Jack Thompson Bill Overwhelmingly Approved by Utah House Committee
Jack Thompson Bill Overwhelmingly Approved by Utah House Committee
February 24, 2009
He wasn't on hand to testify and his name wasn't mentioned, but the influence of disbarred Miami attorney Jack Thompson was apparent in yesterday's meeting of the Business and Labor Committee of the Utah House of Representatives.
By a 10-3 vote, committee members approved H.B. 353, a bill drafted by Thompson and sponsored by Rep. Mike Morley. The measure targets the video game and film industries by amending Utah's current Truth in Advertising law. Retailers and movie theaters which advertise that they don't sell M-rated games or R-rated movie tickets to underage buyers and then do so would be liable for fines of $2,000 per incident.
Those testifying on behalf of the bill included Alan Osmond, the most senior of the Osmond Brothers vocal group and Gayle Ruzicka, the politically powerful head of the ultra-conservative Utah Eagle Forum.
For his part, Osmond, read into the record verbatim passages from an e-mail circulated earlier yesterday by Thompson. Osmond, however, did not identify Thompson as the author:
This link shows a montage of sex scenes from the Grand Theft Auto IV game which has been sold and is presently being sold at BestBuy.com, WalMart.com, Target.com, GameStop.com, and at other retailers’ sites, with no age verification whatsoever.
As you can see, there are graphically depicted lap dances in a “gentleman’s club” in this game, including simulation of oral/anal sexual intercourse between women. The hero in the game then has intercourse, clearly depicted... The hero then kills the woman by gunfire and running her over with his car.
Now that’s entertainment...
Utah must do something about these major retailers who are flat-out lying to the public when they assert they are not selling this and other similar pornographic “games” to kids when in fact they are...
Conservative power broker Gayle Ruzicka also testified on behalf of the bill with a Thompson-esque flavor, mentioning Devin Moore, the GTA-playing Alabama teen who murdered three police officers in 2004. Thompson, representing the officers' families, subsequently brought suit against Rockstar Games, Sony and others before being thrown off the case by an Alabama judge for professional conduct violations in November, 2005.
For those familiar with Thompson's anti-GTA crusade, Ruzicka's testimony had a familiar tone:
These [games] are the kind of things that are training our children. This is the vile stuff. The Grand Theft Auto games are cop-killing murder simulators. And when [Devin Moore] was faced with being arrested he knew exactly what to do. He knew how to aim... at the head and each time killed these [officers]. We don't want this for our children. Not at all. Please, please vote yes today on this bill.
Anything we can do to protect our children from the violence, from the filthy pornography that the only way they can get into the pornography is being good at the game. They work hard and get to certain levels and when they get to the high enough levels then they get into the pornography - filthy, vile stuff that you would be appalled and never want your children to see. And then as a reward, they get to kill the women...
Dick Cornell of the Utah Association of Theater Owners was among those who testified against the bill:
Theater owners have taken pride in enforcing [MPAA] ratings... There isn't any forgiveness in this [bill] for an intent by someone else to deceive us, so we would be penalized for that...
One thing that we're very susceptible for in this legislation is that we would be penalized if there was a ticket purchase over... online or on the ticket kiosk. Because as soon as that purchase was made... we would be in violation of this law... We know of some theaters here in Utah that 40% of the ticket sales are done through a kiosk or online purchases... We have theaters that will on the weekend pull in 10,000 people of a Saturday. The chances of exceeding this [bill's] limit, it's possible, even though our intent to keep the kids out.
This bill really discourages compliance with our voluntary system. The only protection that we would have if this passes is to not follow the enforcement rules... And we don't want to do that...
Oddly enough, Rep. Morley said that it was not his intent to have the proposal apply to movie tickets, although the language of the measure would seem to encompass theaters.
HB 353 will now move on to the full Utah House for consideration.
AUDIO FILE: Listen as the committee considers the bill (53mb, 58 mins, mp3).
A PUBLICATION OF THE ECA
SUBSCRIBE
LOGIN / REGISTER
Crispy Gamer
GamePolitics ShoutBox
Posted 03/15/10 at 04:05pm
Andrew Eisen: I'm still here and I'm doing a lot of behind the scenes work (as time permits me). But it's true, I've only written one piece under the new GP but if that Facebook/JT bit is the last thing I write for the site, I’d be okay with that.
Andrew Eisen: I'm still here and I'm doing a lot of behind the scenes work (as time permits me). But it's true, I've only written one piece under the new GP but if that Facebook/JT bit is the last thing I write for the site, I’d be okay with that.
Posted 03/15/10 at 04:01pm
ZippyDSMlee: I suppose its not inane enough for petes muses*giggles*
ZippyDSMlee: I suppose its not inane enough for petes muses*giggles*
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:55pm
PHX Corp: It had the Video Games tag on it, I thought that it had been a video game law that was concerning it
PHX Corp: It had the Video Games tag on it, I thought that it had been a video game law that was concerning it
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:54pm
JDKJ: And what happened to "Senior GP Correspondent, Andrew Eisen, reporting from San Diego [and who has a better finger on the pulse of GP's readership than some others]?" Huh? Did he fall victim to the Night of the Long Knives?
JDKJ: And what happened to "Senior GP Correspondent, Andrew Eisen, reporting from San Diego [and who has a better finger on the pulse of GP's readership than some others]?" Huh? Did he fall victim to the Night of the Long Knives?
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:53pm
Andrew Eisen: No, but my one example was not meant to cover the entire spectrum. Besides, multiplayer is a big part of video games.
Andrew Eisen: No, but my one example was not meant to cover the entire spectrum. Besides, multiplayer is a big part of video games.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:50pm
Andrew Eisen: PHX Corp - Are you referring to AB 847? I haven't read the bill but the summary doesn't appear to apply to video games.
Andrew Eisen: PHX Corp - Are you referring to AB 847? I haven't read the bill but the summary doesn't appear to apply to video games.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:49pm
DarkSaber: 2 mediocre games do not "a big part of video games" make.
DarkSaber: 2 mediocre games do not "a big part of video games" make.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:49pm
JDKJ: I suspect that'll fall victim to the "pass." Wrong side of the fence. It's North Korea we aren't supposed to like.
JDKJ: I suspect that'll fall victim to the "pass." Wrong side of the fence. It's North Korea we aren't supposed to like.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:48pm
DarkSaber: Although, following the "MW2 Made Lots of Money" excuse for a story, GP would be hard pressed to justify WHY they passed on it.
DarkSaber: Although, following the "MW2 Made Lots of Money" excuse for a story, GP would be hard pressed to justify WHY they passed on it.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:47pm
Andrew Eisen: DS - Not necessarily. See recent Ubisoft stories.
Andrew Eisen: DS - Not necessarily. See recent Ubisoft stories.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:47pm
Andrew Eisen: Zip - Or it will and GP hasn't had a chance in the last couple hours to get to it yet. Or yeah, maybe he’ll pass on it.
Andrew Eisen: Zip - Or it will and GP hasn't had a chance in the last couple hours to get to it yet. Or yeah, maybe he’ll pass on it.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:46pm
DarkSaber: Only if you play multiplayer AE.
DarkSaber: Only if you play multiplayer AE.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:45pm
Andrew Eisen: Except, aside from following up on an earlier story, GP frequently reports on internet censorship and net neutrality issues (the internet being a big part of video games and all).
Andrew Eisen: Except, aside from following up on an earlier story, GP frequently reports on internet censorship and net neutrality issues (the internet being a big part of video games and all).
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:45pm
ZippyDSMlee: I emailed it in DS, if Venezuela gets covered so should south koera but I gues not :P
ZippyDSMlee: I emailed it in DS, if Venezuela gets covered so should south koera but I gues not :P
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:45pm
PHX Corp: The CA S(Foghorn)heads are at it again, instead of banning M rated video games for children They are going to tax the hell out of them Literally and yhis time Yee aint The one trying to do it
PHX Corp: The CA S(Foghorn)heads are at it again, instead of banning M rated video games for children They are going to tax the hell out of them Literally and yhis time Yee aint The one trying to do it
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:39pm
DarkSaber: That is a VERY tenuous link to the "GamePolitics" umbrella, to be sure. One sentence referencing an older story tacked on at the end of 7 paragraphs.
DarkSaber: That is a VERY tenuous link to the "GamePolitics" umbrella, to be sure. One sentence referencing an older story tacked on at the end of 7 paragraphs.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:38pm
JDKJ: And as a change of pace, there's the article with the thinly-veiled criticism of the Chavez administration. Never seen that one before.
JDKJ: And as a change of pace, there's the article with the thinly-veiled criticism of the Chavez administration. Never seen that one before.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:35pm
DarkSaber: OBJECTION! The bobblehead only started being awarded AFTER Dennis got the boot. I mean voluntarily left, sorry.
DarkSaber: OBJECTION! The bobblehead only started being awarded AFTER Dennis got the boot. I mean voluntarily left, sorry.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:33pm
JDKJ: Dennis used to give more than mere "credit." Tipsters used to get a Hal Halpin bobblehead. If you're truly appreciative, show it. If you're happy and you know it, clap your hands.
JDKJ: Dennis used to give more than mere "credit." Tipsters used to get a Hal Halpin bobblehead. If you're truly appreciative, show it. If you're happy and you know it, clap your hands.
Posted 03/15/10 at 03:33pm
DarkSaber: Good to see GP is in touch with the community as always then.
DarkSaber: Good to see GP is in touch with the community as always then.
Copyright © 2007 ECA. All rights reserved.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Game Politics and Game Politics logo are trademarks of the ECA.
Comments
Meet the Jack Thompson Wacko Syndicate.
Maybe I'm just retarded, but this bill shouldn't be that much of a problem.
If a company says "We don't sell X product, to Y customer" Then they aren't losing out on money, if they actually follow those rules. Here in Britain, we have a strict setting of games. We have 12's, 15's and 18's, for the BBFC and then we have the PEGI reccomendations. If you sell to someone without ID who looks like they are under the age of the BBFC reccomendation, then you are breaking the law. This system is profitable over here, so why should it be that much of a problem in Utah?
EDIT: Nevermind, forgot that it's ment to enforce the store's own policies. But anyone that thinks a store can adhere to them 100% is foolish.
Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!
How long before JT sends his son into a store in Utah and tries to buy GTA IV?
In Britain, we call that a Sting operation. The Police test retailers, by sending in underage kids to buy these products. If they do indeed buy them, then the clerk is under arrest.
But just because a game is advertised as being M doesn't mean the store itself is saying that they are following those suggestions. I've never seen a store (besides GameStop, who says they card people) advertise that they don't sell M rated games to minors, let alone T rated games to under-13's.
-If an apple a day keeps the doctor away....what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-
Jack's used his own son for Stings. Except the difference was that he sued the store when John did indeed get the M-rated game.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's despicable that he exploits his son in this manner, but at the least he's not using pressure to force the stores to do something that is against their policy, to see if they snap. That's the reason why Chris Hansen doesn't do his To Catch a Predator show anymore.
GameSnooper
Agreed. TCAP may have exposed the existence of predators (I, for one, didn't know such people existed), but it was still unfair that they were baited into that.
...
Meh, had a thought, but it's unlikely, so I'll leave it out.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
yes, the police test retailers. Jack is not one of them, unless you count thought-police
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
I don't understand, even if Jack is not the authority, isn't it his right to enforce the law anyway?
If you see a mugging underway, do you not try to stop it? If you see a murder, do you walk away and pretend you didn't see a thing? If you see a rape in progress, do you walk by and not care?
Same principles, different crime.
As for the "Principles" It's still a crime at the end of the day, no matter who it is that buys the product. I saw on Worlds most Amazing Videos the other day, some Police left a Decoy car, with the Engine running and car empty, and left it to be "stolen". When in fact, it was a tracked car, designed to be chased, and apprehend those that "stole" the car.
It's the same thing really. Someone sets up a possible crime, and if the suspect takes the bait, and breaks the law. They will be punished for it.
Murder, rape, robbery, and theft are all crimes, free speech isnt
EDIT: oh, and by the way, the ESRB is a private organization with no legal bearing, it was never intended to have ANY legal bearing... it was meant as a GUIDELINE for parents to decide what to buy for their kids, no more no less.
This bill is giving a private organization legal power, which is unconstitutional and ticks me off more than anything
"Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson'll justify it in the end." - nightwng2000
The bill is not giving private organization legal power. It is regulating enforcement of the voluntary rating system. The privately owned theater or video game store has no legal athority. They are fined by the Utah government if they don't card everyone for restricted fare. They Utah gov. is using the fines to force the theaters/video game stores to more strictly adhere to the ratings system. The complaint here is that inevitably, more so with theaters people will get into restricted movies and the owners are then held accountable and punished with fines.
thelobbyist.net - live it, love it, debate
I think you may have misread my post, the bill isnt giving the store any legal power, that was obvious, but the bill is based on the ESRB rating system... the ESRB is a PRIVATE organization, and this bill gives the government the right to fine people based on ratings that this PRIVATE organization gives... and that is giving it legal power, even if it is indirect
"Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson'll justify it in the end." - nightwng2000
I think you meant legal standing not power.
Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.
meh, i was close :P
"Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson'll justify it in the end." - nightwng2000
"As for the "Principles" It's still a crime at the end of the day, no matter who it is that buys the product. I saw on Worlds most Amazing Videos the other day, some Police left a Decoy car, with the Engine running and car empty, and left it to be "stolen". When in fact, it was a tracked car, designed to be chased, and apprehend those that "stole" the car."
How can anyone compare the theft of a car to the sale of a game? You can't even compare it to selling pornography. And you, as a retailer can't sell AO rated games.
- Warren Lewis
Yes but in your scenario, your car would be considered entrapment which is a big no no by the courts. Much like most of the TCAP "predators" got off free of charge because the DA's couldn't get a clean prosecution because of all of the legal hurdles NBC caused by being there with cameras.
Different countries different rules here in the states we do not have legal enforcement of any age ratings due to restrictions placed on the government by our Constitution.
I don't understand, even if Jack is not the authority, isn't it his right to enforce the law anyway?
If you see a mugging underway, do you not try to stop it? If you see a murder, do you walk away and pretend you didn't see a thing? If you see a rape in progress, do you walk by and not care?
Same principles, different crime.
your examples fall under either the good-samaritan clause (helping someone in need), or a citizen's arrest (which only applies to felonies), Jack's doesn't. An unauthorized person doing police work is a vigilante, a person who violates the law in order to exact what they believe to be justice from criminals, because they think that the criminal will not be caught or will not be sufficiently punished by the legal system.
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
But, he's not violating the law? His son is merely buying a product, and Jacko is pointing the crime out to the proper authorities.
There is no crime in a child buying a video game product; it isn't illegal for a child to buy an AO or M title.
Oddly enough, if he got his wish and put in place real legal teeth behind the idea that children should not be able to buy these products (and some of the laws he has suggested did this) then he would indeed be violating the law... and in general calling it a 'sting' in order to exempt one from a law doesn't work.
It's not a crime in the U.S. It may go against store policy, but the police wouldn't be making arrests or charging anyone.
"That's not ironic. That's justice."
I'm talking about the people, not the law. What they're saying is wacko-esque.
Wow, Honeycakes must be proud of himself that he actually "won" against something when it's literalilly attacking 1st admendment rights, Not to mention Store's already had policies forced to keep minors away from violent content and such...For someone like jack thompson, He should've known that certain lousy parents have too much free time on their hands to merely give a shit about what their kids do.
...and actually buy the adult rated games for their kids, making this bill pointless.
Nido Web Flash Tutorials AS2 and AS3 Tutorials for anyone interested.
How to set Xbox 360 Parental Controls
Technically, it's not attacking first amendment rights; instead of regulating games, is forcing stores to stand b their own declared policies... as mentioned on GP before, constitutional experts say that the bill is in fact constitutional, meaning that no first amendment rights are being stepped on... HOWEVER at the same time they said that the bill as it was, was in fact toothless and completely ineffective
If i recall, when it comes to "truth in advertising", one must actually prove that the management of the store had the intent of falsely advertising... in other words, if a store employee goes agaisnt store policy and sells a game to a minor, but the management had no intent for such a thing to be done, then the store would not be in violation of "truth in advertising"; really all a store would have to do is show that they do indeed tell their employees not to do it. In essence, the bill is reduced to that of a "feel good" legislation since it is completely incapable of fining anyone; anyone who doesn't advertise their policy can't be touched, and those who do are not responsible for the mistakes of their employees
So while Jack has succeeded in drafting a constitutional anti-game bill, he is cheering about a bill that is 100% ineffective... if anyone else cares to look up the GP article and elaborate more; i think i do recall that the issue about the bill may have said though constitutional, but still suffered legal issues that could get it over turned in court; though even if still passed it would still be 100% ineffective
However, here's part of what the bill apparently says:
(g)(i) A violation of Subsection (1)(u) occurs when the person or an employee of the person sells the good or service a second or subsequent time to any person subject to the age restriction or recommendation.
(ii) Each violation by the person or the person's employee is considered a violation for determining if two or more violations have been committed.
They left out any intent-part there, so the question is whether they'll try to fine despite intent. I myself wonder if the bill contradicts the existing law.
How the hell can they pass this for an age "recommendation"???
Intent is part of the broader law and anything more specific will be in terms of intent (or requires intent to already be shown)
I'm interested to see where this goes from here...
Ultimately I have no problem with preventing kids from buying these games, but the reality is that very few are these days. The reality, in fact, is that most game retailers check ID now, and they're not even mandated to do it.
This bill is all well and good, and I'm sure it makes Jack all warm and fuzzy down in the cockles of his heart, but ultimately it won't do anything to anyone given that I've never even heard of (let alone seen) a retailer advertise that they don't sell certain products to children.
So, uh... y'know... grats?
I think of this bill as more pork and crap, a sad waste of more taxpayer money!
Jesus Jack Jones Thompson loves you, so die for him instead or the other way around so he can sue your ass back to the stoneage (oooh upgrade!)
Hold on just a second....where is this 'graphic depiction' of oral/anal intercourse in GTA??
Because damned if I saw it....and I got the 100% achievement. =/
Now I feel like I'm missing out.
No offense to the Americans on this board, but anyone saying this sorta stuff on our side of the pond would be instantly ridiculed and politcally-distanced by pretty much everyone with a reputation they were worried about. Seems to be over in America where all these religious crazy types are left to flourish.
Only in some sections, south and the mid-west mostly. Other areas like the west coast and New England aren't as affected.
While we have always had our fair share of religious fundies, they didn't really become such a prominent political power until around the 80's when the "culture wars" went into full swing.
Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!
Pretty much what Geoff said, America is quite a big place don't forget.
Wouldn't dream of it. =)
Wasn't it someone on YOUR side of the pond that claimed video games had widespread pornographic in adult rated games then managed to discover the wonderful world of H-Games with Rapelay? Why yes it was...
Any country that has politicians capable of public speech (read: any) has politicians capable of distorting and lying to get support and votes. This isn't an America only thing. It's a "Protect the sheeple" thing.
Wall of Text Simulation- Insert coin to continue.
Keith Vaz doesnt have widespread or religious supprt. He's just a one-off agenda-pushing nutcase.
Oh, and he's not going to get re-elected according to the latest forecasts. Thank GOD.
He's refering to the lap dances.
England has Keith Vaz - he's the European Jack Thompson.
And I too missed the graphic depiction of oral/anal intercourse and my character never got to have graphic sex with a hooker. Is there another version of this game that I missed?
Also don't forget that Australia has a certain Michael Atkinson who has been holding back the R18+ rating for Videogames for almost over a decade.
Heh. I like to blame instances like this one on you guys across the pond. See what happens when you let us have our way with things? ^^
"HEY! LISTEN!"
"As you can see, there are graphically depicted lap dances in a “gentleman’s club” in this game, including simulation of oral/anal sexual intercourse between women."
Where the hell is that in the game???!?!?!? How is that even possible (unless the women have a dual-head vibrator) ?????!?!??!!?
Or futanari. Don't forget futa.
"As you can see, there are graphically depicted lap dances in a “gentleman’s club” in this game, including simulation of oral/anal sexual intercourse between women."
That's how it's in the game. They mean during the lap dances if you stay around till the other girl shows up. They make sexual motions at each other.
Except that over-PC-zealous attention-wh*re fascist, Keith Vaz of course
Well, some of their ancestors did leave the UK to live in the Americas for religious freedom. And look at where that has gotten us :P
GameSnooper
At least three people were intelligent enough to see through the bullshit spewed by Thompson's tools and voted against this piece of shit bill.
Ruzicka lied about the aspects of the Devin "Lionel Tate wannabe" Moore case, so I guess she'll be up for a perjury charge, and Donny and Marie's older brother as well for making Thompson's e-mail sound like it was his own words and for lying about one thing that isn't even in GTAIV.
I looked up the bill yesterday and found that they changed the wording of the bill from "under" to "subject to":
http://le.utah.gov/~2009/pamend/hb0353.hca.01.htm
I should also say that yesterday I found that Target doesn't even have their ID policy "advertised" in their store, so Target's immune from this bill apparently.
Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.
Man, both Ruzika and Thompson has very VERY sick minds.
Have fun paying the legal fees, Utah. So far the industry has a perfect score of 9 out of 9. I wouldn't bet on this bill holding up no matter what the odds.
Tea and cake or death! Tea and cake or death! Little Red Cook-book! Little Red Cook-book!
Maybe 10'll be the magic number. (They think tenth time's the charm, we hope that after 10 failures they'll give the hell up.)
Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.
that's great...now if someone can tell me what it's going to do because...uh, i'm not really seeing a difference from what's already being done (carding minors).
Not to mention the huge loop-hole (they don't advertise perfection, they're not liable).
i'm liking the bold button this morning.
what its going to do is mean retailers (like the head of the theatres is saying in his quote) are going to STOP carding individuals.
They arent legally obliged to do it. Like the theatre guy says, if you sell 10,000 tickets on a weekend, SOMEONE is going to get through underage. The only way to avoid this bill is to not have a policy to card individuals.
Step 1) So the bill will pass, and retailers can simply stop carding individuals. So 13 yr old Johnny can easily buy 15+ rated games.
Step 2) ????????
Step 3) Kids dont have access to these games and are protected from the 'pornography and filth' they contain.
What... im missing step 2?
What do you mean , of course stopping carding will reduce underage kids getting games. didnt you see step 2???
Or a store can simply say "We reserve the right to card and not sell games based on age." My friend once wasn't allowed to buy an M game at Walmart when he was 17 >.>
-If an apple a day keeps the doctor away....what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-
Ooooh, good one! You don't say it's policy, so they can't blame you if you don't always do it and certainly can't claim you're advertizing you won't do it!
What do you expect...Utah=Mormons
Their group's done enough damage with California's Prop 8 legislation
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
I don't see what Mormons specifically have to do with it.
Aren't the Eagles Forums of other Christians sects? Considering the Traitor John Bruce is Presbyterian and has already made Anti-Mormon comments, I'd suspect the Eagles Forum, even the Utah branch, isn't primarily of the Mormon sect.
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl
Uh, if I may digress from the subject, Nightwing, I notice you always refer to the organization as the "Eagles Forum" or "Eagles Forums" like you just did there. I just wanted to point out that the proper name is the "Eagle Forum." Singular, not plural. Referring to tham as the "Eagles Forum" makes me think that it's being run by the football team!
Ummm...Generalization much?
Mormon here who hates this bill. I have also read comments from a number of Utah residents both Mormon and not who hate this bill.
This is more Politics and agenda mongering than it is a Mormon issue.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
My apologies for that earlier comment. It was rude of me to paint an entire community with a broad brush. That, and I haven't been back for months - I spent a good deal reading up on Thomas Paine, and have since given up on organized religion as a whole. While my dispisition on faith has changed considerably since I was gone, that doesn't excuse my behavior. Once again, sorry for acting like such a douche.
Getting back on topic, it pisses me off that legislators are actually stupid enough to follow Jack's lead. Most of you have already said every bit of nastiness I can imagine for our beloved anti-gaming crusader/loon, so I'll just way what I can surmise since my absence...
HOLY SHIT - he's still alive?
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
I think a more accurate descriptor would be "Utah = Christian Zealots"
One thing I always liked about Utah is how the state has been a treasure-trove of fossils and paleontological discovery. I believe Dinosaur National Park is there as well...you know, those animals that the Zealots believe never existed (the earth is only 6000-ish years old).
You know, of all the Christians I know, not a single one believes the Earth is only 6000 years old and none believe that dinosaurs never existed.
What nut jobs do you know?
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
Jack Thompson.
A winrar is you!
http://treasurebin.blogspot.com Game reviews from the bottom of the bargain bin
The concept is called "Young Earth Creationism" and it's a significant element in the Christian attack on science and reason.
http://www.answersingenesis.org/
http://creationontheweb.com/
http://www.icr.org/
http://www.creationsafaris.com/bisci.htm
http://www.creationmuseum.org/
As for the Dinosaurs not existing, I have nothing in my bookmarks at the ready, but I've met them. A group when I was in college called RU For Christ actually held a "scientific" lecture about this.
Sorry, but Christian Zealots are just as guilty of trying to rewrite history and science to coincide with their Bible as they are in destroying free speech.
That is true evil.
We got them as well. One of the classes I had in fifth grade at high school involved evolution. Apparently once a pupil said to the teacher "I did this test for you but I still don't believe it."
Ken Ham, Kent Hovind (aka Dr. Dino), and Adnan Oktar off the cuffs. All equally sleazy and intellectually dishonest.
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
@EZK: Be for real. The influence of the Church of Latter Day Saints in Utah's politics can't be overstated. The Utah Legislature's just like a shadow Tabernacle.
Never said the influence wasn't there. I merely said that claiming all people of a given religion etc fell the same way about this was pretty much sterotyping.
As for the Church's influence on politics, the only influence is that the majority of the population is LDS and would thus be inclined to vote along the lines of their belief. The Church itself does not influence any political decision. They only counsel their members to vote based on what the members think is right.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
Here's another way of looking at LDS influence in Utah politics. What percentage of the Utah Legislature is LDS? More than 75 percent, I'd bet. That's a super-majority. If they all -- or even most of them -- vote their religious beliefs --which I tend to think they do -- then LDS are, in effect, writing Utah's laws.
Or yet another way: Gayle Ruzicka is an LDS, is she not? With the apparent ability to singlehandedly ram-rod through the Utah Legislature any particular piece of legislation she wants to see passed.
Yes, but there is a huge difference between that and saying that the Church itself is shaping politics.
For example, while I have a tendancy to vote for things that do not contridict my religious views, I have never been told by the LDS church to vote in a specific way or for a specific person.
You could say the same thing about the current Democrat crontrolled Legislature. The Demacratic party is controlling US politics.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
The Church doesn't have to tell the Utah Legislature how to vote. It's got a proxy in the form of Gayle Ruzicka to do just that for it.
And of course you could say that a Democrat-controlled Congress, by virtue of their majority votes, dictates the laws that Congress passes. And, assuming that Congresspersons by and large vote along their party lines -- which they do -- you'd be correct in saying that the Democratic Party is, by turn, dictating the laws that Congress passes.
AS far as I know, Gayle Ruzicka has no position of influence in the church. As far as I know the Eagle forum is not sanctioned by the church.
So to say that the Church is using her to influence politics is just a much a falacy as claiming the church is doing it directly.
It seems to me that you are trying to make a connection that is either not there or is present in any organized group of people.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
Ruziack is the Relief Society Teacher in her LDS ward. That's a fairly influencial position in the Church. But that's beside the point. The point is that you can randomly grab just about anything in the State of Utah, scratch beyond the surface, and you will find LDS. Plain, simple, and, as far as I am concerned, beyond dispute. And this isn't some sort of normative judgement or intended as a perjorative. It's just a fact.
To prove the point, take the executive membership of Utah Eagle Forum (i.e., President, Vice-President, Treasurer, etc.). I'll bet you a dollar to your donut that the entire executive membership are also LDS. If so, who needs official LDS sanction? Utah Eagle Forum is, by extension and in effect, the Church of Latter Day Saints.
That's just alocal position. Meaning she has no influence outside the congregation she teaches in. Any political influence she has comes as a direct result of her position in the Eagle Forum.
I guess it would be fact that with any bill or law if you dig deep enough has a basis in the personal position of the author of said bill or law.
I am just trying to point out that this is not a unique phenomena in Utah or the LDS church.
Also, that group could get in some major trouble if they ever implied that they have sanction from the LDS church to do anything. THe LDS church makes it very clear that they do not support or sanction any group that is not an actual part of the LDS church. Meaning political parties, watchdog groups etc. are not and never will have a church sanction.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
That's not exactly what you were saying before, EZK. What you were saying before, paraphrased, is that LDS has little to no influence over Utah's legislative process or other political processes. Which simply is not the case. Their influence thoroughly permeates every level of Utah's political processes. Again, I'm not saying that this is a good thing or a bad thing. But it certainly is a thing.
No, what I was saying before was that the LDS church has no influence on the political process. Meaning the leadership of the church will not come out and tell their members to vote a certain way or for certain people. They will not go to members of the church who hold political office and tell them how to vote on issues and bills.
The beliefs held by LDS members on the other hand is a different story and I concede that point.
Any person of faith (or without faith) will generally have their position influenced by their personal view. Whether they act on that or on what they consider the greater good for all is another story as well.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
Take away the members of a church and what are you left with? Nothing. A church's membership is the physical and practical embodiment of the church's doctrines, without which those doctrines mean nothing -- other than in some theoretical or academic way.
"You are Peter and upon you I shall build my Church."
And...
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
. . . Peter went out and spread the Lord's doctrine.
I'm still missing some kind of point here.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
That the division between "church" and "church membership" which you attempt to draw is meaningless.
And the illusion of influence between the church and government is pretty meaningless as well.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
Which I guess explains why running on an anti-Mormon platform appeals to all those candidates for the Utah Legislature.
So, someone runs on a patform that the LDS church is evil corrupt or whatever in Utah, and doesn't get elected. So that automatically means that Church held some influence on all the voters position.
Next you will say that someone who runs on the platform of creationism is wrong and doesn't get elected it will be because all the Churches who teach creationism influenced the vote.
The point is, why would I vote for someone who considers me either evil or stupid?
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
Not automatically, no. But it could be one of the possible conclusions to be drawn.
Hey, it's getting a little tight over here!
Hunting the shadows of the troubled dreams.
Bundle!
Help, help, I being compressed!
There have always been motherf*ckers, there will always be motherf*ckers, but what we can't do is let them control our motherf*cking lives. -John Oliver, December 1st, 2008
Well
played.
Sufficating here. This bill seems pointless to me still.
The groups that believe such things tend to be pretty insular. They tend to not make friends or assocations outside thier church so the exposure is kinda low.
But there are a LOT of them.
George Bush
Jack Chick
Jerry Falwell
Sarah Palin
okay so I don't technically know them but you get my point
There have always been motherf*ckers, there will always be motherf*ckers, but what we can't do is let them control our motherf*cking lives. -John Oliver, December 1st, 2008
The testimony of the hearing should be used as evidence in the lawsuit to follow any passing of this bill to show that the PURPOSE of the bill surrounds the issue of "harmful to minors", which has already proven to make such laws unconstitutional.
The fact they had to use fearmongering, misinformation, lies, and deceit to force this bill through was clear evidence that such a law was baseless and unconstitutional from the start.
But what do you expect from hate groups like the Eagles Forum and corrupt, Anti-US Constitutionalists like the Traitor John Bruce "Jack" Thompson and the other politicians supporting such bills?
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl
Just like they say "we don't mean to target film tickets", while the language says they can. In other words, they intend to ONLY apply the law when video games are involved. So their INTENT is violation.
"The testimony of the hearing should be used as evidence in the lawsuit to follow any passing of this bill to show that the PURPOSE of the bill surrounds the issue of "harmful to minors", which has already proven to make such laws unconstitutional."
Actually, I think you're very wrong. In the case of the other laws, they tended to center around compelled speech or prior restraint of speech for the purposes of stopping something allegedly harmful to minors. However, it's the bold parts that're important -- those are the actions which bring the laws into direct contention with the First Amendment and require the law to have a better established purpose than a vague assertion of games being "harmful to minors".
In this case, however, it looks like they're using the truth in advertising laws. At its core, the law boils down to "If you say you always do X, and you're caught not doing X, you're going to get fined." As such, I'm inclined to believe that this law will end up being constitutional. Unlike an older proposed law, it doesn't require ESRB ratings on all games (which would be both compelled speech and also prior restraint of speech controlled by a private institution). Unlike a recent unconstitutional law, it doesn't require games to stick non-ESRB warnings on their boxes if they contain certain content (which would be compelled speech). Since the law isn't butting heads with a major free speech issue, the "harmful to minors" purpose is less relevant. I think this has a decent chance of withstanding judicial review.
Of course it doesn't matter all that much. All it means is that retailers and movie theaters will stop advertising that they don't sell M-rated games / R-rated tickets to minors.
Let me ask you something. How liable is a company for an act committed by an employee that directly counteracts the rules they have to follow? If a company tells employees they will be fired if they sell without carding properly, is the company liable if the employees break these rules and the law?
Because right now the suggested law says they ARE.
(g)(i) A violation of Subsection (1)(u) occurs when the person or an employee of the person sells the good or service a second or subsequent time to any person subject to the age restriction or recommendation.
(ii) Each violation by the person or the person's employee is considered a violation for determining if two or more violations have been committed.
Would that mean that the moment ANY two employees of a shopping chain ANYWHERE in Utah sell a single game without carding, or a single employee sells two games, the company can be sued?
That was just added to the bill yesterday before the hearing.
The wording indicates to me that it's either way.
Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.
"In this case, however, it looks like they're using the truth in advertising laws. At its core, the law boils down to "If you say you always do X, and you're caught not doing X, you're going to get fined." As such, I'm inclined to believe that this law will end up being constitutional. Unlike an older proposed law, it doesn't require ESRB ratings on all games (which would be both compelled speech and also prior restraint of speech controlled by a private institution). Unlike a recent unconstitutional law, it doesn't require games to stick non-ESRB warnings on their boxes if they contain certain content (which would be compelled speech)."
Have to disagree here. At its core, the bill is still based on restricting sales to minors based on an ESRB(or MPAA) rating that's based on certain content, even though it is reliant on a retailer "advertising" doing X in the first place. So I think that there's still a major free speech issue, and believe that the bill will be ruled unconstitutional on the First Amendment grounds of compelled speech.
Second, this bill still runs afoul of the Fourteenth Amendment guarantee of equal protection under the law, since it still doesn't apply to sales of music CD's with Parental Advisory stickers or books.
Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.
Are you sure it doesn't apply? What do those Parental Advisory stickers say if "labeled with an age restriction or recommendation" doesn't apply?
The PA stickers just say: "Parental Advisory: Explicit Lyrics", though some might say "violent lyrics", although there's no age ratings on music. Usually when they card on music, it's set at 17 as well.
Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.
But then the nature of the rating system is the reason, not the product being rated. The moment they rate books and musics based on the nature and start smacking age-recommendations on, it makes them liable. So it wouldn't count as singling out a specific type of media.
Giving third party ratings legal binding violates Fifth Amendment (due process)
However the bill in question talks about companies saying they enforce these third party ratings yet not doing so. No legal binding to the ratings, only to the promise to do A yet not doing so.
Technically, it is still giving legal binding to the third-party ratings by basically forcing the retailers to enforce them under threat of penalty from " 'false' advertising".
Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.
Wait... People need VIDEOGAMES to tell them headshots are the best way to take down a guy with a vest? What on earth are they teaching Utah kids, is biology off-limits due to its vague association with evolution?
I think the video game law should not only unconstutinal but literally unenforcable because they want the Store and theater chains to slip up so they can get Money to fill JT's pocket to fullfil JT and the States greed
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
Thing is Jack can't collect a dime :) He can't sue anyone unless he has an attorney working for him.
Oh he can sue alright. He's just restricted in submitting court filing documents.
But only in Florida.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
jackie was only licenced to practice law in Florida so being barred there leaves him a 3 legged horse (nothing again horses btw) in a derby. Can't help but lose. Of course he had already practiced that to an artform.
For those that live in Utah I submit there is always gogamer.com or other online gaming sites beyond the narrow reach of this BS. Also my sympathies.
Additional question for those intelligent legal minds in-the-know (so don't waste your time Traitor John Bruce because you're not intelligent to begin with):
How does the EXISTING law apply to advertisments regarding the sale of products over the internet, even by retailers who also have brick and mortar locations? I notice the Traitor John Bruce's efforts to slip that in since the FTC's studies show a continuing decline in failure rates of brick and mortar retail sales each time the study is done. So he has to try to misinform the politicians with references to internet sales, which may or may not be governed by this law.
I'm just curious how it would ACTUALLY apply to internet sales, no matter what the truth about age verification systems, etc during the sales.
Nightwng2000
NW2K Software
Nightwng2000 has also updated his MySpace page: http://www.myspace.com/nightwing2000 Nightwng2000 is now admin to the group "Parents For Education, Not Legislation" on MySpace as http://groups.myspace.com/pfenl
I should guess that the retailer's claims on checking ID (nonexistant, in most cases) online, would take precedence over the brick-and-motar's claims.
And a question from me: You're not allowed to single out one type of media. How does making a law with usage against all media types, yet claiming it is against one and intent to use against one, go up against that?
Furthermore, does intent when making the law even matter when it applies to civil lawsuits where people can sue based on what the law clearly states, which would easily include theaters? Is the intent of lawmakers relevant when the law clearly says something else and based on that someone sues a theater?
Depends on the judge, there are a few cases about the "spirit/intent of the law" versus the "letter of the law".
Great. We'll never hear the end of this from him now.
Also, I always thought it was kind of a joke that the Osmonds ran Utah. Had no idea one of them actually had a political career. One more reason to dislike them now.
Don't worry. He's going to crow and strut for a short bit, but then this law is going to get thrown out like all the others and we'll be back to laughing at the pitiful excuse for a human being.
I find it more likely the bill is passed, gets turned into a law, then a cinema theater gets sued, some retailers of movies, some retailers of video games, some crazy bitch sues a store for selling a boardgame rated 10+ to her son of 9, and the politicians will claim they never intended the law to be used like this, yet they formulated it in such a way it CAN.
Then it would be ruled unconstitutionally broad.
Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.
Hm... Could be possible. Man, I want to read the entire thing. They claim, for example, it's only against M/R-rated things, yet the thing you linked to earlier was general enough to apply to all the other age restrictions as well.
Yeah, but you know that the man hangs on to every little scrap of victory he can get, real or imagined. Irregardless of whether the law gets tossed out or not, in every interview he ever does from now on, he's going to mention how he got this bill passed in Utah and no one's going to call him on it. Just like he keeps harping on his appearance on 60 Minutes ad nauseum.
I can already see them stationing peope lat retail outlets so they can pounce the second they even think there is an infraction.
It's the same as the prop 8 law, it's only purpose is so they can impose their beleifs on others. It serves no other purpose.
If you need to lie to get a law passed, it is not a good law.
You reminded me of what one of the GP members once said, I took the quote as forum-signature:
When your goverment start to look problems in fiction instead real life, is not a good time.
- Rodrigo Ybáñez García
Jack proves his pathological lying is only believed by other pathological liars yet again.
First statement....
''including simulation of oral/anal sexual intercourse between women. The hero in the game then has intercourse, clearly depicted... The hero then kills the woman by gunfire and running her over with his car.''
Followed by...
''I solemnly swear, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing description of what is in GTA IV is true, correct, and complete, and that this game is being sold to kids under 17 in Utah. ''
Congrats. you just commited perjury.
there is no 'anal or oral sex'. There is no 'clearly depicted' intercourse.
Someone call the ACLU! Send in Op-Eds to the newspapers! Bring 'em to their knees!
http://treasurebin.blogspot.com Game reviews from the bottom of the bargain bin
email that to Utah
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
Notice he only pulls this 'I solemnly swear' stuff at times where there is no perjury system in play?
Does anyone think this is even worth the ESA's time to overturn this one?
I'd like to see this perjury mentioned in the post directly above yours called out. Maybe the lieing finally stops, when someone gets seriously burned.
Sorry, but the above poster is wrong. The lapdancing does exactly what they say it does, except for the fact that there isn't any nudity whatsoever. You get worse than that in a primetime evening tv drama. What they are doing is misleading people rather than presenting the facts in their raw form (showing them the footage).
The truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth?
"Oral/anal intercourse..."
That is a lie. No anal in the game at all.
-If an apple a day keeps the doctor away....what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-
In other news, Nevada is looking forward to an influx of sales from 16-year-old state-hoppers trying to buy GTA without getting carded. 8)
---
The Mammon Industry
The real problem with laws is they are not perfect, but that´s normal. The problem is when people believe law as perfect, that everybody will follow them blindly.
The cynical side of videogames (spanish only): http://thelostlevel.blogspot.com/ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com/
And to think that my writing campaigns meant anything to any politician on a city level, let alone a state level. Meh, no wonder people don't want to participate anymore.
---- There is a limit for both politicians against video games, and video games against politicians. http://www.goteamretard.com
''And when [Devin Moore] was faced with being arrested he knew exactly what to do. He knew how to aim... at the head and each time killed these [officers]. We don't want this for our children.''
what...
just...
what?
He had to play a game to work out that shooting somebody in the head is more lethal than shooting them in the hand? Right.....
Also..
Still doesnt explain how his x-button mashing thumb skills suddenly translated across to being able to handle a real weapon.
Still doesnt explain where his floating crosshair came from to assist his aim when shooting at the cops.. i mean.. in the GAME, you line your crosshair and press fire to kill someone. How did this occur in real life?
Still doesnt explain how he managed to autoaim in real life. Did god/magic/aliens help guide his floating crosshair onto his victims?
Still doesnt explain how he knew how to reload a firearm, in the game its automatic.
Still doesnt explain how he handled real recoil/weight of a weapon compared to holding a playstation controller.
Still doesnt explain what he used instead of the floating health/armour pickups.
Stil doesnt explain how he didnt just stand and soak up some bullets before running around a corner and letting his health regen.
Still doesnt explain why he got caught. I mean GTA is a cop-killing simulator RIGHT? So it must accuratley model their tactice so he knew how to react right? strange, because in GTA all you have to do is kill hundreds of people, then run down an alleyway for 30 seconds and the cops will give up chasing.
''Anything we can do to protect our children from the violence, from the filthy pornography that the only way they can get into the pornography is being good at the game. ''
What DOES THAT EVEN MEAN?
SERIOUSLY. Are you just stringing random words together with the phrase 'protect children' in there? i have read that sentence 4 times and i literally dont understand the grammatical structure. Its just random words....
here let me try:
''Give me all your money to protect our children from the aliens, from the filthy pornography and child molesters that the only way they can get to the kids is being rich with your money. So give us your money...................
*cough....*
...terrorists.... 9/11..... *cough*... protect kids.. money. now..... Chicken dinner''
So help me, I couldn't help but play devil's advocate by answering your questions. I have this absolute fascination with how crazy people think, and it's a good mental exercise to keep a step ahead of 'em.
First, it might not have been thumb-skills; he could've been playing a game with a configurable scheme which allowed use of the shoulder buttons for firing. That'll work the index finger for that trigger-squeezing touch.
Devin reportedly said, "life is a video game." It's entirely possible that he hallucinated the floating aim reticule, and maybe even an entire HUD system. I know that after I play Tetris for half an hour, everybody around me looks like their heads are made of bricks.
None of the news reports say anything about reloading the gun; he took it from one of the cops and shot his way out. So no need for floating powerups, as he was clearly doing an pickup-free achievement run.
As for recoil, have you tried some of the higher-sensitivity controllers out there? Sure, it's not exactly like the real thing, but it's like swimming in cold water on a warm day. You can adjust fairly rapidly.
Finally, of course he got caught when he found out real life isn't exactly like a video game. We're talking about somebody so dumb, he didn't figure out which body parts were worth the most damage until a simulator taught it to him. I would've liked to have seen the look on his face when he realized that there were no cop bribe icons waiting for him in the bushes.
(Free with this ridiculous post: several thousand grains of salt. Take as many as required and pass 'em around.)
---
The Mammon Industry
Mr. Thompson, by pointing out that the shooter was "so dumb, he didn't figure out which body parts were worth the most damage...," are you insinuating that only the most idiotic of us would ever consider pulling a gun on a police officer? Because if you are, then you're correct...partially. You could be categorized as any of the multitude of social sub-groups (not just video gamers) and you'd still have to be a moron to think you could get away with murder in real life.
"HEY! LISTEN!"
Did you just confuse me for Jack? Hahahahahahaha LURK MORE
---
The Mammon Industry
You want to play Devil's Advocate, we'll treat you like the devil. =) I found the adressing as Thompson quite nice a joke.
Thank you! ^^
"HEY! LISTEN!"
The greatest trick I ever played was convincing the world I didn't exist, after all. ;D
---
The Mammon Industry
It´s "LURK MOAR", not "LURK MORE"...
The cynical side of videogames (spanish only): http://thelostlevel.blogspot.com/ My DeviantArt Page (aka DeviantCensorship): http://www.darkknightstrikes.deviantart.com/
Yeah, l2lurkmoar
-If an apple a day keeps the doctor away....what happens when a doctor eats an apple?-
Not to derail the subject at hand, but...doesn't Mr. Thompson have an ailing wife at home?
I dunno, maybe it's just me...but if my significant other was severely ill, I'd make her welfare my number one priority. And this is coming from a teenager who, by all rights, should be devoid of any semblance of human compassion (i.e. I play Halo 3 a bit too much).
He must have his reasons, though...right?
...right?
"HEY! LISTEN!"
EZK: Let's leave family out of this.
He must have his reasons, though...right?
...right?
Yes, those reasons likely being that his wife has long since more or less recovered from treatment, and he only trots out her health for attempts to play the sympathy card.
-Gray17
EZK: Let's leave family out of this.
I hate to say it, but he had me going for awhile there.
"HEY! LISTEN!"
If you believe that, I have a lovely bridge in Manhattan to sell to you. Real cheap. Only one owner.
Yes, I am a liberal. I also believe in a strong military, less government, and the right to bear arms. ~ Me
Calling an illegal alien an undocumented worker is like calling a crack dealer an unlicensed pharmacist. ~ Me
My apologies for that earlier comment. It was rude an uncivilized of me to paint an entire community with such a broad brush. That, and I haven't been back for months - I spent a good deal reading up on Thomas Paine, and have since given up on organized religion as a whole.
Regardless, it pisses me off that legislators are actually stupid enought to follow Jack's lead. Most of you have already said every bit of nastiness I can imagine for our beloved anti-gaming crusader/loon, so I'll just way what I can surmise since my absence...
HOLY SHIT - he's still around?
An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind.
This bill has ZERO teeth.
So all the retailers simply stop advertising that they won't sell MA games to underage kids. That's all that will come of this.
Bravo!
But then of course they'll start grass-roots campaigns to boycott any store that doesn't vow to stop selling MA games to kids. All in a way to circumvent the constitution and force their draconian beliefs upon others.
Idiots....to quote Thulsa Doom, "They should all drown in lakes of blood."
Who cares if they start a boycott? The people boycotting will be the people who never buy games because they think they corrupt children. Places that aren't game specialty stores like Wal-Mart of Target could be hurt, but if they all decide to stop advertising that they don't sell M-rated games to kids, the protesters will be forced to choose one of them to do business with unless they want to run all over town to get what can be gathered in 15 minutes in Wal-Mart or Target. Since people are naturally lazy, I don't see that happeneing too quickly.
Wasn't the problem kids buying WITHOUT their parents present anyway?
Probably. Now retailers are going probably to nix their "we don't sell M-rated games to minors" policies to avoid legal action, and these irresponsible parents are going to have even more trouble with their unsupervised kids getting ahold of GTA than ever before.
"and at other retailers’ sites, with no age verification whatsoever."
Credit cards are valid means of age verification. Perjury.
"including simulation of oral/anal sexual intercourse between women."
This is a complete falsehood. Perjury.
"I solemnly swear, under penalty of perjury"
Bring on the penalties!
"These [games] are the kind of things that are training our children."
Training them to do what? Play the game better? Have slightly better hand eye co-ordination?
"The Grand Theft Auto games are cop-killing murder simulators."
No. The Grand Theft Auto games are games.
"And when [Devin Moore] was faced with being arrested he knew exactly what to do. He knew how to aim... at the head and each time killed these [officers]."
LOL! I'm sure if he had never played the game he would have held the gun backwards, or aimed at his feet, or pressed a catch and have all the bullets fall out. Yes indeed, there is no possible way that this man would have known that a gunshot to the head was lethal if he had not played a video game. *BRz...Sarcasm overload...brz*
"We don't want this for our children. Not at all. Please, please vote yes today on this bill."
I don't want my kid playing games that are not appropriate for him, but I don't need a bill or the government to ensure he doesn't. I have a more powerful method, it's called doing you fucking job as a responsible parent.
"Anything we can do to protect our children from the violence, from the filthy pornography that the only way they can get into the pornography is being good at the game."
GTA is not, and does not comtain any pornography. Also, it's like she believes there is absolutely nothing a parent can do to stop their kids playing the game! Off the top of my head:
Confiscate the controllers/video cable, therefore rendering the console unplayable.
Confiscate the game disc, allowing them to play other suitable games only.
Activate and password lock the parental controls on the console, enabling only Teen and lower games to be played.
Here's a tough one, DON'T BUY THESE GAMES FOR YOUR KIDS. DON'T GIVE THEM THE MONEY TO BUY THEM UNSUPERVISED.
For feck's sake, is it any wonder that kids are getting more violent and turning to crime with parents as spineless and worthless as this? Parents that don't have the first idea of discipline or authority when it comes to their kids?
"They work hard and get to certain levels and when they get to the high enough levels then they get into the pornography - filthy, vile stuff that you would be appalled and never want your children to see. And then as a reward, they get to kill the women..."
Ok, if your kid plays GTA and sees killing women as a reward, then there is something badly wrong with that little sociopath that GTA did not cause. This sounds like a kid that tortures and kills small animals and will grow up to be a serial killer at some stage. GTA LETS you kill women. It does not instruct you to, force you to or encourage you to. If a kid takes his lego and constructs little rape scenes and violent murder fantasies, is it the fault of the bricks? The Virginia Tech killer wrote page after page of violent and sadistic "prose" and "poetry" withouth playing any violent games. Must have been the pen and paper, or blank MS Word screen and keyboard that caused it!
I think the state Congress of Utah is going to be cleaned house if they vote for the bill(and it's gets ruled unconstutional by the courts) Due to commiting perjury
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
"Anything we can do to protect our children from the violence, from the filthy pornography that the only way they can get into the pornography is being good at the game. They work hard and get to certain levels and when they get to the high enough levels then they get into the pornography - filthy, vile stuff that you would be appalled and never want your children to see. And then as a reward, they get to kill the women..."
My brains can't understand what is being said.
We should protect children by putting pornography in games and the only way to access it would be by being good at the game?
The children would play it and would see stuff that their parents don't want them to see because the parents have no way of controlling their child while he plays the game?
And for some reason instead of enjoying the porn that the child has gained by leveling up, the child decides to kill a woman?
And this act of killing the woman is supposed to be rewarding for the child.
Is she supposed to be talking about GTA IV or about some really obscure game that I'm not aware, because I know several games where you can fuck and kill a woman, but I know none which involve levels and killing the woman as a reward and not as a part of the plot
Not to mention that getting past the first mission is considered hard to these politicians and people who don't really play videogames at all.
Jack claims to have owned GTAIV just so he could have some sort of integrity to people who believe him. But I often wonder has Jack Thompson even have bothered to PLAY THE GAME????
Also does Jack Thompson have an XBox360? like the GTAIV game was the 360 version, right?
Given that this state saw fit to give Jack Thompson a 'Freedom' (emphasis on the massive sarcasm) Award, I can't say I'm surprised.
M. Carusi
Capitol Gaming
http://capitolgaming.blogspot.com
Ah good point. Can almost picture jackie having built a shrine around that award.
Are you sure the shrine would be to the award and the award not just be part of a shrine to himself?
Edit: I have been reminded that it was not the Eagle Forum who gave John Bruce his award. I was under the impression that they were a sponser of the Freedom Festival that gave him the award. Apparently not.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
I wonder if Gayle Ruzicka knows that Jack Thompson lost the Devin Moore case. The court found GTA wasn't the cause of violent behaviour.
Well, it would be our civic duty to let Mr. Ruzicka know about JT's current track record (or lack of). If only we knew where to mail him such vital information *nudgenudgewinkwink*.
I hold a PhD in Horribleness
Um, that's Ms. Ruzicka
http://treasurebin.blogspot.com Game reviews from the bottom of the bargain bin
Well, she looks like a Mr. at first glance, so cut him some slack there.
Geaux Saints, Geaux Tigers, Geaux Hornets, Jack Thompson can geaux chase a chupacabra.
She probably already knows, but considering she and the rest of the Eagle Forum share Jack's warped world view, she probably doesn't care and would probably even go so far as to back him up up that he was unjstly thrown off it and/or help him cover it up.
That fact has likely been conveniently forgotten.
1. Fraud implies intent to defraud. This law doesn't address that.
2. How long after advertising that they don't sell violent games to minors must a retailer continue not to sell such games to minors? Is it a matter of "promise once, bound forever", or is a retailer allowed to change its policies in the future?
including simulation of oral/anal sexual intercourse between women.
I solemnly swear, under penalty of perjury, that the foregoing description of what is in GTA IV is true...
Hmm..
Oh great they are trying to outlaw the games now. :(
No Cheater, they would not be that stupid (I think). Games and other forms of entertainment are still a solid source of taxable income for the state. No, they simply want to be able to control what you (well minors by theory) are able to: see, read, experience, discuss, learn, know or how you think.
One of the guys in the hearing said they should be outlawed.
In other words, to get the bill passed they just went haywire at games and used the created hostile environment to get the bill through.
I assume that statement came from the asshole Chris buttars
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
Is it just me, but a rated R movie has more nudity then a M rated and maybe even some AO games? If he has such a huge issue with "porn" in games, I would think they would also have an issue with the movie theaters for actually showing nudity. Speaking of, why is it ok to go to a retail store and they will carry a movie which will have some nudity but not ok if its a video game? The same could probably be said about violence, in that why doesnt this legislature have a problem with violent movies as well? You could just as easily "learn how to aim at a head to kill" from a movie(and even books) as one could (supposely) from a video game. Perhaps video games should be much like the book industry who doesnt rate their books?
Quess it is my turn to play devils advocate...
Movie nudity is more "real" than pixelated (though it is getting close). Most M rated games got that rating due to violence, drug/alcohol use and suggestive or sexual themes rather than outright nudity. AO games only quasi exist as they cannot be played on any (unhacked) existing system so the point is moot.
I remember back when I was a kid before I ever started down the (dark) path of video gaming, me and the kids on the street would play "war" with fake guns. Even now I cannot remember how that started or who got the idea, maybe such vaguely violent activity is hardwired into kids. Also we were not taught to flirt with the cute girls in school or date, as far as I know the sexual urge is part of our biological makeup, might as well attempt to hold back the tide.
We do rate movies and there have been long standing rules/laws about legal ages (though there was usually a way around those). Books are not rated becuase if they were some of the classics would have to cease to exist.. Gullivers Travels or Gone with the Wind comes to mind due to racey or rude scenes.
I would submit for the Christian and Morman Zealot types.
Judge not Lest ye be judged (Matt 1:7) and Matt 7:2-5
As far as I can recall, there was only one game that ever got an AO rating: Thrill Kill. It got that rating because of grotesque finishing moves that would make fatalities look tame. Not to mention it was dropped in development because no retailer in their right mind would carry it. Last I checked, the source code is somewhere in the bowels of the internet for the PS1 and DC versions.
http://treasurebin.blogspot.com Game reviews from the bottom of the bargain bin
There have been a few dozen not counting games that were edited and later rated M. Most are AO for some form of sexuality. Thrill Kill is the only one rated just for violence, unless you count Manhunt 2 but that was edited and rated M.
E. Zachary Knight
Oklahoma City Chapter of the ECA
http://www.theeca.com/chapters_oklahoma
This thing just went WAY off topic, this was a bill to regulate false advestisement from retailers. so what does the video game content has anything to do with it.
Sure the content may be in question if you would want a legally regulate it, but as far as i can see this bill only goes after retailers doing false advertising, saying they will voluntarily won't sell to kids under the suggested age, then does it.
I just feel like the actual content of the games shouldn't of have any weight on this ruling.
Also i franckly don't care if this does go through, since it's true the retailler shouldn't falsely advertise something like that if they're not doing it. But i honestly never heard of anyone advertising that, but i'm in canada, so i don't know about Utah.
Looks like they Aimed pretty low on that one, maybe they needed a victory to make a particular cry baby happy about something. like what you do with a little kid crying because he falls and scraped his knee, so you give him a little piece of candy and forgets all about it. Just in this case the kid will grow an ego 5 times as bigger then it was before... wait is that even possible?
How low can Utah go(at the rate thier going)
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
Sorry 'bout that. ^^;
"HEY! LISTEN!"
I really didn't expect this to pass. I mean, do they know who they are up against? The combine strength of the film and videogame industries. Not only is this law overwhelmingly, retardedly without merit, the second they try to enforce it they will get slammed with a lawsuit, if not sooner. And the film and videogame industries have lawyers. Good ones. These guys have Jack Thompson.
---------------------------------
Internet troll > internet paladin
"These guys have Jack Thompson."
not anymore, he's been disbarred, didn't you hear?
they're using a disbarred lawyer for legal advice...
It's like they want to fail, or being blackmailed, that could be another good hypothesis to why he's involved, notice the interview before, that would explain it, blackmail, We should look into that.
LOL. Sorry but reading the above made my evil mind click into gear. I have envisioned jackies next career. (semi) Professional Fall Guy. ROFL. Think about it. Some group can bring him onboard and if things go wrong they can shove him outfront as a sacrifice.
"Its his fault. He was giving us legal advise but we found out later he was disbarred".
Actually, in the event of a lawsuit, they would have an actual licensed lawyer... and depending on case, it may even be the AG who has to hold this law up in court
I really didn't expect this to pass. I mean, do they know who they are up against? The combine strength of the film and videogame industries. Not only is this law overwhelmingly, retardedly without merit, the second they try to enforce it they will get slammed with a lawsuit, if not sooner. And the film and videogame industries have lawyers. Good ones. These guys have Jack Thompson and a bunch of crazy guys from Utah. It would be like bringing a wet noodle to a gun fight.
---------------------------------
Internet troll > internet paladin
and the Video game law Comes crashing Down(effectivly finishing it off and causing a waste of Taxpayer money, plunging Utah in the same boat as CA)
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
Typical republican sheep mentality. Wish I could say I was suprised by this, but, it came exactly as expected.
Leland Yee, Hillary Clinton & friends say hi.
Sweeping half thought out generaliations much? I am a registered Republician (though find I am more of a politican agnostic now and despise people like Glenn Beck) and a Gamer. I am mostly sane (I think) and even allowed to go into public without a keeper.
Being an arse has alot less to do with political beliefs and much more to do with the individual.
That may be true, but I give the democrats more slack because whenever I disagreed with Clinton, I was never called a traitor to my country, a terrorist sympathizer, an America-hater, etc, unlike when when the last guy was in office. They've earned my contempt.
And with that one statement you've struck the heart of the matter, the reason that we hate the Rupublican party, because we've been their whipping boy for the past eight years. Bravo sir. I salute you.
There have always been motherf*ckers, there will always be motherf*ckers, but what we can't do is let them control our motherf*cking lives. -John Oliver, December 1st, 2008
Ok, I live in Utah. I just emailed my state representative and encourage her to vote AGAINST this bill... I've done my part.
were a list of Jack's perjuries included as well?
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
Didn't listen to the mp3 yet...did anyone from the ESA show up?
not that i know
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
I just had a thought. Has anyone considered what might come from this bill if it does pass? Do you think that it will just stop with the passing of it? Yes I know that all retailers of movie tickets and videogames can stop advertising the fact that they card, which Does get them off the hook for being responsible. However who’s to say that the state won’t try to pass a second bill that will demand that the said retailers will HAVE to card and advertise the fact that they do so. If such a bill was passed then it gives the first bill some teeth, even if it is unjust. Not to mention if the affected groups don’t advertise the fact that they card, and/or stop carding then overly protective parents and the likes of Jack Thompson will call them out on it which can be bad for business.
Jack Thompson may have been permanently disbarred, but that doesn’t mean we should assume that we should relax on defending videogames. We should press on defending them, because if we don’t…. well look at what has happened to the US since a majority of the American. We grew complacent and lazy in regards to politics and our government which resulted in adding the transfer of more power to people in our government who abused it and royally F@^ked the country up. *cough* Bush *cough*. Complacency and laziness leads to the loss of strength and decay.
********
Responsibility: Its time that the next generation takes up the reigns of power in our government, before the old fools who hold them steer this country of ours closer to capsizing. We must act before its to late to repair the damage.
*******
Retailers can simply say that people buying M-rated games MAY be required to show ID. It would fulfill your advertising requirement but doesn't commit the retailer to 100% compliance.
Also, such a law faces more free speech concerns than the current one. The current one says you only have to do A if you voluntarily chose to do B. Saying that stores HAVE to have some policy is compelled speech which is generally a no-no.
Is anyone else concerned by the quote: "including simulation of oral/anal sexual intercourse between women." Now, Im no Human Anatomy Major, but, according to what I know, that would seem physically impossible.. LOL
"including simulation of oral/anal sexual intercourse between women."
I think the more accurate way to phrase that would be "two women pantomiming oral and anal intercourse."
I think "pantomiming" is a more accurate description and I removed "sexual" because "oral sexual intercourse" is redundant.
Andrew Eisen
I've played and finished this game,
and... i think i missed out on a few things.
Well, hardly surprising information. It'll be interesting to see what the ESA/MPAA etc do if it is passed, on one hand, it's harmless and pointless, on the other hand, there's too many doors been left open.
Rep Morley has already been duped by Thompson, looking at the whole movie theatre thing, it looks like Thompson was claiming it was an anti-game legislation when the truth was that Thompson was targetting everything. It does concern me that Morley obviously didn't read the bill too closely before submitting it.
If even the person submitting it didn't know what the Bill encompassed, then what other little tricks could be pulled using it?
You can tell from the GamePolitics interview of Morely that he don't know too much of anything about his own legislation. But, then again, why should he? You can also tell from his GamePolitics interview that he's nothing more than a front for Ruzicka and Thompson. How much does he need to know in order to be a front?
Thompson's video game law has, was, and awalys will be a Failure
Watching JT on GP is just like watching an episode of Jerry springer only as funny as the fights
WOW... how do lying a-holes like these keep getting nominated for political positions... surely at least SOME voters must have caught on to it by now...
This Link shows a montage of sex scenes from the Grand Theft Auto IV game which has been sold and is presently being sold at BestBuy.com, WalMart.com, Target.com, GameStop.com, and at other retailers’ sites, with no age verification whatsoever.
Umm... myself and everyone I know has been carded at all of those stores, even if the game isnt that graphic (splinter cell chaos theory for instance) and the clerk looks half-asleep... PS: I didnt even bother going to the link because i've combed gta from the inside out and never run into anything more graphic than the brief (and rather disturbing) instance of nudity in The lost and the Damned
As you can see, there are graphically depicted lap dances in a “gentleman’s club” in this game, including simulation of oral/anal sexual intercourse between women. The hero in the game then has intercourse, clearly depicted... The hero then kills the woman by gunfire and running her over with his car.
The lap dance part i'll give you... even though it's completely optional and not the same as a graphic sex scene (you can see more graphic scenes in just about every pg-13 rated movie) ... but the rest though... which version of gta4 did they play? I've played through gta4 about 5 times and havent run into any graphic sex or missions that require you to run down hookers... in fact, if you do that, you usually get a wanted level and have to spend the next 10 minutes outrunning the friggin cops or getting killed
Now that’s entertainment...
Yes, entertainment... as in... not real... fantasy... no bearing in reality... good, you've just learned the meaning of a word that no politician seems to know
Utah must do something about these major retailers who are flat-out lying to the public when they assert they are not selling this and other similar pornographic “games” to kids when in fact they are...
No, Utah has to do nothing, if a kid gets ahold of a game like this, it's the PARENTS' fault, not the retailers, who have had more success than they've had in years in keeping games like this out of the hands of kids, and definitely not the publishers, because where that game goes is completely out of their hands once the first truckload of discs leaves the factory.
"Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson'll justify it in the end." - nightwng2000
These [games] are the kind of things that are training our children. This is the vile stuff. The Grand Theft Auto games are cop-killing murder simulators.
Wowww... where to begin here... if I didnt see Dennis naming who this quote game from, I'd think it was another episode of Jack Thompson's Gamepolitics Adventures... First off... GAMES DO NOT TRAIN YOU TO SHOOT A GUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! If you claim that games cause violence, then how do you explain the tens of millions (maybe even hundreds of millions by now) of people that play games regulary... By this guy's numbers, humanity should have wiped itself off the face of the earth by now thanks to "T3H 3V17 V1DJ@ G@M3ZZZZ" As for the cop-killing murder simulator part... it's standard JT and politician BS and i'm not even going to go into it
And when [Devin Moore] was faced with being arrested he knew exactly what to do. He knew how to aim... at the head and each time killed these [officers]. We don't want this for our children. Not at all. Please, please vote yes today on this bill.
Once again, games do not TRAIN you to shoot people... I play shooters regularly... and I also took up skeet/target shooting a few years ago.... four years later, i'm decent at shooters, but i'm still terrible at the real life shooting (it takes me about ten tries to hit one clay pigeon in skeet shooting, just for the record)... in real life, there is no lock-on button, there is no auto-aim, there is no enemy health-meter, there is no ammo indicator, and there is no automatic reload.... just for starters, in short, a video game is NOTHING like real life
Anything we can do to protect our children from the violence, from the filthy pornography that the only way they can get into the pornography is being good at the game.
Dudewut? That makes NO sense whatsoever... the only way they can get to the pornography... WHAT?! the only game I know of that ever did that was The Guy Game, which, interestingly enough, tanked.... miserably.
They work hard and get to certain levels and when they get to the high enough levels then they get into the pornography - filthy, vile stuff that you would be appalled and never want your children to see. And then as a reward, they get to kill the women...
This sounds like he just reworded his last statement, and then just put "they get to kill the women" at the end of it, but I'll humor this guy and shoot this one down too.... In GTA4, there are no missions where you "kill the women" as a reward. If you "kill the women" anyway, the cops chase you... if you keep it up, you get arrested and lose all your weapons and some cash... yes... nice reward isnt it?
@GP & co. : feel free to shorten these if you feel I got a bit long winded, I tend to rant when I'm angry >.>
"Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson'll justify it in the end." - nightwng2000
Lol even better example...
If i sit and play FIFA Soccer for 2 months solid, 18 hours a day, eating nothing but tasty but very unhealthy snacks, and get good enough that i can play against the hardest AI opponents, does that mean that i can get signed up to a professional football club getting paid like £1 million a week?
I mean.. ive trained right...?
I mean.. my coordination is just as good as in the game right?
I mean.. i can easy sprint for 90 minutes without getting breathless because i can do it in the game..... right?
no?
umm... Formula 1 racing then?....
umm Mario and sonic at the olympics? I am pretty good at the pole vault...
Maybe if I play Rock Band for 5 hours a day, I'll know how to play REAL musical instruments!
:D
Incidentally, Rush played 'Tom Sawyer' in Rock Band and FAILED their own song...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=btcvSWoQWV0
haha, I love Rush so I have no idea whether i should laugh at this or not :P
"Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson'll justify it in the end." - nightwng2000
Bill is challenged and overturned in 3, 2, 1.
And you people keep wondering why I say the industry should be suing these imbeciles back to the stone age? Given the amount of BS spread in the hearing, Rockstar alone would have enough to make a good case. Let alone the ESA.
I guess Mike G is as spineless as Doug L was, pathetic and weak and to concerned with trying to make criminals of honest people over mod chips, then defending his customers rights.
Sad aint it, when even the good guys in a fight act like bad guys.
Yukimura is still here "Honor, that is what matters, isn't it? " Yukimura Sanada, from Samurai warriors 2
I love the part where Gayle Ruzicka says that he knew what Devin Moore was doing.... he shot the cops and found the quickest scapegoat he could instead of being a man by blaming the game when he willingly committed a crime and took life. All this bill does it makes it easier for ppl particularly minors and their parents who don't supervise them to blame everything but themselves when s**t hits the fan. And because of laws like this they'll win. The problems with America: Irresponsibility, Ignorance, Incompetance, Stupidity, and Scapegoats/Excuses. Anyone guilty of the above 6 points is awarded, not punished. Anyone wonders why this country is going down the crapper?
P.S. EVen if all the so called evidence about games influencing ppl to kill was 100% accurate......The one thing a game can't teach them is where to acquire their weapons. Where is all the outrage against minors acquiring weapons with apparently so little effort? Just shows how hypocritical they are. For the record I am actually neutral gun rights but when the real bullets and bloodshed are constantly ignored and the virtual ones are blamed for everything wrong in society it pisses me off.
You know what I hope this bill passes
Just so that I can see this blow up in their face when all the retailers repeal thier voluntary policies and more of these games get sold to kids. Underage gamers should be celebrating this and hoping it passes(I'm not underage by the way).
Utah gives conservatives a bad name, and iam liberal
Seems like some people still have NEVER PLAYED THE GAME they are talking about.
Also it seems that the link did not really have anything explicit.
But compared to the Eagle Forum, to them everything is explicit.
Even going to the tiolet is explicit.
I guess someone needs to go there and set the record straight, someone from Rockstar or even from the ESRB or even the people from the Florida Bar and say that this legislation is going too far with comments and emails like that, or even say that this sort of slander is provoking fear and hate towards the Videogame Industry.
In any way, the legislation will be shot down, and then everyone who believes Jack will more likely go on a moral riot,
that is what I truly think that Jack's plan is.
To many post to read them all but anyways,
I work at a Gamestop, I really don't care if this bill passed. With it or without it I would still get fired by the corp. and possibly sued by the Parents for contributiong to the delinquency of a minor. So adding a $2500 fine doesn't bother me. But JT just is a DICKHEAD!
A little mathematical-political fact that is quite observable.
The more conservative someone gets, the less confident/responsible/adult/self-aware they seem about managing violent media within their households, or personnal life.
I fail to comprehend why an ultra-conversative wouldn't do the effort to NOT behold violence when he sees it and is displeased, but instead need to run into a room filled with old men/women scared about the world and write basic educational rules on a paper, and pass it as a bill...
One takes an instant, the others months.
All in all, this bill will encourage piracy ; Can't get the latest gore-splattering shooter at the store? Download it, kid, it's free. This bill, while having a noble purpose, is utterly useless for it will never truly succeed in what it's supposed to do.
Also, how fucking hard is it for a parent to look up their children's games and say "You're 15 and this game is for 17 and over. Sorry, you should've thought about it." and take it away?
A lot, apparently.
And finally, another math formula ; The more conservative someone gets, the more susecptible they are to blame human behavior and all it's fun lil horrors on things they fail to comprehend or deal with. Pretty much like an emotionnaly-distressed individual.
I am hearing the audio right now,
Age in-appropriate ratings for minors.
Isn't an M17+ game have a rating that is sold to minors at the age of 17.???
Also why try to fine a games retailer getting fined by 2,000$ if the product has got no proof of being harmful for minors.
All this time, a few of these people have talked so much about studies that have been so flawed just to back up their own opinions.
All those facts are not backed up by accurate research. Yet these people always try to focus on studies that support their view.
There is an accurate study in Grand Theft Childhood that does prove that teenagers can distinguish between fantasy and reality, it is said within their own voices and also with the ways they parent their younger siblings.
I can see a court judge ask the conservative party member who made this bill ask them if this was intentionally apply to Videogames only to have movies caught up in it.
I am sure that Hollywood will have a larger voice in this, and it will blow up on Eagle Forum's faces when this happens.
I just wish while hearing the audio that there should have been a gamer in the audience, they should have outlined the numorus errors of their statements about Grand Theft Auto.
One parent has accturely supported the games retailers,
She said that it is the parents that should have responsibility and that the retailers who try their best should not be subjected to those laws.
Also the game retailer spokesmen really did his best job here, and I can only appluad him for trying his best, but he should have spoken out against the politicians who was blatenly lying about the sexual content in the game Grand Theft Auto IV.
Like imagine how politicians feel if they were subjected to these Truth in advertising laws, instead having a law that will impose a truth in politics law.
No politician would support it, because they would be subject to those laws the politicians will be really afraid of saying anything in case they are caught of making a mistake.
Also how would Fox News feel if they were subjected to the laws of Truth in Media legislation.
Also if no retailer would ever put up their advertising that they would not sell M17+ rated games. Then it would only be worse for the parents.
Also the "protect our kids" type of people who blatenly lie about the comment.
I have nothing I have to say to those people, these people who pretend to talk about protecting the kids and say things that GTA is Porn when in fact it is NOT!!!
These people who lie about videogames or the content in videogames are just scum who are trying to pass the laws.
I am only happy to see that a few people who still kept their heads.
"Language of this bill is a dissinsentive to try and enforce our policies"
Best comment in this audio hearing.
These lies about videogames being porn and poisining our society is the verry thing that is polloting politics at the moment
no body is able to think clearly.
And to blame it on the industry, it is just so wrong.
I also think that the game GTA should be played in the court to show that people have been lying about the content in videogames.
/agree, that's all we really need to do
"Go ahead and hate your neighbor, go ahead and cheat a friend. Do it in the name of Heaven, Jack Thompson'll justify it in the end." - nightwng2000
I'm going to start selling bubbles for parents to put their children in so they don't have to worry about any kind of outside influences preying on their young. The only problem is I'd probably get sued once children started dying because the parents forgot to put food in the bubble or clean out the waste every now and again. Air holes optional.
The Grand Theft Auto games are cop-killing murder simulators. And when [Devin Moore] was faced with being arrested he knew exactly what to do. He knew how to aim... at the head and each time killed these [officers].
Because that's how we know David killed Goliath. Why else would David aim for the forehead?
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」
Sad thing is, people like them usually blame things that they don't like or have no interest in.
And when something they like gets targeted, they do everything to protect it under the laws of the 1st Admendment when in fact they are also attacking another person's freedom of speech and expression.
Every time when those religious people talk about Videogames teaching kids to shoot people in the head, we might be better off to counter their statements with giving them a note that if every child grew up reading or learning about David and Goliath, they would also learn that if you shoot someone in the head either with a bullet or stone, then you would most likely kill them.
So in a way, if videogames teach children about shooting people in the head, then the bible is just as much guilty as videogames are with the David and Goliath example.
I emailed my state legislator and got a response tonight...
I have reviewed the bill and the committee vote and am having a hard time understanding why you are so vehement against the bill. It simply states that it is a "deceptive trade practice" to advertise you do not sell to minors" and then you do sell to minors. It does not limit the sale of video games in any way. It simply requests that those doing so, be up front with their customers. I read the link you provided and understand it is coming from a position of no regulation for video games. However, this appears to be not about video games, though they could certainly be included, but about the sale of any product, including video games, that are provided to minors. I agree that more education for parents would be helpful as well.
I would note that I am a Republican that believes in limited government. This appears to be very limited in its application. All the Republicans and one Democrat voted for this bill (10) while only 3 other democrats voted against it. I appreciate you bringing this to my attention and am certainly willing to listen to any other information you wish to send me on this or any other issue.
Sincerely,
Lorie D. Fowlke
Representative
District 59
Orem, Utah
I'd say the problem is the law is too broad. It can screw over ANYTHING with an age recommendation, from movie theaters to a game rated T being sold to a 12-year old. The movie-guy said it himself, this law will require them to change their policies because they are not capable of guaranteeing a 100% success rate.
if I were in Utah, I would no longer be able to get my kid cousin anything for his birthday/Xmas because I'm too old to buy anything recommended for ages 7-12
岩「…Where do masochists go when they die?」