Whats goes on everyday, Stardock Forums, life, and all

That idiotic, game hating, son of a b*tch is at it again! Old Jack tried to get a bill passed that would severely punish retailers for selling M-rated games to minors.

The governer of Utah vetoed to bill, using the same reason that has killed Jack's attempts to destroy gaming in the past: the freaking First Amendment. Old Jack just doesn't learn. What really annoys me is this guy's nerve. He got disbarred as a lawyer in Florida, and now he's in Utah. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't a disbarrment effective nationwide? If so, this guy is breaking the law by continuing to practice law.

What do you guys think?


Comments (Page 1)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Mar 26, 2009

Disbarrment is NOT effective nation wide, but it is a fairly stiff barrier to cross to be accepted to the bar in another state. Each state is responsible for setting the standards for who they will allow to practice law in their state.

A better question is, how the hell did such a law even get to the governor to be vetoed?

on Mar 26, 2009

A better question is, how the hell did such a law even get to the governor to be vetoed?

Jack Thompson created it a few years back, before he was disbarred. When will the moral crusaders learn that they do NOT have the right to tell us what we can and cannot play?!

on Mar 26, 2009

When everyone is dead and hell has frozen over.

on Mar 27, 2009

When everyone is dead and hell has frozen over.

Well, we can say when Jack Thompson is dead, for starters...

on Mar 27, 2009

Being disbarred prevents you from practicing law, not from making it...

 

That fucktard can write laws with idiot legislators any time he finds one stupid enough to work with him.  He can be disbarred in all fifty states and that will still be the case.

 

Also, most of the religious right would like that asshat to go fuck himself, even if they're too religious to say so.  He's a fringe lunatic.  Even most of the moral crusaders probably wish he'd disappear, it doesn't help your anti-porn cause when people start railing against Harry Potter because it's filled with evil witchcraft!

on Mar 27, 2009

I hate Jack Thompson too, but, well the retailers shouldn't be selling 18 game to minors

on Mar 27, 2009

Szadowsz
I hate Jack Thompson too, but, well the retailers shouldn't be selling 18 game to minors

I don't see why not. Of the 5 or so "mature" rated games I have, there is really nothing any more mature about them than any of my other games. Most of them get rated "mature" due to having "dirty" language, "drug use," as well as blood and gore. As far as language goes, I challenge you to walk around a high school. I can gaurentee you will hear much worse than anything you may hear in a game. By drug use, they usually mean the medkits which are injectables rather than abstract medkit shaped. Blood and gore really isn't a mature topic either. I am sure everyone has seen what we look like on the inside on House MD, ER, CSI, or just about any other TV show relating to medical or criminal fields. Most mature games are suitable for just about anyone who is at least around 12-13 years old, just as the shows depicting these various elements are.

on Mar 27, 2009

Well said, alway.

on Mar 27, 2009

The way games are rated is another topic altogether, but at face value, that law makes sense (of course depending on what 'severe punishment' exactly means). I played Mortal Kombat 2 as a kid and survived, but kids these days...

on Mar 27, 2009

[quote]railing against Harry Potter because it's filled with evil witchcraft![quote]

Never understood the controversy behind that. To me, they books weren't "evil", they were mediocre fantasy.

As a side note, I've heard/read some monumentally stupid, paranoid crusader garbage. I mean the stuff where the douchebag ranting doesn't make ONE valid point, they just take things completely out of context and make crap up.

Woah. Bit of a rant there, huh?

on Mar 27, 2009

I agree with Alway. You can't go like 5 min through my school without hearign someone swear at something or someone. I mean like the TV shows like CSI and House seem to me to be more graphic then "M" Games. Like right now I am going through Fallout 3 againand like You can Dismember people and shoot their limbs off and it's rated M.

I ask you to find me one teenager gamer who is under the 17 or 18 ration who does not own or has not played a M game. Exceptions are those people who only play games like once in a blue moon like when they go to their friends across the country.

Heck I have played T games when i was like 6 or 7 and M games since i was like 10 or 11

on Mar 27, 2009

Heck I have played T games when i was like 6 or 7 and M games since i was like 10 or 11

You're pretty lucky. My parents were the meaning of "ratings freaks". I had to wait until whatever age the rating said.   I really dont see the reason why parents have to act this way, as it only fuels the movements of the moral crusaders. If the would watch the game for five minutes, they would find it okay.

on Mar 27, 2009

It's irrelevant how graphic the games are.  If I wanted to go buy hardcore porn when I was twelve, it was none of the government's business.  My parents were the ones responsible for my limitations, not a store clerk.  But, in the great nanny state of America...

on Mar 28, 2009

But, in the great nanny state of America...

Nanny state? Take a look at Singapore.

on Mar 28, 2009

I'm under the M rating and never played an M game!

But really, it's idiodic to make a law punishing stores for selling M games to minors. It really should be the parent's decision of what their children play. Though it might not be the best idea to let a toddler play Mankiller or something.

3 Pages1 2 3