is this a fucking punishment?  Put the little vandals into Juvie for a few months, see if they decide to do it again.  They caused 30 THOUSAND dollars in damage, and they get a slap on the wrist?  That's like demolishing a new car, it'd be the same cost in damage.

What bullshit.  Fuck Cathy, the state should take them up on charges.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

 Well, you would have to take into account that Mr.Cathy may have insurance that covers everything the girls did. He's more forgiving then i'd probably be though, but he also seems to understand how hard life can be when you have any kind of criminal record... his hope is probably that the punishment will be enough to get the girls to learn their lesson and keep them from doing something this stupid again... if it works out, this incident will have no lasting effects on their lives and they can go through life normally... if not, they'll commit another stupid crime, this time get the full punishment, and have their lives really screwed over. he's pretty much giving them a second chance... 

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

Yeah, screw her for being a forgiving human being! Also for realizing that showing compassion is the only way to really make those girls realize that the "enemy" is all in their twisted hippy girl heads!

(I really hope you were being sarcastic too.)

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

Video games aren't being banned because they're a proximate cause of the vandalism. The girls are just being grounded by the courts. And yes, considering the damages done, they got off nicely. If I had $30K of damages done to me (well, if I had $30K worth of stuff to be damaged, and then someone damaged it) I would be far less forgiving.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

"If I had $30K of damages done to me (well, if I had $30K worth of stuff to be damaged, and then someone damaged it) I would be far less forgiving."

 

Perhaps, but if you were a millionaire you might be a bit more forgiving (or willing to barter at the very least).

---------------------------------------------------- Debates are like merry go rounds. Two people take their positions then they go through the same points over and over and over again. Then when it's over they have the same positions they started in.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

Agreed, unless some comments not included in the story give more video game specific context, this strikes me as a removal of privileges, rather than any particular damnation of video games per se.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

Do the courts have a legal position to do this?

@GP: Don't diss chick-fil-a.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

 I don't think the courts are involved at all... this is all an agreement between the parents and Mr.Cathy. If Mr.Cathy does not press charges against the girls, then the courts don't get involved

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

LOL, I knew I'd irritate the Chick-fil-A fans... Sorry,couldn't resist.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

That is nicely lenient considering what they did, but it's also a fairly standard parental punishment.  I can remember a few times I lost the right to watch TV and play Game Boy.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

Aw, c'mon, the food ain't THAT bad...

Seriously, though; that is a very lenient punishment, considering the amount of damage.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

1,000 lines? No TV or games?

Somehow I'm not sure these punishments tackle the causes of the problem, lenient though they may be.

Re: Video Game Ban for Girls Who Trashed Chick-fil-A

LOL... I'm not a fan, but I think the billboard is funny.

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
Matthew WilsonI updated to a clean instill of windows 10.07/29/2015 - 2:36am
Mattsworknameargue that it's wrong, but then please admit it's wrong on ALL Fronts07/29/2015 - 2:06am
MattsworknameTechnoGeek: It's actually NOT, but it is a method used all across the specturm. See Rush limbaugh, MSNBC, Shawn hannity, etc etc, how many compagns have been brought up to try and shut them down by going after there advertisers. It's fine if you wanna07/29/2015 - 2:05am
Mattsworknamediscussed, while not what I liked and not the methods I wanted to see used, were , in a sense, the effort of thsoe game consuming masses to hold what they felt was supposed to be there press accountable for what many of them felt was Betrayal07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAs we say, the gamers are dead article set of a firestorm among the game consuming populace, who, ideally, were the intended audiance for sites like Kotaku, Polygon, Et all. As such, the turn about on them and the attacking of them, via the metods07/29/2015 - 2:03am
MattsworknameAndrew: Thats kind fo the issue at hand, Accountable is a matter of context. For a media group, it means accountable to its reader. to a goverment, to it's voters and tax payer, to a company, to it's share holders.07/29/2015 - 2:02am
Andrew EisenAnd again, you keep saying "accountable." What exactly does that mean? How is Gamasutra not accounting for the editorial it published?07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - I disagree with your 9:12 and 9:16 comment. There are myriad ways to address content you don't like. And they're far easier to execute in the online space.07/28/2015 - 11:47pm
Andrew EisenMatt - Banning in the legal sense? Not that I'm aware but there have certainly been groups of gamers who have worked towards getting content they don't like removed.07/28/2015 - 11:45pm
DanJAlexander's editorial was and continues to be grossly misrepresented by her opponents. And if you don't like a site, you stop reading it - same as not watching a tv show. They get your first click, but not your second.07/28/2015 - 11:40pm
TechnogeekYes, because actively trying to convince advertisers to influence the editorial content of media is a perfectly acceptable thing to do, especially for a movement that's ostensibly about journalistic ethics.07/28/2015 - 11:02pm
Mattsworknameanother07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
Mattsworknameyou HAVE TO click on it. So they get the click revenue weather you like what it says or not. as such, the targeting of advertisers most likely seemed like a good course of action to those who wanted to hold those media groups accountable for one reason07/28/2015 - 9:16pm
MattsworknameBut, when you look at online media, it's completely different, with far more options, but far few ways to address issues that the consumers may have. In tv, you don't like what they show, you don't watch. But in order to see if you like something online07/28/2015 - 9:12pm
MattsworknameIn tv, and radio, ratings are how it works. your ratings determine how well you do and how much money you an charge.07/28/2015 - 9:02pm
Mattsworknameexpect to do so without someone wanting to hold you to task for it07/28/2015 - 9:00pm
MattsworknameMecha: I don't think anyone was asking for Editoral changes, what they wanted was to show those media groups that if they were gonna bash there own audiance, the audiance was not gonna take it sitting down. you can write what you want, but you can't07/28/2015 - 8:56pm
MattsworknameAndrew, Im asking as a practical question, Have gamers, as a group, ever asked for a game, or other item, to be banned. Im trying to see if theres any cases anyone else remembers cause I cant find or remember any.07/28/2015 - 8:55pm
Andrew EisenAs mentioned, Gamasutra isn't a gaming site, it's a game industry site. I don't feel it's changed its focus at all. Also, I don't get the sense that the majority of the people who took issue with that one opinion piece were regular readers anyway.07/28/2015 - 8:43pm
MattsworknameDitto kotaku, Gawker, VOX, Polygon, ETC07/28/2015 - 8:41pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician