×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Thompson and 2K Come To Blows Over Manhunt 2

Zonk posted more than 6 years ago | from the alright-boys-no-biting-or-hits-below-the-belt dept.

Games 99

GamePolitics is serving up email transcripts that show increasing tension between Jack Thompson and 2K Games. The two parties have been acting at least vaguely civilly towards each other since an April settlement. A taunting, factually incorrect email from Jack to 2K (and other parties) has set things off again. 2K's response is to-the-point: "We demand that you cease making these false statements about our online sales practices. Your dissemination of knowingly false statements for the purpose of adversely affecting Take-Two's business is actionable and we reserve all of our rights under the settlement agreement and state and federal law. Not only are your statements clearly false, but they were made in an email publicly disseminated to both the FTC and the press. Please be assured that I am happy to answer any questions you have concerning our practices in a private communications. It is for this very reason that our settlement agreement designates a legal contact for you at Take Two."

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

99 comments

Title (4, Funny)

Dr. Eggman (932300) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424455)

I read the title and though Thompson had decided to go the Uwe Boll route and challenge his 2K critics to a boxing match. Watchout for 'is right, Rocky!

Re:Title (1)

bhima (46039) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424679)

I am *still* amazed Uwe did so well.

And, yes, his movies still suck.

Re:Title (2, Informative)

Pitr (33016) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424935)

He had prior boxing experience, and trained for 4 months in order to kick ass on some geeks with no fighting experience (except for the 17 year old with a little experience, you go big man).

Am I surprised he won, no, but it would have been fun to see one of the geeks take the same interest and have boned up on how to throw a punch. That having been said, it's not like I think he deserves any more respect than the zero respect I already have for him thanks to that stunt.

Frankly I for one would have liked to have shot in that ring, but 1) I'm just some guy, not really relevant except that I think Uwe's a douche. 2) I know how to fight, which I think disqualifies me. 3) I'm a couple pounds out of the weight class he restricted it to, so even if I was somebody "important", I'm disqualified.

Now... weren't we talking about Jack Thompson? ;)

Re:Title (1)

sYkSh0n3 (722238) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425235)

Didn't one critic with fighting experience try to apply to fight him and he refused? Seems like i read that somewhere. The guy met all the requirements, but after uwe talked to him he refused to do it. I think that's how it went anyway.

Re:Title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20425275)

Yep - Seanbaby [blog-city.com] .

Re:Title (1)

nuzak (959558) | more than 6 years ago | (#20426441)

It's unclear that Seanbaby's martial arts experience would have helped him in boxing. But it's even more telling that Uwe still wouldn't fight him. I think it's pretty well established that Uwe Boll is a complete prick -- but I'd still relish the prospect of him landing a jawbreaker on JT.

Re:Title (1)

mazarin5 (309432) | more than 6 years ago | (#20428807)

Martial artists tend to due poorly in boxing, unless they've specifically trained in that discipline. You can't disallow a majority of a person's techniques and expect them to do well against someone who has specialized in what's left.

Re:Title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20427423)

Wow, so what exactly was the boxing match supposed to prove anyway? Even if he could have beaten trained fighters, his games would still suck. Or is it just the "I can beat you up, so I'm right" mentality?

Re:Title (1)

deniable (76198) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424875)

Yep, Jack Thompson causes more violence than video games.

Re:Title (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20427237)

I thought the title meant they sat down and did blow, which would explain his terrible choice in hairstyle. and clothes. and life.

What a maroon (0)

1_brown_mouse (160511) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424473)

screwball, nutjob, etc.

Will this lead to a legal smackdown of Jack? Hoisted on his own petard?

Tune in next week...

Re:What a maroon (1)

stonecypher (118140) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425357)

Insert " s/p/r/g " joke here.

Re:What a maroon (1)

geminidomino (614729) | more than 6 years ago | (#20431413)

Inefficient use of regex. There's only one 'p' in the string, no need for the 'g' global flag

Re:What a maroon (1)

stonecypher (118140) | more than 6 years ago | (#20433549)

Efficient way to make an ass of yourself. There's only one goal in the post, no need for the 'technicality' joke-killing flag.

I have an idea for a new video game (4, Interesting)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424475)

You take the role of a young gamer whose favorite franchise has been canceled due to the lawsuits. No longer having virtual violence to occupy your time with, you decide to hunt down all the people responsible for taking your game away. Thompson is featured by name. Let's see the shitfit he pitches at that.

Re:I have an idea for a new video game (4, Funny)

deniable (76198) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424941)

You could make him the victim in a murder mystery. The list of suspects would be long. Call it 'Who cares whodunnit.'

Re:I have an idea for a new video game (4, Funny)

AHumbleOpinion (546848) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425647)

You could make him the victim in a murder mystery. The list of suspects would be long. Call it 'Who cares whodunnit.'

I say it was the geek, in the basement, with a CD-ROM that was snapped in half.

Re:I have an idea for a new video game (2, Funny)

lysse (516445) | more than 6 years ago | (#20426443)

The challenge would be to prove which of the (many) confessions is false; the harder a confession is to discredit, the higher your score. The game would end with you presenting the murderer a soup-plate medal, a 22ct gold pistol, and the names and addresses of the RIAA's directors (so plenty of scope for sequels).

Re:I have an idea for a new video game (1)

bubzor888 (1138953) | more than 6 years ago | (#20427587)

He would probably respond by asking game makers to make another game, only this time it's about the father whose kid was killed by a violent gamer. The father then decides to go on a rampage to kill everyone who helped make the game that enraged said gamer.

Oh wait...he already proposed that: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Modest_Video_Game_P roposal/ [wikipedia.org]

Re:I have an idea for a new video game (1)

jollyreaper (513215) | more than 6 years ago | (#20428429)

He would probably respond by asking game makers to make another game, only this time it's about the father whose kid was killed by a violent gamer. The father then decides to go on a rampage to SUE everyone who helped make the game that enraged said gamer.
There, fixed it for ya. That would actually be very funny, I'd play that game.

Come to blows? (4, Funny)

KingSkippus (799657) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424477)

Crap, you can't post a headline like that! I read the article excitedly expecting Jack Thompson and someone at Take Two to have literally come to blows! I was popping the popcorn to munch on while watching the video of it on YouTube!

Re:Come to blows? (4, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20424785)

I think you've been playing too many video games...

zzz... (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20424513)

Hey Zonk, no offense, but uhh... slow news day? Did you just go to Jack Thompson's Fox News homepage and start copying and pasting?

Thompson is the Anne Coulter of the gaming industry and Fox News is the Jerry Springer Show of news agencies. His opinions have about as much merit as Ted Stevens does on network neutrality.

The only people that listen to his tripe are probably not on /. and I think posting anything about them here adds about as much contribution as a blog titled "Microsoft is bad" would.

Ok, I swear I'm done with the analagies now... they're about as overplayed as Da- err... nevermind

Re:zzz... (1)

iminplaya (723125) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424865)

Why do you have to insult Jerry Springer like that? His show is good! And if he was running for president, I would vote for him. Fox "News" is more like Dr. Laura. But I have to say, I just love her new hair doo [1100kfnx.com] .

Re:zzz... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20429907)

Why do you have to insult Jerry Springer like that? His show is good!
Then you have low standards.

And if he was running for president, I would vote for him.
I have to agree with that. He's seems intelligent despite the show. At the very worst he'd still be better than GWB or Clinton, or any of the non Ron Paul candidates.

Fox "News" is more like Dr. Laura. But I have to say, I just love her new hair doo [1100kfnx.com] .
It certainly looks like doo...

I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this (3, Insightful)

bad_fx (493443) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424515)

But I can't help wondering if Jack is actually on some game studio's payroll. Surely he must realise that all his hot air and bullshit does very little except give the very games he rails against free puplicity while making himself look like a complete twat...

Re:I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this (2, Funny)

deniable (76198) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425027)

Game companies should start paying him consulting fees for PR services or listing him as an asset on financial reports. A thank you card would be good, as would a fruit basket. Make his brain explode.

Re:I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this (1)

Luketh (696002) | more than 6 years ago | (#20432097)

"A thank you card would be good, as would a fruit basket" Because you are what you eat.

Re:I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this (4, Insightful)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#20426339)

Actually, considering the number of states that have gone to him for help in game legislation, he's setting himself up as a hero for those who don't know what the hell's going on. People like my parents are apt to believe him when he talks rather than realizing what an absolute moron he is.

Re:I'm sure I'm not the first to suggest this (1)

tbannist (230135) | more than 6 years ago | (#20428223)

Yeah, they figure he's "on the news" therefore he must know what he's talking about.

Libel (1)

TheNinjaroach (878876) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424591)

This is libel, I don't know anything about April's settlement (RTFA? Yeah, sure) but I smell a lawsuit lurking in Take-2's response.

2k games is not Take Two (-1, Redundant)

darkmayo (251580) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424603)

2K games is formerly Irrational Games, and recently released Bioshock.

Take Two is a separate entity.

Re:2k games is not Take Two (4, Informative)

adam.dorsey (957024) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424743)

From Wikipedia: [wikipedia.org]

2K Games is a video game publishing subsidiary of Take-Two Interactive.

Re:2k games is not Take Two (1)

darkmayo (251580) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424963)

Ahh.. well then I am a moron.

Re:2k games is not Take Two (1)

IthnkImParanoid (410494) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425173)

The article, though, doesn't seem to mention 2K at all. The exchange is between Jack Thompson and Take Two. The slashdot title is incorrect.

Two Thompson threads in one day? (2, Funny)

Fx.Dr (915071) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424619)

This Friday just keeps getting better and better!

Jack Thompson is a media-whoring nut job who will stop at nothing to pander to to his... to his... well, whoever he panders to. The only surprising thing about this ordeal is that it hasn't reached critical mass already.

Re:Two Thompson threads in one day? (1)

blueZhift (652272) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425673)

Maybe it has reached critical mass, as it doesn't seem that JT is getting as much press these days as he used to. It must really hurt to crave the attention of the spotlight once the spectators have moved on. Maybe he's just a little lonely...

I'll believe it when... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20424731)

...I see it on a real news site, not the tabloid that is GamePolitics.

Re:I'll believe it when... (1)

sqlrob (173498) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425775)

Come on Jack, at least get the guts to log in.

Re:I'll believe it when... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20426041)

Don't hold your breath; he's never actually used a computer.

Re:I'll believe it when... (1)

moderatorrater (1095745) | more than 6 years ago | (#20426433)

Actually, gamepolitics had to ban him from their comments sections because of his trolling. That man's fairly prolific.

Propoganda and Delusion (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20426673)

I love it when people think something is not biased just because they agree with the "stance" a website takes.

Just as delusional as the Thompson devotees.

Re:Propoganda and Delusion (1)

sqlrob (173498) | more than 6 years ago | (#20429927)

So you (if you're the same AC. Seeing as you're too chicken to comment even pseudonymously), explain how it is a tabloid, with support.

If you're not Jack, you'll be able to come up with a coherent argument for your position.

Better policy: just ignore the nutjob (4, Insightful)

Alzheimers (467217) | more than 6 years ago | (#20424975)

A better policy would just be to ignore the nutjob. Any time anyone says anything against him his name is back in the headlines, which is exactly what he doesn't deserve.

Re:Better policy: just ignore the nutjob (1)

Omnedon (701049) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425545)

The problem with ignoring nutjobs is that they don't go away quietly if they win (and a lack of opposition allows them to win), they will - emboldened by victory - simply go after another target.

Re:Better policy: just ignore the nutjob (1)

jandrese (485) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425929)

Sure, it's easy to tell Slashdot to ignore him, but our congressmen and major news outlets don't read Slashdot and don't know (well, the major news outlets should have figured it out by now, not that it will stop them from giving him all the airtime he wants) that Jack Thompson is a nut. If you don't fight him you'll find your parents and non-tech friends suddenly talking about how games make people go crazy and kill and congress will make legislation (that will pass with an overwhelming majority) that kills video games. This wouldn't be the first time something like this happened. Look at what the Comics Code Authority did to the comic industry. It has taken years and years to undo the damage that caused, and it is still impossible to get most older people to take them seriously.

Re:Better policy: just ignore the nutjob (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20426223)

It'd be nice if the tear down list let you take back your mods before you accidentally click "Redundant" instead of "Insightful". So, this AC comment's for you! And I agree with you. Though he can still do whatever he wants, and will, if he's largely ignored, he won't have any steam behind his claims. As it is, he's more than ecstatic for any publicity. No one would have cared about his V.Tech comments if people hadn't ballooned his influence from the outside...

oh, and since I'm posting AC to pull off a bad mod.. I'd just like to tell the world that I hate pork chops. Eww...

Re:Better policy: just ignore the nutjob (1)

RoloDMonkey (605266) | more than 6 years ago | (#20427083)

A better policy would just be to ignore the nutjob. Any time anyone says anything against him his name is back in the headlines, which is exactly what he doesn't deserve.

Yes, but 2K games doesn't mind being back in the headlines. If I didn't know better, I would think that Thompson was being paid to stir up such publicity.

J.T. wrong on firearms (4, Informative)

dazedNconfuzed (154242) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425015)

J.T. writes:

Take-Two is welcome to use age verification software that is available for on-line alcohol, firearm and other purchases of adult material.

Not sure about the other two, but NOBODY can "buy a firearm on-line".

By law, and very heavily enforced throughout the industry, firearms must be physically transferred through Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL dealers), who require detailed forms be filled out and background checks run. While payment to original seller may occur on-line and arrangements for shipping occur, taking physical possession requires face-to-face meeting with a federally licensed dealer who will require federally recognized ID, run a NICS criminal background check (or confirm more detailed checks have occurred), and require legally binding statements of eligibility (a felony to lie on the so-called "yellow forms"). Shipping may only be to an FFL or current owner (not buyer).

No, Jack, there is no "age verification software that is available for ... firearm ... purchases" - because you CANNOT legally purchase firearms on-line!

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

CellBlock (856082) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425429)

From what I've seen, there isn't age verification software for either of the others. I've never purchased alcohol online, but I do know that a lot of places will not ship directly to your door, but instead ship to a local liquor store for pickup. Age verification is performed there.

As for adult material, I always thought that porn and whatnot just used the credit card for age verification. Do they do something else now?

I've never heard of "age verification software," but does it come as any surprise when Jack Thompson starts pulling stuff out of his ass?

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (2, Informative)

EtoilePB (1087031) | more than 6 years ago | (#20426035)

From what I've seen, there isn't age verification software for either of the others. I've never purchased alcohol online, but I do know that a lot of places will not ship directly to your door, but instead ship to a local liquor store for pickup. Age verification is performed there.

I purchase groceries from an online service from time to time (I live in a city, where cars aren't the norm, and the quality is good enough and prices competitive enough that it's worthwhile not walking thirty blocks with a month's worth of food on my back) and this can include wine. They make you check a little tickbox that says "I am over 21" and that's it. The wine comes, along with all the other groceries, directly to my door and kitchen.

So, a little tickbox for video games saying "I am over 17" sounds like about all the "age verification" software that's in order here. Fabulous!

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

Phisbut (761268) | more than 6 years ago | (#20427191)

As for adult material, I always thought that porn and whatnot just used the credit card for age verification. Do they do something else now?

Yes, they now bill the card. That's a new concept.

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (5, Informative)

DangerSteel (749051) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425579)

Not sure about the other two, but NOBODY can "buy a firearm on-line".

I cannot both respond and moderate your post a -1 wrong, but you can buy firearms online and nothing would restrict this as long as it is a private transaction as these are http://www.shootersexchange.com/ [shootersexchange.com] .

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (4, Funny)

IndustrialComplex (975015) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425659)

Shooter s ex change? I think that qualifies in one of the top 50 most unfortunate domain names.

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

kasek (514492) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425885)

We're changing our name! ShootersExchange.com is becoming ShootersXchange.com!

looks like they realized the error of their ways.

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20426657)

moderate your post a -1 wrong

It's only a little wrong, http://www.shootersexchange.com/laws.cfm [shootersexchange.com] "You must typically use a Federal Firearms License holder (FFL) to receive the gun if you are an unlicensed buyer". They say there are exceptions (plural) but the only one given is if the BATF considers the gun "antique".

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (4, Informative)

ErikTheRed (162431) | more than 6 years ago | (#20426659)

I cannot both respond and moderate your post a -1 wrong, but you can buy firearms online and nothing would restrict this as long as it is a private transaction as these are http://www.shootersexchange.com/ [shootersexchange.com]


Ummm... Wrong. And it only took a few seconds of looking at the shootersexchange website to figure it out. They are in an awkward position because they are not lawyers and cannot give specific legal advice, but they do point the buyers and sellers [shootersexchange.com] to places that specify the relevant federal and state laws.

While you can enter into a contract to purchase a gun over the Internet, an FFL (Federal Firearms License) Holder [atfonline.gov] (someone who's licensed to sell guns) must make the physical transfer of the weapon to the purchaser. So you can't just have the gun shipped to you - it has to be shipped to an FFL, and then they physically verify who you are (and follow any other local laws regarding the transfer) and hand you the package. It's up to the buyer, seller, and FFL to make sure the applicable state and federal laws are followed, but that's still the case with a traditional "brick & mortar" purchase so there's no real difference.

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 6 years ago | (#20429181)

They are in an awkward position because they are not lawyers and cannot give specific legal advice, but they do point the buyers and sellers to places that specify the relevant federal and state laws.

Saying "can't be don't legally" and "can't be done at all" are too entirely different things. The statement that 'NOBODY can "buy a firearm on-line"' is demonstrably false.

I like guns. I own guns. I'm not remotely anti-gun. It's just that this is like arguing that you can't gamble or buy drugs or pirate music online. Maybe the law says you shouldn't, but that's doesn't mean that you can't.

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20472007)

-1 duh.

If human law was enforced by the natural law of the universe, we wouldn't have bothered to write up our own laws.

Narrow exception, red herring (2, Informative)

dazedNconfuzed (154242) | more than 6 years ago | (#20426871)

That still doesn't count, as it's not what J.T. is alluding to.

The on-line firearm sales sites (gunbroker.com, gunsamerica.com, etc.) merely connect buyers with sellers, who still have to either (A) arrange for an intermediary FFL to handle the transfer, or (B) arrange a face-to-face meeting - neither of which counts as "buying firearms on-line" which typically conjures up images of "click on 'Mossberg 590 Master Key', quantity 1, click on 'cart', enter credit card number & address, have nifty new shotgun show up on doorstep several days later". Such sites are merely faster ways to find out who has what a buyer wants, followed by the standard in-person transaction.

To clarify: the private transaction you indicate still requires (legally) a face-to-face meeting, which provides ample opportunity to discern whether the purchaser is a prohibited minor.

In no way (short of outright illegal) can, to J.T.'s email, a legal minor buy a firearm on-line with mommy's credit card.

Re:Narrow exception, red herring (1)

CFTM (513264) | more than 6 years ago | (#20428127)

Well I don't know about you guys but my local illegal arms dealer takes paypal, so mommy's credit card here I come!

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

MMaestro (585010) | more than 6 years ago | (#20429993)

From the website you linked:

4. Be sure to find a FFL holding transfer agent prior to commiting to a purchase. Find and contact a FFL holding transfer agent through the FFL transfer agent links below.

6. The dealer will ship the firearm or other item to your FFL holder or to you, as appropriate by law.

Bolding mine.

Like the parent post said, you can use the internet as a means of finding dealers and exchanging money, but its still illegal to ship a firearm directly to a buyer without involvement of a FFT holder.

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

AHumbleOpinion (546848) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425817)

While you are correct in a practical and realistic sense, I know people who have *legally* purchased rifles and do not have FFLs, taking possesion was not face-to-face with a dealer - the seller literally mailed the rifle to an address and the postman collected a signature, there we no yellow forms that you would get at a real dealer. Of course, the seller was the US Army. They are allowed to sell surplus World War II rifles (M1 Garand) to tournament shooters and the paperwork was a little more detailed than the yellow forms and include fingerprinting and an FBI background check. :-)

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

Hijacked Public (999535) | more than 6 years ago | (#20427009)

You are probably thinking of the Civilian Marksmanship Program.

They sell M1 Garands, M1 carbines, 1903s, and some surplus 22LR bolt guns directly to the public. Shipped straight to you via FedEx.

Their requirements are that a person be a member of an affiliated shooting club and either have participated in a sanctioned match or be over the age of 60 (I think it is 60). They have a specific exemption that allows them to ship directly to non-FFL'd individuals and clubs as long as the customer meets the requirements and passes the usual NICS background check.

Otherwise sales of long gungs between individuals that cross state lines, face to face or online, have to be transferred through FFLs. All handguns have to go. But of course, individuals can hold an FFL without necessarily engaging in the business of dealing firearms.

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 6 years ago | (#20426341)

Not sure about the other two, but NOBODY can "buy a firearm on-line".

My local newspaper regularly lists guns in the classified ads. I'm pretty certain that the buyers and sellers don't go through all those hoops, and I'm equally certain that I could mail one of those sellers a check and get a package from UPS a few days later without ever having met them.

Maybe you can't legally buy a new gun online. Maybe you can't even legally buy a used gun without all the forms you mentioned. But you can darn sure buy a firearm through the classified ads in my paper, and that's just about the same thing.

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

tbannist (230135) | more than 6 years ago | (#20428269)

I bet Take Two's age verification system is much better than that used by the classifieds in your newspaper, though. So once again, you're left wondering WTF is JT talking about?

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

Just Some Guy (3352) | more than 6 years ago | (#20428451)

So once again, you're left wondering WTF is JT talking about?

Speak for yourself. I wonder what he's talking about in the same way that I wonder why that guy asking me for a dollar is preaching about the saddle he found in a payphone and how toxins got in the space shuttle.

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

Registered Coward v2 (447531) | more than 6 years ago | (#20427015)

ot sure about the other two, but NOBODY can "buy a firearm on-line".

By law, and very heavily enforced throughout the industry, firearms must be physically transferred through Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL dealers), who require detailed forms be filled out and background checks run. While payment to original seller may occur on-line and arrangements for shipping occur, taking physical possession requires face-to-face meeting with a federally licensed dealer who will require federally recognized ID, run a NICS criminal background check (or confirm more detailed checks have occurred), and require legally binding statements of eligibility (a felony to lie on the so-called "yellow forms"). Shipping may only be to an FFL or current owner (not buyer).

No, Jack, there is no "age verification software that is available for ... firearm ... purchases" - because you CANNOT legally purchase firearms on-line!


That's true fro the legal definition of firearms, which, AIR, does not include non-cartridge black power weapons including handguns and rifles.

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#20427157)

Can I still get one if I'm white?

Re:J.T. wrong on firearms (1)

vimh42 (981236) | more than 6 years ago | (#20429693)

I think age verification software is pretty much a scam. How can you reasonably confirm age beyond using a credit card? Be connected to the DMV and confirm by drivers license or SSN? Now there is a brilliant idea.

A Girth of Gamers (5, Funny)

Grech (106925) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425413)

She looked up at him, and asked, "And what of Jack Thompson?"

"He will continue to be my implacable enemy, lending his pen to every plot against me."

She started to reply, but caught herself as a sudden realization struck. "And how will you repay him for this service?" she asked.

He smiled. "With gold, and land, and boys. He is a simple man. All he desires are land, and gold, and boys."

With apologies to George R. R. Martin

.

Re:A Girth of Gamers (1)

Tofystedeth (1076755) | more than 6 years ago | (#20425603)

Had I but the mod points I squandered these few days ago, I'd have modded you +1 Funny. Instead all I can do is talk about how I would.

Re:A Girth of Gamers (1)

CFTM (513264) | more than 6 years ago | (#20428085)

BAH! I say BAH! I had allowed myself to forget about this series until YOU had to bring it up. When is that old battle axe going to finish the next goshdangit book already!?!?

Hyperbole much? (1)

Guppy06 (410832) | more than 6 years ago | (#20426931)

If two parties "come to blows," it means they actually laid hands on each other, got into an actual fistfight, etc. It does not mean "exchanged nasty letters" or "called each other bad names."

Thanks for getting my hopes up, only to shoot them down. Don't bother me again until someone really does get hit over this.

Oblig Voltaire (1)

Kasis (918962) | more than 6 years ago | (#20427065)

I have never made but one prayer to God, a very short one: "O Lord make my enemies ridiculous." And God granted it.

Voltaire

Hmm... (1)

Torodung (31985) | more than 6 years ago | (#20427287)

(*Uninstalls Bioshock DRM with tools like regdelnull, and NTFS-3g for the undeleteable files*)

I never thought I'd say this, but "Go get 'em Jack!" I hope they go up in a big mushroom cloud together. ;^)

--
Toro

Jack Thompson, (2, Interesting)

DragonTHC (208439) | more than 6 years ago | (#20431253)

It's a multi-billion dollar industry. You're fucking with their profits.
You're fucking with my hobby.
You need to be sued into the stone-age.
You tried to sue the Florida bar for taking away your license.
You have no honor, integrity or ethics.

You can hide behind your moral compass all you like.
It's leading you into the circus ring. Soon we can all laugh at the clown in the center ring.
Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...