Jack Thompson Faces Disciplinary Hearing 231
CoolC writes "Gamepolitics is reporting that attorney Jack Thompson is to face a disciplinary hearing before the Florida Supreme Court. The attorney faces five counts of professional misconduct, three of which are correlated with his ongoing campaign against violent video games. Thompson faces the possibility of disciplinary action up to and including disbarment."
i'm hoping... (Score:5, Funny)
I'm crossing my fingers in the hope that you misspelled dismemberment.
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:5, Funny)
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
http://www.g4tv.com/attackoftheshow/blog/post/629
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:5, Insightful)
To describe his conduct as "disgusting" is the understatement of the year. Even outside video games, listening to the things he says (neo-conservative religious freak... I don't care where you fall on the political spectrum, that spells "jackass.") makes me sick.
Disbarment is too good for him, but I'll settle for it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:5, Insightful)
"In 1992, Thompson asked a Florida judge to declare the Florida Bar Association unconstitutional. He claimed that the bar was engaged in a vendetta against him because of his religious beliefs, which he said conflict with what he called the bar's pro-gay, humanist, liberal agenda."
We may disagree, however, I think this line here pretty much says to me that Mr. Thompson is a huge bigot. He's going for the "persecuted minority" (despite being a Christian, which is hardly the minority) routine. This is incredibly disgusting to me on every level. Is it wrong to wish to see him fact the consequences of his actions?
I admit, we're biased. But we're also human, and we're talking of a man who has personally attacked our character (well, the character of anyone who ever plays games, anyway), our hobbies, and has in general, made himself out to be our enemy, as if he feeds off of animosity. Is it surprising we should take some enjoyment in watching and criticizing his actions, in hopes that they may be his downfall? Sorry if this is a bit of nonsensical rambling, but I see no reason we shouldn't be upset at him.
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:5, Insightful)
>If I may quote his Wikipedia article
You may... but if you're really going to tell us what Jack Thompson thinks, you should quote *Jack Thompson*, who said:
>"wedding of all three functions of government into the Florida Bar, the 'official arm' of the
>Florida Supreme Court, is violative of the bedrock constitutional requirement of the separation
>powers and the 'checks and balances' which the separation guarantees."
from the *same article*.
To paraphrase: A branch of the government, especially a non-elected one, should *never* regulate ITSELF. That actually makes a good deal of sense, don't you think?
I dislike Jack Thompson for his smearing, his wild accusations, and his consistent histrionic bullshit, which can be quoted voluminously (so why quote a paraphrase?), but he is still a lawyer, and he is a *competent* lawyer who understands exactly what's gone wrong with the law.
His tragedy is that he uses that information to get his way, instead of as a point of reform. That's not unique amongst lawyers, because the system does not reward ethical behavior, it rewards whatever sticks to the wall. He knows what's wrong with this country's legal system, and I would welcome his disbarment because it might turn his crusade in the right direction: against that corrupted system.
He isn't a nutjob. People IGNORE nutjobs. He's EFFECTIVE and that bothers us because it shows us how easily the legal system can be manipulated to punish unsubstantiated wrongs.
--
Toro
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:4, Insightful)
At some point each arm of government has a degree of autonomy. Separation of powers means that each arm may not usurp the others, NOT that each arm may not regulate its own activities insofar as they are within the scope of its power.
Oh, and "especially a non-elected one" - you mean one that actually has an incentive to set up favourable rules and regulations to ensure re-election..?
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:4, Funny)
I guess it's possible he has a brain tumor, but I think his Invisible Friend is a far more likely explanation.
-
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:5, Informative)
Check out his entry on wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Thompson_(attor
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:5, Interesting)
The difference is that he's before the FL Supreme Court now, the same people that just two months ago fired a renegade district judge for egregious behavior when no one else would. They don't seem to tolerate such misbehavior very much, especially when presented with a record like Thompson's. Here's hoping he's forced to find an alternate career.
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:5, Insightful)
For example, in my own experience, someone who has religion is someone who believes in God/a god/whatever. He follows its principles.
A religious freak is someone who says "I believe this, so follow it, too, or burn in Hell."
There are some key ways to tell the difference. For example, no sane religious person would ever seriously use the term "gay agenda." Mr. Thompson has made it very clear that he's anti-gay, and on a number of occasions spoken like gays are out on street corners, handing out pamphlets to try and convert you.
A religious person finds comfort in his own beliefs. A freak finds comforting in condemning those who don't follow his beliefs.
Part of the reason we don't see many truly religious people in the news is because they're being tolerant and quiet. That's not newsworthy. Some jackass marching down Main Street to have minority group/religion/whatever put in death camps, however, will be plastered all over.
So, Thompson is loud, irritable, stubborn, intolerant, and closed minded. Combine this with his often stated "strong faith" and you've got the model religious nut. Believing in God don't make you nuts. But if you are nuts and believe in God, oh, the shit you can try to pull...
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:i'm hoping... (Score:4, Funny)
Repensum est Canicula (Score:3, Funny)
Jack Thompson - this is your future! [justgotowned.com]
Re: I'm hoping... (Score:3, Funny)
Re: I'm hoping... (Score:5, Interesting)
NOW, sending tens of thousands of troops to a foreign country in a war of aggression and occupation and subjugation which results in 40,000 civilian casualties. THAT is violent.
But I guess context is a silly thing. We don't need that.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Department (Score:5, Funny)
Come on, let's try not to show such a bias here on slashd...oh, wha? That Jack Thompson?
I wonder if tarring and featherings are allowed in the florida legal system... Seriously though, isn't this a textbook case of "people getting what they deserve?"
Re:Department (Score:5, Insightful)
Definitely, but given his history [wikipedia.org] he'll probably sue the Florida Bar (again).
Re:Department (Score:5, Insightful)
So, let me get this straight. He sues the Florida Bar Association because he basically says its an evil communist terrorist organization planning to turn everyone gay, and that it's blatantly disregarding the Constitution (Please note: I exaggerate his wording, but either way, it's full of shit) and destroying America.
So he settles for $20,000 out of court. "You're destroying America! Stop it now!" "How about we just give you some money?" "That's fine, too!"
Damn, this guy is the ultimate sleezeball. If you ask me. Jack Thompson is a shining example of everything wrong with America these days (bigoted, sue-happy, uninformed but with LOUD AND STRONG OPINIONS).
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Wrong with America (Score:3, Interesting)
While clearly an idiot, the fact that people like Jack Thompson still exist in America at least gives me some comfort that free speech is not being infringed on. It gives me solace that our democracy has not yet gone down an irreparable path.
"I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
As I understand it, your U.S. consitution forbids the use of "cruel and unusual" punishments (emphasis mine). I believe tarring and feathering to be either cruel or unusual, but probably not both.
IANAL.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
That'd be fantastic.
Re: (Score:2)
Wrong State (Score:2)
no, it's a good thing (Score:5, Funny)
Thompsons wild accusations finally his downfall? (Score:3, Insightful)
Finally justice. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
But seriously, before video games, it was rap music (in fact, it still sorta is), D&D, comic books, rock and roll, movies... And if you want to go back far enough in history, violence was caused by witches and Jews.
Color me cynical, but as much as I'd love to stop seeing parents blame todays massive surge in teen violence (which, if I may be so bold, woul
Re:Finally justice. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, what this is about is Jack Thompson, a crazy man practicing law. What exact view he presents, and whom he attempts to target with his wild accusations and lawsuits, is not the case here. He's a flat-out frothing-at-the-mouth smearing-shit-on-the-walls lunatic that is nevertheless certified to practice law in Florida solely because the last time they tried this he threatened them with a civil suit.
It's important that the gaming community at large not gloat too much should this go the way I so sincerely hope it does - i.e, that Thompson is removed to a position in society where he can do minimal harm. If we start waving the flags and claiming victory over those who ignore the research and continue to claim that video game violence produces killers, then we risk making a nutjob a martyr, and watching three more spring up in his place. The sensible long-term response is, "regardless of my views on gaming and media censorship, it's good for ALL Americans that this man is out of the discussion, and we can continue to argue for our rights with those opponents who approach the issue with dignity, respect, and above all, sanity."
That's not to say this news doesn't make me happy in my pants. Oh, it does. It VERY MUCH does.
Re:Finally justice. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Finally justice. (Score:5, Insightful)
No, but toeing the party line would.
Just so's you know.
"(Jack Thompson)
Hm. You mean like trying to overturn Roe v. Wade? Or perhaps outlawing gay marraige. Yeah. Those damned liberals. Always thinkin' they know what's best.
Seriously. The second I hear 'liberals are like this' or 'conservatives are like that' I know the speaker has immediately gone into an irrational defensive mode.
Jack Thompson is a conservative; he's almost a reactionary. He's trying to use the legal system to 'protect' the citizens from a new form of content, which is a very conservative thing.
The fact that he's a nutjob has nothing to do with that. There are conservative nutjobs and there are liberal nutjobs. Please, accept your own nutjobs. No one else will.
There's nothing conservative about them (Score:2)
I find it truly bizzare that radical anti-intellectual Christian splinter groups call themselves conservative - paticularly the ones that seem to think it's all about making money and smiting people.
Are you sure? (Score:3, Funny)
Effectively, they want society to regress to the Dark Ages. What could possibly be more conservative than that?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
By the way, I'm agnostic, but remain confused by the radical right wing Christian groups that appear to have lost the second half of their book somewhere and ignore most of the first half.
Meh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Its like saying "lunatic charged of murder cases thinks he should be able to kill people!" Who cares...in both cases its some stupid crazy loon getting what he deserves...
We need to know what crazy loons are up to (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:We need to know what crazy loons are up to (Score:5, Insightful)
Jack Thompson is just a member of that breed of attention addicts who will do or say anything to get their faces in the paper. The news media happily obliges these guys, because they're outrageous and clearly demented. They're following is just as demented, and are probably psychologically not all that different from the kinds of guys who end up in cults. If Jack Thompson belongs anywhere, it's on the Jerry Springer Show fighting transexual hookers and eighty year old sex addicts.
Re:Meh... (Score:5, Insightful)
"I feel bad that he has a slashdot article this late in the game even dedicated to him...I don't think its worth it..."
I rarely turn on the news, or read the paper. Slashdot is one of two "news" sites I read, the second being primarily video game based site. So if not for new sites like Slashdot, and other specialty news outlets, I very well may not have known about this extremely relevant piece of information.
Over the last several years it's been a tad bit demoralizing to see logic and reason go out the window in the USA, in favor of a policy of scapegoating. Killed your brother? Blame violent music. Robbed a store? Blame GTA. 8 year old that swears like a sailor? Blame TV and the media at large.
You're a bad parent? Don't worry, we can fix that. Here, blame these guys. Everyone's doing it, it's all the rage.
If you're fat, it's McDonald's fault. If you can't read warning labels or use common sense, whoever made what hurt you, is to blame. Clearly they should have warned you that you were retarded before selling you a product that's designed to do damage, like a knife, or a product that's been served pipping hot for as long as anyone's been alive, like coffee. Clearly you needed to be told not to spill hot coffee on your lap.
So taking a good look back over the last several years, and all the madness... It's refreshing to see a stand being taken against these trends. If left unchecked, people like this, and attitudes like these, will lead to the widespread disappearance of personal responsibility.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Jack Thompson might be a nutjob, that however doesn't mean that violence in video games and other media isn't a problem. You know, personal responsibility is a door that swings both ways, just because people should take care about themself or parents about their children doesn't mean that McDonalds, the cigarette industry or video game developers should get away with sellin
Re:Meh... (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Meh... (Score:5, Insightful)
Perhaps instead of blaming violent entertainment, we should be looking at why we so enjoy watching people get the shit beat out of them.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Jack Thompson's noise being silenced would be a great thing for the debate at large. More mature and reasoned voices can now (hopefully) be heard.
Re:Meh... (Score:4, Insightful)
there is so very little room left for meaningful discussion of such topics.
Such topics are discussed ENDLESSLY. Ad freaking nauseam [google.com]. The problem is this: One side has decided, arbitrarily, without any compelling evidence whatsoever, that videogames are harmful to children. The other side says, okay, before you go claiming I have "responsibilities" and abridging my rights to self-expression, show me your evidence that what I'm doing is harmful. And that's where things lie. The first side wants to pretend that the "evidence" step (and that whole little issue of parental responsibility) should be skipped over and we should move directly on to imposing restrictions. So when you say "discussion," if you mean "discussion of how far we should restrict video game manufacturers based upon a mere gut feeling that what they're doing is bad," that's not the discussion that the software industry wants to have.
However, if forced, they will have the "let's enact a useless self-imposed 'rating' system to keep the think-of-the-children crowd at bay" discussion.
Re: (Score:2)
How about good old common sense? Do you let your children watch hardcore porn? Gruesome war documentaries? Horror movies? Now how exactly a child might react to all that depends on the age, his personality, his parents and a bunch of other things, but I think there is no question that it will react to such extreme stuff quite different then to the latest Disney mov
Re: (Score:2)
How about not NOT claiming some right to pull out a gun and forcibly imprison people who refuse to comply to your claimed "common sense" when all scientific evidence indicates that that supposed "common sense" is wrong?
And yes, expecting legislation does ultimately boil down to claiming a right to pull out a gun and forcibly imprison people - to have police pull out a gun on your behalf - to enforce that legislation.
And yes, the scientific evidence does indicate it is wrong.
Re: (Score:2)
Which scientific study claims that extreme violence has no influence on younger people? I don't know any. Set a bunch random five year old in front of Doom3 and you might pretty quickly be able to proof that there indeed is some influence. I am not claiming that that video game violence l
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Jack Thompson might be a nutjob, that however doesn't mean that violence in video games and other media isn't a problem.
The problem isn't that there's violence in video games. The problem is that violence is far more accepted than sex. I like violent games, but I also like boobs - given the choice, I might pick the violent stuff half the time, but there's really no market for that stuff that I can tell, and I blame the freaky christian right (same one that had an aneurysm over Janet Jackson's pixelated
Re: (Score:2)
I agree that there needs to be more meaningful discussion, but does the problem necessarily stem from the side of gamers and game developers? Ever since Doom 1 became the first posterchild for video game violence, the entire industry has been branded more or less as dangerous. When your products are branded as "murder simulators" its hard to convince the public anyt
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Is that necessarily a problem with the public or a problem with the lack of "experts" on the topic? Outside of the video gaming world, Jack Thompson is the ONLY person the public simply hears when it comes to video games.
When was the last time you heard Will Wright, CliffyB or John Carmack talk on CNN/BBC/Fox News about video games? What about Satoru Iwata or Reggie Fils-Aime (besides the
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Games have a ratings system, the same that movies do, and more than books do. Anyone can go to a library and read worse than you'll find in a game. Hell, have you read the so-called 'holy' book? Lots of violence there, not too mention the negative attitudes towards women in general.
The only possible meaningful discussion is by psychologists and psychological r
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
If you are old enough the government has of course no right to interfere with what you can access, but why shouldn't it have some say about what the kid can have easy access to? In Germany selling movies or games to kids below the rated age is forbidden, this however neither limits your access nor does it stop the parents from buying the games for their kids, even if they aren't old enough. The regulation simply puts power whe
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Meh... (Score:5, Informative)
So yes, it's her fault it spilled. Is it her fault she got 3rd degree burns from it? No.
Re: (Score:2)
Also, when your coffee is that hot, it quickly scalds most of your taste buds so you can't really taste the flavour. The caffeine is still there, which is what many want anyhow, but you can't taste the fact that the coffee is rather cheap and unpaletable (as far as coffee goes in general anyhow, I prefer mine with a generous dose of Irish Cream)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
After researching this topic for a few year I came to find out that:
a) Most lawsuits the seem frivilous in the media do so because the facts are not presented.
b) Many 'classic' examples of frivilous lawsuits never really happen and many were started by insurance companies and other anti-Tort orginizations. Example : Person stands on open oven door and
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
I think also that honest debate is always a good thing. The debate about the effects of video game violence deserves some serious discussion. Unfortunately it's people like Jack Thompson who reduce the debate to a Crossfire/Jerry Springer type yelling match that really hurts the voice of the side that has genuine concerns.
My personal view is that those people who have trouble separating reality from fiction shouldn't play video
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
And to this I say "ESRB". It's there for a reason.
More on topic, a response to your post;
I agree with pretty much everything you've said here. The ESRB exists to guide parents on what little Jimmy should and should not be playing. As one of my two jobs is working at a store
Re: (Score:2)
Me, I don't get my news from any one place in particular. I do find a lot of links to stories from the AP and the BBC a lot, though.
Re: (Score:2)
Very well, then.
You do make a lot of use of colorful phallic metaphors. Don't worry about it. Just be happy.
Re:Meh... (Score:4, Insightful)
Calm down... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Too Bad He Couldn't be Tried in Auburn, WA. (Score:5, Funny)
Obligatory Penny Arcade Links (Score:5, Informative)
Devil's advocate (Score:2)
Jack Thompson, in my opinion, is an idiot who does a lot to hurt his own cause. If he gets silenced by being disbarred, it may actually be a net negative for the video game playing public, because he might be replaced by someone who is actually good at convincing people that video games are somehow the root cause of school killings.
Re: (Score:2)
2) It's not like it's a staffed position and they have to find a new scare-monger if he leaves; a more effective JT could show up at any time whether the current one's around or not
3) Someone smarter would be just fine - they could be debated on the merits of their arguments.
Too bad (Score:2)
Seriously, why would you want to get rid of an opponent that is such a raving loon that he ends up making you look good every time out?
Re: (Score:2)
DId it occur to you (Score:2, Insightful)
Not all lawyers are media whores like JT, and the few that our are smart enough to stay away from cases like these.
Re: (Score:2)
Write. (Score:2, Insightful)
What motivates this guy? (Score:3, Interesting)
John Walsh from "America's Most Wanted" is motivated by what happened to his son, what happened to Thompson?
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
He's an attention addict, who keeps getting his fix because everyone keeps on paying attention to him long after it's clear he's an immoral lunatic.
They'll never go away... (Score:2, Insightful)
We haven't seen the last of him... (Score:5, Insightful)
One thing that we should keep in mind, however, is that crazy old coots like Jack typically don't vanish the moment they lose their jobs (see: Fred Phelps). He'll have a lot more free time all of a sudden, and I expect he will continue to portray himself as a martyr -- a man who sacrificed his own career to protect America's children (and all that drivel). Sure, he won't be as dangerous when he can't blindly sue anything that moves, but I expect that the media will still view him as the resident expert on video game violence.
Here's what is really sad.. (Score:2, Interesting)
Only a fool represents himself. Jack Thompson will more than likely continue practicing, no matter where he is.
Again? (Score:2, Troll)
So this is what, the 6th state he'll be disbarred in? I suppose he'll just have to move to Nevada now.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Jack was abscent... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Good thing? Bad thing? I don't know. But a little odd, if you ask me.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Someone who can't read the article and at least agree with some of it can't be expected to do more than dribble and make goo goo noises.
I digress.
I was being sarcastic. I wasn't trying for flamebait. Somehow that seems to have passed over your head, like my finely honed article on perl.
Re: (Score:2)