Judge Comes Down Hard on Video Games in Halo 3 Murder Trial

Well, it's complete laymanic rubbish, but at least he's capable of seperating opinion from fact, there's no law against him having an opinion I guess, even if I don't agree with it.

"The dopamine surge the stimulation of the nucleus accumbens - the same as an addiction. Such that when you stop, your brain won't stand for it"

Seems to me that the only rational solution is to play MORE video games.  Stop, and you might have to go on a "killing spree" (hahaha...ok, not so funny.)

In any case, as a gamer, I have a visceral dislike of claims that games can be damaging.  But, I try to be objective.  I conceed it is possible games may have a negative impact on the behavior of certain susceptible individuals.  I even concede that video games could be more damaging to these individuals than, say, television, movies, etc because they are more interactive.

That being said, I (a) don't believe this applies to the vast majority of people; rather, the negative behavior is likely only exhibited in a very small percentage of the populace who have other significant behavioral and/or emotional problems; (b) don't think the government should play nanny-state and try to legislate against this; and (c) do not believe video game addiction, etc should be allowed as a viable defense against in criminal cases.

i think the judge is retarded.

if he wants to buy it that the kind went crazy and decided to shoot his mother and father because they took away halo, thats fine.  and if he wants to convict him of murder and discount any theory of insanity, thats fine.

but saying that *HE* believes that the kid thought his parents would be "respawned" the next day because he was so addicted to video games, but then discounting any possibility of insanity?  wtf doesnt make sense batman.

This is what was running through my nead while reading this..

"Mr. Madison, what you've just said is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever heard. At no point in your rambling, incoherent response were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this room is now dumber for having listened to it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul."

Replacing Burge with Madison of course....

"It could have been, should have been worse than you would ever know"

How long did it take for him to come up with this?

I firmly believe that Daniel Petric had no idea at the time he hatched this plot that if he killed his parents, they would be dead forever.

Seriously?

Only by letting strangers in can we find new ways to be ourselves.

On the other hand, Judge Burge was able to put aside his, in my opinion, absurd personal beliefs and do what was right and just.

Commendable, says I.

Andrew Eisen

"The other dangerous thing about these games, in my opinion, is that, when these changes occur, they occur in an environment that is delusional. Because you can shoot these aliens, and they're there again the next day. You have to shoot them again. And I firmly believe that Daniel Petric had no idea, at the time he hatched this plot, that if he killed his parents, they would be dead forever."

I honestly don't understand how people could think this way. If I understand this correctly, pleading insanity failed for the defendent, yet the judge still believes this could be true? I doubt any sane gamer would think killing in real life would be as inconsequential as killing in games.

This is why I didn't get my hopes up.

This judge is the only one who has problems discerning fantasy from reality.