Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson Bill

March 26, 2009 -

Terming it "a bullet dodged," the Salt Lake Tribune has lauded Gov. John Huntsman's veto of HB 353 in an editorial.

Although it did not mention the disbarred Miami attorney, the editorial was unsparing in its criticism of the Jack Thompson-conceived bill:

Somehow, this misguided piece of legislation zoomed through the Legislature with hardly an opposing vote, and, we suspect, without a thorough vetting...

 

This was patently ridiculous legislation, easily challenged in court as unconstitutional...

The bill ignored the fact... [that] the ratings can provide helpful information to parents, but should not supercede a parent's decision to let a child buy a game or DVD. In that, HB353 flew in the face of Utah's traditional support of parents' rights...

 

Is that really what legislators believed they were voting for... ? Probably not, but the legislation's broad language invited a whole set of consequences that were not intended...

In their misplaced zeal to limit access to media they don't like, our legislators might have eliminated the very tools parents need to set limits on what their children see and hear. We dodged a bullet on this one. Having misfired badly, the Legislature should not bring it up again.


Comments

Re: Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson Bill

A simple truth that not all newspapers in Utah supported the bill.

This one was more informed and almost got it spot on.

Although I don't think that anyone in Utah ever cared who Jack Thompson was, I guess most parents were taken for a ride when they were hearing all about how good the bill was without even reading it.

 

The Language of the law can be a thickle thing, it is not what the politicians say but it is how the law was written that could have been more damaging.

Considering how much of the bill was changed while it was still being discussed in the house, I am glad that the Govenor vetoed it.

 

TBoneTony

Re: Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson ...

How about a link to the article?

 

------ Ago. Perceptum. Teneo.

Re: Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson ...

Nah, I say give him all the credit in the world for the bill.

Why?

... well, why not? He created a bill that failed, was spat on as unconstitutional and adds to a list of failures in his bid for world domina---I mean, his bid to protect the world from violent video games. Give him credit for creating a bill that utterly FAILED in Utah. It'll settle right next to how he got disbarred. Add up his failures, for maybe, just maybe... if people see this growing list of desperation, the less likely he'll succeed in his mission to rule the wor---Oh, I mean his mission to ban video games.

Just a thought.

Amy Levandoski

Amy Levandoski

Re: Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson Bill

"Although it did not mention the disbarred Miami attorney"

Ooh I bet THAT hurt...

 

Re: Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson Bill

To the person who wrote the editorial,

I commend you. Well said.

Sincerely, 

-----------------------------



"A Chrono Trigger is anything that unleashes its will or desire to change history!" -Gaspar

Re: Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson Bill

The epic fail, it grows.

Re: Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson Bill

I've always said that the best ratings system is our own common sense. When laws attempt to supercede our own brain and our two eyes to judge what's right or wrong, then something bad will happen.

Steam ID: canadakiller

Re: Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson Bill

To tell the truth, i doubt anyone there other than Jack and his allies even know he "created" it, I say now that it's dead, we follow suit (after all, not crediting him probably pisses him off as much as it failing).

Re: Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson Bill

But It's not likely that they would care that much, Given Bigots Like the Eagle forum and all.

 

"This was patently ridiculous legislation, easily challenged in court as unconstitutional..."

Finally Common Sense triumphs all, And im glad some utah people including certain media thought this piece of trash was a waste.

 

 

Magic Taco

Re: Leading Utah Newspaper Applauds Veto of Jack Thompson Bill

I wish they would have put in the fact that Jack was a disgresful lawyer that got disbarred. That what Utah would see his true color.

 

http://www.magicinkgaming.com/

 
Forgot your password?
Username :
Password :

Poll

Which group is more ethically challenged?:

Shout box

You're not permitted to post shouts.
E. Zachary KnightTeachers unions are just as bad as police unions, except of course you are far less likely to be killed by a teacher on duty than you are a cop. But they also protect bad teachers from being fired.07/07/2015 - 6:29pm
E. Zachary KnightGoth, so you agree they are still union members. Thankfully we have a first ammendment that protects people from being forced to join groups they don't support (in most cases any way.)07/07/2015 - 6:27pm
E. Zachary KnightAh, police unions. The reason why cops can't get fired when they beat a defenseless mentally ill homeless person to death. Or when they throw a grenade into a baby's crib. Or when theykill people they were called in to help not hurt themselves.07/07/2015 - 6:26pm
Goth_SkunkeZeek: Non-union employees have no right to attend meetings or union convention/AGM, or influence policy. The only time they get to vote is whether or not to strike.07/07/2015 - 6:24pm
Infophile(cont'd) about non-union police officers being given hell until they joined the union.07/07/2015 - 4:58pm
InfophileParadoxically, the drive in the US to get rid of unions seems to have left only the most corrupt surviving. They seem to be the only ones that can find ways to browbeat employees into joining when paying dues isn't mandatory. I've heard some stories ...07/07/2015 - 4:57pm
Matthew WilsonI am old school on this. I believe its a conflict of interest to have public sector unions. that being said, I do not have a positive look on unions in general.07/07/2015 - 3:59pm
TechnogeekWhat's best for the employee tends to be good for the employer; other way around, not so much. So long as that's the case, there's going to be a far stronger incentive for management to behave in such a way that invites retalitation than for the union to.07/07/2015 - 3:10pm
TechnogeekTeachers' unions? State legislatures. UAW? Just look at GM's middle management.07/07/2015 - 3:05pm
TechnogeekIn many ways it seems that the worse a union tends to behave, the worse that the company's management has behaved in the past.07/07/2015 - 3:02pm
james_fudgeCharity starts at home ;)07/07/2015 - 2:49pm
james_fudgeSo mandatory charity? That sounds shitty to me07/07/2015 - 2:49pm
E. Zachary KnightGoth, if Union dues are automatically withdrawn, then there is no such thing as a non-union employee.07/07/2015 - 2:38pm
Goth_Skunka mutually agreed upon charity instead.07/07/2015 - 2:33pm
Goth_Skunkyou enjoy the benefits of working in a union environment. If working in a union is against your religious beliefs or just something you wholeheartedly object to, dues will still be deducted from your pay, but you can instruct that they be directed towards07/07/2015 - 2:33pm
Goth_SkunkBasically, if you are employed in a business where employees are represented by a union for the purposes of collective bargaining, whether or not you are a union member, you will have union dues deducted from your pay, since regardless of membership,07/07/2015 - 2:32pm
Goth_SkunkIt's something that has existed in Canada since 1946. You can read more on it here: http://ow.ly/PiHWR07/07/2015 - 2:27pm
Goth_SkunkSee, we have something similar in Canada, called a "Rand Employee." This is an employee who benefits from the collective bargaining efforts of a union, despite not wanting to be a part of it for whatever reason.07/07/2015 - 2:22pm
Matthew Wilson@info depends on the sector. for example, have you looked at how powerful unions are in the public sector? I will make the argument they have too much power in that sector.07/07/2015 - 12:39pm
InfophileIt's easy to worry about unions having too much power and causing harm. The odd thing is, why do people seem to worry about that more than the fact that business-owners can have too much power and do harm, particularly at a time when unions have no power?07/07/2015 - 12:31pm
 

Be Heard - Contact Your Politician