| Averross |
04-11-2007 08:54 AM |
He's accusing several companies, including Take Two, Kotaku, Gamespot, IGN, and Penny Arcade of... wait for it... racketeering. In case you don't know what racketeering is, it's usually a protection racket (Pay us and we won't burn down your store).
Here's how the "racketeering" works in this case: People have gone to Jack's residential neighborhood handling out "libellous" pamphlets, shooting at his house, harassing him online, threatening his son, and (my personal favorite) sending sex aids to his wife. It's racketeering because those sites are somehow "knowingly orchestrating" these attacks. Plus, every bully I've ever had was commanded by aliens.
A personal opinion of mine: this man deserves our wrath. He has constantly tried to destroy our precious freedom of speech all in the name of "stopping murder." Even if he was right, we would still give him hell over this. But I think that threatening his son over this is unacceptable. His son has done nothing wrong. He has to deal with having a dad that many people, including myself hate. If you hate Jack, man up and take it out on him. You're not a comic villain, you don't have to target his family. It is because of his son that he started the crusade against games, but his son still isn't at fault. Jack found him playing games of violent nature and was outraged and decided to bitch at the developers instead of parenting. Blaming his son for the "crusade" is like blaming racism on the other races.
Well, that's just my two cents, maybe seven but whatever.
|