i was talking to the old teacher of my laws classes from high school, and she mentioned that all lawyers in florida have to be listed by the florida bar associates. I looked into it, and not only are they listed, but the listings are publi c information. Oh, if only there were some sort of ******* lawyer who lived in florida... maybe someone who hates videogames... maybe based in miami...
Oh, huh, sounds kind of like Jack Thompson. Oh... lookey [url=http://www.floridabar.org/names.nsf/All/07D079003898F95585256A830051348B?OpenDocument]here![/url]
[url=http://www.floridabar.org/names.nsf/All/07D079003898F95585256A830051348B?OpenDocument]Oh, wait, is this Jack Thompsons contact information? Oh, huh, I think it is. boy, it sure would be a shame to let everyone know that his PHONE NUMBER IS (305)666-4366 or that HIS LAW FIRM CAN BE MAILED AT
1172 S Dixie Hwy Ste 111
Coral Gables Florida 331462918
Huh, hope nobody spreads this around the net or anything...[/url]
Before anyone says anything, his name is john, not jack.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_%28attorney%29
Bag full of rats' feet on the way!
Mail him a completely harmless game like Kirby, then watch him freak out about cannibalism or blowjobs in games.
Aweso... I mean, how terribly disappointing. I am appalled by the childishness on display here. APPALLED I SAY.
[quote=Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia][url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_%28attorney%29]"Because of recent vandalism or other disruption, editing of this article by unregistered or newly registered users is currently disabled."[/url]
You can always count on Wikipedia members to know whats hot and whos not. ;)
Wikipedia history dumpster diving FTW :p:
EDIT: [url=http://www.floridabar.org/names.nsf/All/07D079003898F95585256A830051348B?OpenDocument]Member in Good Standing[/url]. :rolleyes:
...he's a dead man.
anthrax
John's secret is safe with me.
his area code is 666? is that real?
his area code is 305. 666 is just the first part of the number
[quote=Fei-on Castor]When someone gonna clean up MTV? I'm tired of channelsurfing and having to see half-naked women with their breasts hoppin around like some g*dd*mned jack russell terrier trying to snatch the a chicken off the supper table.
Bullshit. You appreciate MTV and their soft-core nudity, just like all of us other hetero males. Sure, eventually, you want to see some actual music videos, but every-now-and-then, a guy's gotta see some badonkadonk.
---
Too bad you couldn't get Mr. Thompson's e-mail.
I know what I'm doing tomorrow during break at work.
[quote=Skitzo Control]Bulls[COLOR=white]h[/COLOR]it. You appreciate MTV and their soft-core nudity, just like all of us other hetero males. Sure, eventually, you want to see some actual music videos, but every-now-and-then, a guy's gotta see some badonkadonk.
---
Too bad you couldn't get Mr. Thompson's e-mail.
Being a heterosexual male =/= wanting to see T&A thrown in your face constantly, and I also really don't appreciate the way crap like this makes young girls (as in 8 years old) feel like they have to act and dress like sluts. I actually find it an insult to my intelligence that they feel the only way to appeal to me is through primal urges, it's fucking patronising.
i say we get a bootleged copy of san andreas, mail it to him, and watch him rant about it to the media.
That's just a really lame idea. Wow.
Oh yes, that's right, it's either one or the other. Both certainly cannot be factors, that wouldn't fit in with rest of the neat and tidy, black and white world we live in.
It's a factor, but the blame lies on the parents shoulders. That **** will always be on TV because people want to watch it, and people enjoy it. Why should action movies, late night porn, violent cartoons and whatever else be taken off the air just because some parent needs the TV to babysit their kid?
Yeah, it's not marketed towards eight year-olds. It's not MTV's fault a new breed of sluts are growing up. They're a factor, yes, but I wouldn't blame them.
saying that mtv is ruining a generation is like sying that video games or tv makes kids violent. it may, but only when said kids arent properly raised by their parents. ultimate blame still lies with the parents for not giving two ****s about their kids.
[quote=Vampiro V. Empire]It's a factor, but the blame lies on the parents shoulders. That **** will always be on TV because people want to watch it, and people enjoy it. Why should action movies, late night porn, violent cartoons and whatever else be taken off the air just because some parent needs the TV to babysit their kid?
Yeah, it's not marketed towards eight year-olds. It's not MTV's fault a new breed of sluts are growing up. They're a factor, yes, but I wouldn't blame them.
Late-night porn, action movies and violent cartoons aren't typically shown at the same time 8 year olds are watching TV. Almost-naked girls dancing provocatively to songs degrading women is.
The blame is split right down the middle, parents can only do so much. No matter how good a parent you are you simply can't be with your kids 100% of the time, you aren't Jesus.
It's MTVs fault for showing this crap, no one can argue that. And therefore it's MTVs fault that it makes it into popular culture. As a parent you can sit your kids down and explain to them why such and such is wrong, lock TV channels and so forth, but showing it certainly makes it harder.
You job as a parent is to protect and raise your children all of the time. Your limitations as a human being prevent that. A show of responsibility certainly would not go amiss on MTVs part.
This is why I agree with Jack Thompson on what he's actually trying to do (not with the rest of his beliefs, the man is clearly a c[COLOR=lightgreen]u[/COLOR]nt). Believe it or not, he's not trying to ban videogames, he's trying to ban videogames with adult content until it becomes illegal to sell them to kids. Most civilised countries have a similar rating system for games. America has one for movies and DVDs, it makes absolutely no sense as to why it should'nt have one for games too.
You might say that responsibility should lie completely with the parents, but in my opinion that's unfair to parents, kids and adults. Being a parent is hard enough as it is, most people would agree that no decent parent would let a 5 year old play GTA anyway. Why not help most of them out by legally preventing kids from getting their hands on it?
At the same time you could have even more extreme content for adults to enjoy because there wouldn't be any publick backlash from kids having access to it. It works, in England we have much less censorship on TV because we have a system in place that stops kids from being able to see that kind of content in the first place.
Holy crap that's off topic.
EDIT: Actually, it's not. I looped back round to Jack Thompson.
You dont have to be with your kids all the time to instill proper values. I was the son of a single mother, which meant I had little time spent with her (most of hte time i was at school or in daycare). However, because I was actually taught right an wrong as a child, I carried those lessons over to when she WASNT around. You dont have to be there; you're lessons do.
Also, MTV isnt really in the business of pushing things as much as you might think. Things dont become popular because they're on TV, its the other way round. if being on tv was all it took to be famous, where are all the old Idol winners? Nobody knows, nobody cares. MTV shows what is popular so that they can get more ratings, in order to be able to sell more adspace.
And one more thing, are you seriously complaining about how kids are dressing slutty? Last I checked most 8 year olds had to rely on their parents for clothes. If their parents buy the stuff for them then they have no right to complain.
Spoilers: you typed too much for me to read, Speedy.
[quote=Vampiro V. Empire]Spoilers: you typed too much for me to read, Speedy.
I'll shorten it for you.
England restricts it's content more than America, but also has less censorship and less crazy people like Jack Thompson. None of our politicians seriously consider the kind of crap yours are regarding videogames because we've already found a solution.
Restricted concent gives more freedom, it doesn't take it away. Time paradox.
... OK. Good for England.
I have a feeling you shortened it too much. I also don't care anymore, nor do I remember what this is even about.
I think it's the parent's fault, too. I haven't read any of this topic, btw, because it was all too long and I don't care enough. Parents are always looking for a new way to take the blame off themselves. What? Me a bad parent? BUT I MONITOR MY CHILD'S EVERY WAKING MOMENT! THAT UNPOSSIBLE!
When I'm a parent, I'm going to raise my child the right way--beating him.
[quote=Vampiro V. Empire]... OK. Good for England.
I have a feeling you shortened it too much. I also don't care anymore, nor do I remember what this is even about.
Jack Thompson :cookie:
Nah, definitely not.
even the shortened version was way too long for me
[quote=Vampiro V. Empire]It was a lot shorter when I first read it (just "England restricts it's content more than America, but also has less censorship.") I don't know where the rest came from.
I was talking about MTV and parents. How did it get to video games and Jack Thompson?
Why don't you just read my fucking post instead of having me report it in short installments? Lazy cunt.