Grand Theft Auto Civil Case Moves Forward 129
An Alabama court has refused a request by retailers and Take-Two Entertainment lawyers to throw out a 'Grand Theft Auto-style killing spree' civil case. From the Next Generation article: "Moore, who was 18 at the time of the 2003 slayings, is convicted of killing two Fayette county officers and a dispatcher, and claimed that Grand Theft Auto inspired him to do it. That defense was barred, and Moore was sentenced to death. Although that defense was thrown out, the multi-million dollar suit filed by relatives of the victims claim that Moore was in fact mimicking GTA, which attorneys claim Moore played 'obsessively'."
Goddamnit (Score:1)
Re:Goddamnit (Score:2)
Because we all know there was no such thing as a "killing spree" before GTA invented the concept. Nobody had apparently ever run amok before that fateful software release....
end sarcasm
Re:Goddamnit (Score:2)
Because Take-Two, Rockstar, Sony, Wal-Mart and GameStop have a lot more money than Quentin Tarantino.
Re:Goddamnit (Score:5, Insightful)
<comwalk> Remember, here in the U.S.A, we have reached a new age.
<comwalk> NOBODY is responsible for their own actions.
<comwalk> Remember that.
<comwalk> Holy shit! I killed somebody! Bob made me do it!
<comwalk> Bob: Joe made me do it!
<comwalk> Joe: I blame the media!
<comwalk> Media: Videogames.
<comwalk> Videogames: Personal responsibility?
<comwalk> Personal Responsibility: <AFK>
Re:Goddamnit (Score:1, Insightful)
Just unbelievable. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just unbelievable. (Score:3, Insightful)
It's just the part where they move past that and start blaming everything around him that makes me think they're overreaching. Do they honestly think that if he'd only played Solitare that he wouldn't be violent? I don't think so. He may have gotten some inspiration from the game, but ultimately the choice to do it was not dictated by Take Two or Rockstar or anybody but himself.
Re:Just unbelievable. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Just unbelievable. (Score:3, Funny)
At least I don't have to worry about getting myself pregnant.
Re:Just unbelievable. (Score:2, Informative)
What this *is* about is a seperate civil case based on the same facts. The lawyers for the victims are saying to Take-Two "Hey, you helped this happen; you sh
Re:Just unbelievable. (Score:3, Funny)
Think about it, it really is.
Re:Just unbelievable. (Score:1)
Alabama supreme court (Score:2)
Do we really need more disclaimers on game boxes?
".. by opening this box, you agree that we are not to be held responsible in any way if you get influences from our game and decide to kill 3 people
Re:Alabama supreme court (Score:2)
Re:Alabama supreme court (Score:1)
Jaysyn
Corruption Defense - Lawsuits, Profit! (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Corruption Defense - Lawsuits, Profit! (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Corruption Defense - Lawsuits, Profit! (Score:2)
Fortunately, most of us ha
the point? (Score:5, Insightful)
even if we're prepared to accept that there's a causal link in this case between observation and mimicking, surely that he played it 'obsessively' is enough to reject the argument. if you eat/drink/smoke/gamble/have sex/do anything 'obsessively' there are bound to be negative consequences.
if, on the other hand, he'd played the game for 30 minutes and, for example, the seqence of lights and sounds put him into a suggestable state of hypnosis and programmed him to be a cop-killer (not possible annyway since hypnosis can't make you do anything you're not really prepared to do), then there might be a case.
Define 'prepared' (Score:1)
Re:Define 'prepared' (Score:1)
Then the preparedness question is whether someone is prepared to rob a bank in order to ensure that their family is not killed not simply whether they are prepared to rob a bank.
Most people with families are prepared to defend them so, no, that's not an example of getting someone to do something they're not prepared to do.
Re:Define 'prepared' (Score:1)
Re:Define 'prepared' (Score:1)
So what? You're trying to shift the argument. Having a net "prepared" to capture a burglar and being "prepared" to rob a bank in order to save one's family may both be using the word "prepared" but the meaning is quite different. I'm surprised you can't see that without my help.
As the other poster more eloquently pointed out - your initial post is invalid because you're replying to a statement on hyponosis with an e
Re:Define 'prepared' (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Define 'prepared' (Score:1)
Re:Define 'prepared' (Score:1)
Re:Define 'prepared' (Score:2)
Obssesive is the key word (Score:2)
Re:Obssesive is the key word (Score:2)
I kinda hope they win the law suit. There is no contribution the the human condition, no insight, no teachin
Re:Obssesive is the key word (Score:2)
Yes, when society quits buying it, but they don't. They LOVE it. I know I LOVE that game. Now, I don't like it because I get to kill "virtual 'My Radio' LL Cool J's" - but that is fun. I like it because I can do close to anything I want without going to Jail.
See, I don't want to go to Jail. I don't want to hurt people. What I do want to do is experience activities where that could happe
Re:the point? (Score:1)
What gets me is that if somebody did play GTA so obsessively that they tried to play it for real, they'd not only know that killing will bring the cops down on your ass, but that it's also a roll of the dice whether they
Hey relatives (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Hey relatives (Score:2)
Why sue anybody else? (Score:4, Insightful)
You know, this has to stop somewhere. The guy was sick. His parents, friends and relatives who knew him are much more guilty than people who created the video game. Society itself is guilty of allowing such people to roam free. But then, we can't incarcerate everyone "just in case". So my point is: shit happens. Whatever his reasons, whatever the motives, whatever the games he played and the programs he watched, he is a murderer. He's been sentenced to death. The vast majority of people who play GTA do not go on a killing spree aftewards. The game is not the problem.
Re:Why sue anybody else? (Score:1)
Re:Why sue anybody else? (Score:1)
Re:Why sue anybody else? (Score:3, Funny)
Whatever happened to being just plain evil?
Re:Why sue anybody else? (Score:3, Funny)
Ah. It's called terrorism now ;)
And where were these relatives (Score:3, Funny)
Re:And where were these relatives (Score:1)
the multi-million dollar suit filed by relatives of the victims
I'm sure the relatives of the victims had nothing to do with this wacko, no?
Grand Theft Auto Creates Killers (Score:5, Insightful)
If a person's mental state is so twisted that they would kill 3 people after being 'influenced' by a video game, then obviously there are much deeper issues at fault than a bunch of pixels and a joypad.
Where is the logical conclusion to this constantly expanding era of absurd litigation? It's scary to think where it may lead... hell, it's scary enough to think about where we are with it already.
Re:Grand Theft Auto Creates Killers (Score:1)
Dude, can you spare a quarter? Got to get my fix
Re:Grand Theft Auto Creates Killers (Score:1)
Re:Grand Theft Auto Creates Killers (Score:3, Insightful)
I think we should ban the sale and ownership of dogs, if they can encourage a person to go on a murder spree. Nevermind any crimes inspired by a twisted interpretation of a religion...
Re: (Score:2)
Comparisons.... (Score:2, Funny)
Can my family sue New Line Cinema for making the movie?
Can my family now sue Hostess for making Twinkies?
Can I now sue Nintendo for teaching me that the way to get ahead is to lob reptiles?
Re:Comparisons.... (Score:3, Informative)
The question is this: How far along do you get before you lose? In all seriousness, the family does have a right to attempt this type of suit. It's a little dissapointing to see it didn't get thrown out at the earliest oppertunity due to it's obvious rediculousness, but that's the way the system works. It'll actualy be intended functionality of the legal system, unless they win. If they win, then there's definitly a wrench in the works there somewhere
Re:Comparisons.... (Score:2)
I wonder why... (Score:4, Interesting)
The problem isn't if the game MADE him do it, but if the game helped him do it MORE EFFICIENTLY.
From the original CBS News [cbsnews.com] link (not TFA) :
"The video game industry gave him a cranial menu that popped up in the blink of an eye, in that police station," says Thompson. "And that menu offered him the split-second decision to kill the officers, shoot them in the head, flee in a police car, just as the game itself trained them to do."
Perhaps if he hadn't played the game, he would have shot them in the chest where hopefully the cops couldn't have died instantly.
In other words, videogames TRAIN the players to become better and more effective criminals. I don't know about you, but the thought gives me the creeps.
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
"Let's see, the guy without the shirt ran through four yards, climbed under three fences, and dodged a rottweiler. Why didn't he just do two yards, pull a gun and shoot the cops and cameraman when they came through the gate after dodging the dog? Well, -duh-."
If this suit wins, regardless of Jack Thompson's idiocy, this country is going to be opened up to lawsuits of just crazy-insane proportions as people try and dodge liability for every god
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
Re:I wonder why... (Score:3, Informative)
In other words, videogames TRAIN the players to become better and more effective criminals.
I don't really but this at all, the reason being that simulations only work for certain things. Gran Turismo didn't make this dude a better driver. [hedonistica.com] The most that this kid could have learned from a video game was the "concepts" of cover and target to target movement. These could be learned from watching TLC specials on Speci
Re:I wonder why... (Score:1)
Appearently there are to support [military-t...nology.com] that idea.
Just playing devil's advocate. Can't have it both ways, even though I think its crap.
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
But those aren't skill trainers, those two are a theory trainer and a recruitment tool. I agree that the theory of cover and target to target movement can be taught in a video game. You could probably teach firefight awareness too.
What you can't teach is how to shoot that gun effectively. Handle the recoil, control your pulse, breath out and squeeze - game simulation can't do it.
Now, VR Simulation [xent.com], that's a different story...
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
Just food for thought.
Re:I wonder why... (Score:3, Insightful)
Expensive flight simulators go to great lengths to emulate the feel of really flying. If it were as simple as just knowing the mechanics of it, anyone could fly a few hundred hours in X-plane on their PC with a Logitech $30 stick then go hop in a 747 and be fine.
X-plane is FAA certified as a training simulator, but it's only FAA certified when it's used
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
This block has caused problems before, and is only "trained" out of the person by allowing them to become accustomed to firing at humanoid shaped targets. I believe that video gam
Re:I wonder why... (Score:3, Insightful)
I'd like to argue against this. I've been playing violent games for ages, and as a young teenager, I saw the video of when Kennedy was shot (first time seeing a person actually shot) and I felt physically sick. Stopped play
Re:I wonder why... (Score:1)
I've shot guns since I was in the single digit age range. I've played video games where you shoot pixels at other blobs of pixels of varying realism just as long.
Yet when I see a real video of someone really getting shot or blown up, it really does affect me in a way no video game (or movie) can.
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
I think this should be ammended to say that a mentally healthy person can't trick theirself into thinking it is real and not fake. I'm in the same boat as you here. I have played violent video games for a very long time. Heck, I used to play Doom all the frickin' time and listen to Rammstein, just like th
Re:I wonder why... (Score:1)
The block against killing another human has just as much to do with dehumanizing the target and convinving the soldier of a "higher cause".
That's not the sort of training I was referring to though, I was speaking of the non-psychological part of training, that is being able to react without thinking, by performing the same action so many times in the past
Re:I wonder why... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I wonder why... (Score:1)
Us people that enjoy target shooting are all around you. You probably never even realize it. I been a member of a gun club before, and while sometimes there's one or two people that are the stereotype you are probably thinking of, those people usually get kicked out of gun clubs for being whackos.
The real shooting club community really doesn't tolerate the type you a
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
I would have to concur with this statement. At the range I shoot at I made the mistake of saying "well, I like to shoot because I'm practicing for when the cops come to get me."
I didn't think before I spoke and what was meant as a joke, a really really tasteless and classless joke, was taken quite negatively by the crowd there. I was asked to leave pretty soon after that. I returned and apologized for my behavior
Re:I wonder why... (Score:1)
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2, Insightful)
Sorry, I don't buy it. I've played hours of video games. In games, I've killed thousands of people. In real life, I get all squeamish about the thought of squashing a spider. And I couldn't use a gun to save my life. The only weapons I've ever used are the plastic sort with two buttons and a little wheel on top, and a little ball thingy underneath, that
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
Well, good. The last thing this country needs is more inept, half-assed murderers.
Videogames bad; movies, books ok? (Score:2)
Yeah, the fuckers should suffer before they die, headshots are too mercifull.
But back to your point:
the phrase "don't give them ideas" [...] videogames TRAIN the players to become better and more effective criminals.
Go burn some books, those give people ideas too.
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
Why don't you start complaining about Law & Order or CSI then? After all, those shows show a crime, then show where the criminal goofed that allowed him to be caught.
Those shows teach far more about being an effective criminal than GTA does. You also have to try pretty hard to avoid being exposed to those shows, as most hours of the day you can find at l
Re:I wonder why... (Score:5, Insightful)
It's commonly used on people who already tend to express negative behaviors regardless of whether they're given ideas or not. E.g.:
"Those greedy bastards in Congress. Next they'll be taxing us for the air we breathe!"
"Don't give them any ideas."
Which is in fact perfect for the situation -- this man was already violent. That the particular violent acts he performed may or may not have been influenced by a game is just a footnote. Not that it looks like they were -- other than police officers being involved, there is nothing "GTA-like" about his violent acts.
Perhaps if he hadn't played the game, he would have shot them in the chest where hopefully the cops couldn't have died instantly.
Nonsense. First, any idiot knows you will be more likely to kill someone if you shoot them in the head. Cops are trained to aim for the torso to be more sure of your shot. I learned this long before the first video game that bothered to distinguish "head shots" came around, and then it was only representing what everyone already knew. If this guy wanted to kill the cop, and was close enough to shoot him in the head, he was going to shoot him in the head.
Having clearly never played the game yourself, let me also say that GTA does not particularly encourage head shots. The basic targeting system does not allow it, and using manual targeting is difficult and dangerous in most firefights. Which is just one small example of the ludicrosity of the statement:
In other words, videogames TRAIN the players to become better and more effective criminals. I don't know about you, but the thought gives me the creeps.
There is no practical real-world skill that you can learn from GTA. Learn how to car-jack? I keep looking for the Triangle button but can't find it. Firing a gun? Holding R1 to target and X to shoot doesn't do anything to teach you how to fire in real life -- I know, I've done both. The only reason it gives you the creeps is because you've never played to know that it is absolutely nothing like real life and there is no transferable skill that you can learn. Anyone who thought they could practice to become a criminal by playing GTA would find themselves sadly mistaken.
Here's the fact: Millions of people play games like GTA. A few perform violent acts that can in some way be described as being like the game. That's pretty shitty for a game that TRAINS you to be a criminal. In fact, that's the exact same ratio of people who end up being violent criminals in the populace at large. Could it... could it be... that games have nothing to do with causing crime, and are nothing but a scapegoat used as a weak defense by the criminal themselves, and by clueless idiots who are incapable of thinking about the true causes of crime?
Yes.
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
So you have written to all the networks complaining about them teaching people to be better bank robbers? Seem s to be free training most every night now
How about HOUSE MD for training on poisoning techniques, he barely figured it out and he had the script
I wonder if anyone has gotten away with
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
Well, the difference here is that I want to find the truth, not push a political agenda. As idiot as Jack Thompson might be, perhaps he's got a point.
Re:I wonder why... (Score:2)
So that explains the rash of fruit thefts (Score:2, Funny)
Now, personally, I blame the use of cars for violent crimes on the movies.
Nothing like blaming someone else for your own actions, right?
Relatives of the *VICTIMS* are suing (Score:1)
Although that defense was thrown out, the multi-million dollar suit filed by relatives of the victims claim that Moore was in fact mimicking GTA
Grand Theft Auto: Civil Case (Score:3, Funny)
GTA, violence, and the need to be Re-elected (Score:3, Insightful)
1: We have evidence that Violence and Violent Video Games are correlated. Nobody has any clue if violent games makes kids violent, or if violent kids like violent games; but it's politically unpopular to accuse your constituients' kids of being thugs. (FYI, this is the kind of evidence that says smoking and cancer are correlated, but nobody really cares whether or not cancer causes smoking)
2: It's a mid-term Election year. That means that there are several elected officials who desperately need to distract the people voting for them away from an unpopular war, and a deficit which is spiraling out of control.
3: The violence issue in particular has traction because people feel powerless to combat it; trying to protect your kids from becoming assholes is like trying to protect them from the chicken pox. It doesn't work. So, people find a scapegoat, something tangible that they can dismantle and try to keep away from their children. They convince themselves that if they can just keep violent media away from the kids, maybe kids won't know how to be violent. This isnt really their fault, people have been falling for non-causa-pro-causa arguments (with this, therefore because of this) since the dawn of time.
4: Our elected officials are like the contractors at your work. Solving problems does not help them; in fact, Solving problems permanently in a way which makes everyone happy makes them less likely to be re-elected.(this is not a troll, think about this) However, appearing to solve problems does help them. They get the credit for being a tireless defender of the public, and the problems are still there to fix next time they need a boost.
5: History teaches us the following: Games and other High-definition media will continue to be the scapegoat until someone builds a better scapegoat. Console games like GTA will wear targets on their backs until someone makes a VR Game where you rape/kill/steal/whatever or otherwise manages to take simulated violence to the Next Level. Until then, we personally have a choice: we can either whine, follow the mob, or run for congress.
6: There are thousands of idiots out there, sooner or later you will probably fail to think about something and be one of them. While I don't expect you to fix any of the above problems, do try to be smart about it and start thinking critically about the next thing that pisses you off.
Re:GTA, violence, and the need to be Re-elected (Score:1)
1: We have evidence that Violence and Violent Video Games are correlated. Nobody has any clue if violent games makes kids violent, or if violent kids like violent games; but it's politically unpopular to accuse your constituients' kids of being thugs. (FYI, this is the kind of evidence that says smoking and cancer are correlated, but nobody really cares whether or not cancer causes smoking)
Actually, we have large volumes of statistical scientific data which proves
Re:GTA, violence, and the need to be Re-elected (Score:2)
We have scads of scientific data which proves that there is a relationship between smoking and cancer, but we cannot prove that smoking causes cancer on the weight of that evidence alone. A statistical relationship between the two allows us to conclude that either Smoking causes Cancer, Cancer causes Smoking, or that some unknown factor causes cancer and smoking. The Tobbacco companies harp on this point endlessly,
Re:GTA, violence, and the science of it all (Score:1)
Your point on media and violence is more scientifically founded, however.
This does not however, mean that game violence or media violence is or is not a contributing factor to GTA-inspired behaviors, but I'd love to see the research proposals for such a study:
let's see, I'm going to need a few
Re:GTA, violence, and the need to be Re-elected (Score:1)
Nobody has any clue if violent games makes kids violent, or if violent kids like violent games; but it's politically unpopular to accuse your constituients' kids of being thugs
Jack Thompson is pretty popular judging from responses he got from a morning talk radio show from Birmingham when he was in town for the criminal trial, so that may play in. This is the "Bible belt", remember (not to start an arguement)
2: It's a mid-term Election ye
Violence..... Riiiiiiiiight (Score:1)
Re:Violence..... Riiiiiiiiight (Score:2)
OT: Death penalty (Score:1, Insightful)
But does that have to be the case? Did the jury not have a choice in the matter? After all, you don't magically become an adult 18 years after being born.
Easy solution (Score:3, Funny)
"obsessively?" (Score:2)
When I get into a game, I'll play it for maybe 8 hours a day every day for a week or whatever it takes to finish it.
Haven't gone on a homocidal rampage yet.
Seriously, what's obsessive for someone who enjoys games might not apply to other pursuits...games often encourage certain time commitments regardless of content.
I wonder (Score:2)
Completely understandable (Score:3, Funny)
Obviously *NOT* influenced by GTA (Score:3)
Obviously if he'd ever played Grand Theft Auto, he'd be out scoring with hookers, not killing cops. Now, if he was on trial for killing a prostitute, then maybe he'd have a case.
Games...but not movies! (Score:1)
Come on, I'm not that old, but I'm old enough to remember when the target of this kind of hysteria was Dungeons & Dragons. Good mothers wouldn't let their kids be exposed to that source of Evil. How can everyone else have forgotten so quickly?
Re:Games...but not movies! (Score:2)
Coming sonn to a game box near you... (Score:3, Insightful)
Excessive exposure of disturbed individuals to graphically violent games may reenforce existing violent tendencies. Coupled with a disconnect from reality, these conditions may result in the real-world application of themes observed in the game environment, including--but not limited to--assault, robbery, rape, torture, and murder. Please note the existing ESRB rating and seek professional help if you feel the desire to replicate game scenarios in real life.
I have to wonder... (Score:2)
so Rockstar is completely NOT Culpable? (Score:1, Interesting)
While I agree, there is also a part of me that thinks any developer that makes a game where the primary objectives in the game involve car-jacking, murdering and getting away from law enforcement that that developer should have at least a passing concern as to how thier creation will have an impact. We talk so freely about people pointing fingers and shurking
Re:so Rockstar is completely NOT Culpable? (Score:1)
here's something odd (Score:1)
What am I supposed to infer from this compared to the "media" (who have been losing oodles
Pathetic (Score:1)
Please please please (Score:2)
That would be sweet.
Re:Sue the parents (Score:4, Insightful)
Rockstar games has more money.
This sickens me when people think that they can forgo the roles that parents are supposed to play and then sue somebody else for their kids not turning into perfect citizens.
It's worth pointing out that it the victims parents that are sueing, not the parents of the criminals.