I'm not sure how clear I make it here, but I am a gamer. Some of my first memories (trips to the Boston Garden to watch the Celtics in the era of Larry Bird nonwithstanding) involved playing Intellivision games with my father. The hobby has endured throughout several platforms, and has cost me sums of money over the years that I'd rather not think about. Most recently it has caused me to walk five miles in the cold to buy the last Xbox from the second-closest Gamestop, along with copies of Halo 2 and Crimson Skies, because I hadn't brought one to Chicago. I am not going to claim that playing video games has not had negative effects on my life. I would submit that its been worth it, but that's not the point.
The point is that Jack Thompson is full of shit.
Maybe you haven't heard of him. He's an attorney from Florida who has made his living blaming videogame companies and the retail chains that sell their wares for murders. His cases are based, of course, on the claim that violent videogames cause children to commit acts of violence. As one who has played videogames since age 3 and violent ones for only slightly less long, and yet never gotten into a real fight, and know many who can say the same, I put forth that this is a bullshit arguement, but I'm willing to admit that my knowledge therein is purely anecdotal. I do know for a fact, however, that it doesn't retard brain development for people under 25 as he claims.
Here is an article pertaining to his most recent bout of attentionwhoring. Basically he's saying he'll donate ten Gs to a charity if a game company will make a game about a father avenging his murdered son's death by massacring game developers, gamers, retail workers at stores that sell games, and the lawyers who defend them.
Let's give Jackass the benefit of the doubt and assume that this whole thing was tongue-in-cheek. The title of his essay or whatever in which he put forth this idea was "A Modest Videogame Proposal," which draws its name from an essay about how the solution to the Irish famine was to eat children, so that's probably the case anyways. That having been said, it would be more in tune with the namesake essay if it were written by someone like me. But whatever.
In his proposal, he implicates everyone who has to do with video games as targets for the protagonist's revenge. It should be noted that the parents who let their kid play the game that supposedly drove him to murder aren't on the hit list. It should also be noted that with all of the lawsuits against game developers and retail stores, there hasn't been a single one that implicates the parents of the kid who'd been "driven to kill." Also, game companies and retail chains tend to have more money than parents. Coincidence?
This guy is a cretin. He threatens to sue people who email him expressing contrary opinions to an address that he makes publicly available. There have been some who for some reason another had their phone number in their email signature, and he called them up and yelled at them.
Parents, your children are your responsibility. If you want to keep violent videogames away from them, it is likewise your responsibility to do so, because no matter what restrictions are put in place to prevent it, kids will allways find a way to get their hands on it, just like how teenagers will always find a way to get alcohol. Blaming others for your failure to fufil your responsibility is fucking weak