Game Politics ([info]gamepolitics) wrote,
@ 2006-02-19 10:51:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Entry tags:clay calvert, first amendment, games as porn, hogue, legislation, robert d. richards, utah

First Amendment Scholars Weigh in on Utah "Games as Porn" Bill

"...the right issue and the wrong solution."

That's the conclusion of noted constitutional law experts Clay Calvert (left) and Robert D. Richards in a review of Utah Rep. David Hogue's notorious "games as porn" bill, now before the state legislature.

Writing in an op-ed for today's Salt Lake City Tribune, credit Hogue for being concerned about youth violence, but take issue with his proposed solution.

The pair, who happen to be co-directors of Penn State's Pennsylvania Center for the First Amendment, see clear First Amendment problems for Hogue's bill. Reminding readers of the sorry history of such legislation, they write, "The weight of judicial precedent.. is overwhelmingly against Hogue's bill, which would be caught up in an expensive taxpayer-funded legal battle to defend it in court were it to become law."

Calvert and Richards also question Hogue's focus on video games.

"Even setting aside the trampling upon parental rights and the fatal First Amendment flaws in Hogue's measure, any such law would be entirely ineffective in accomplishing its purpose. Minors are bombarded with violent images from myriad sources, including movies, music, books and even continuous coverage of war-related devastation and terrorist torture tactics on television news."

Their conclusion? Leave decisions about what children play to their parents.

"The lesson for the Legislature, then, is that some issues are better dealt with in the home rather than the House."




Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

(Post a new comment)

HEAR, ****ING HEAR.
[info]fedule
2006-02-19 04:11 pm UTC (link)
Such a shame that they will go entirely ignored by politicians.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: HEAR, ****ING HEAR.
[info]chronozaga
2006-02-19 06:34 pm UTC (link)
That one sentence says so much more.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Whoa, hold on!
[info]spock_walk
2006-02-19 04:14 pm UTC (link)
The lesson for the Legislature, then, is that some issues are better dealt with in the home rather than the House.

You mean all of these bills are unnecessary and it’s up to the parents to try and tell their kids what’s right and wrong? I never would have guessed!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Whoa, hold on!
[info]chronozaga
2006-02-19 06:35 pm UTC (link)
Your avatar is giving me seizures.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Whoa, hold on! - [info]spock_walk, 2006-02-19 08:27 pm UTC
Even the experts agree...
[info]beardoggx
2006-02-19 04:18 pm UTC (link)
This approach is screwed to begin with.

And those are real constitutional law experts, not like a certain lawyer who pretends to be one.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Even the experts agree...
[info]sqlrob
2006-02-19 04:29 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, one that still has to address the major precedents I've directly asked him to. It had a forced answer , which he apparently decided to take by default.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Even the experts agree... - [info]ace_ofspade, 2006-02-19 08:48 pm UTC
Re: Even the experts agree... - [info]sqlrob, 2006-02-20 01:42 pm UTC

[info]silver_derstin
2006-02-19 04:22 pm UTC (link)
Why does this sound like a 3 Strikes You`re Out kinda article? Of course they are pointing out the bloody obvious, but still, they`re making a REALLY good point. I hope some people listen to the voice of reason over this.

(Reply to this)

Do you hear that, it's the sound of 100 million gamers going "Like, DUH".
[info]doggyspew
2006-02-19 04:25 pm UTC (link)
"The lesson for the Legislature, then, is that some issues are better dealt with in the home rather than the House."

Common sense is alive again !

(Reply to this)

Dead Pool time
[info]attackgypsy
2006-02-19 04:30 pm UTC (link)
... until JBT says "I worked on the bill, it will be consittutional."

Its Sunday, I say 4 hours.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Dead Pool time
[info]attackgypsy
2006-02-19 04:30 pm UTC (link)
And I know, my spelling sucks. Its Sunday, I SHOULD be sleeping...

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Dead Pool time - [info]warpstarmstr122, 2006-02-19 04:36 pm UTC
Re: Dead Pool time - [info]dog_welder, 2006-02-19 04:54 pm UTC
Re: Dead Pool time - [info]finaleve, 2006-02-19 05:39 pm UTC
Re: Dead Pool time - [info]sqlrob, 2006-02-19 07:26 pm UTC
Some Common Sense for a Change
[info]automancer
2006-02-19 04:42 pm UTC (link)
These guys have the right idea. They are seeing what we are seeing and they don't like it either. It's a shame that politicians don't see the same thing.

-Auto

(Reply to this)


[info]soliloquy76
2006-02-19 04:47 pm UTC (link)
Mormons play video games? I figured they would be too busy knocking on my door trying to sell Jesus to me. Or screwing their 10 wives.

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]semperar
2006-02-19 06:37 pm UTC (link)
where that hell did that come from?


(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]poet_ninja, 2006-02-19 07:41 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]semperar, 2006-02-19 08:07 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jeremykpierce, 2006-02-19 09:28 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]soliloquy76, 2006-02-19 10:04 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]soliloquy76, 2006-02-19 10:02 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]semperar, 2006-02-19 10:47 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]soliloquy76, 2006-02-19 10:51 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]semperar, 2006-02-19 11:10 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]soliloquy76, 2006-02-19 11:24 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]braindead1, 2006-02-20 12:23 am UTC
I am a Mormon - [info]pienzign, 2006-03-08 07:31 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]sstaten, 2006-02-20 03:01 pm UTC
Who woulda thunk it?
[info]startropics
2006-02-19 04:49 pm UTC (link)
You mean to tell me that instead of the government wasting time and taxpayer money to rape the videogame industry, it would be better and more cost-effective for people to be good parents and monitor their child's activities?

Well, gosh, now I don't know what to think.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Who woulda thunk it?
[info]awel_cruiz
2006-02-19 05:09 pm UTC (link)
And in other news, it was revelaed today that the Earth is round, putting your fingers in an electric fan might hurt, and backing your car into on-coming traffic is counterproductive.

Fucking DUH, indeed!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Who woulda thunk it? - [info]squirrelofwrath, 2006-02-19 05:32 pm UTC
No kidding...
[info]bustermanzero
2006-02-19 05:24 pm UTC (link)
I mean, come on. What influenced our behavior when we were kids? I didn't even get a console until I was in my teens. Probably the biggest influence is OTHER KIDS at school. That's where you tend to pick up all the curse words and your attitude if anywhere.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: No kidding...
[info]awel_cruiz
2006-02-19 05:27 pm UTC (link)
It's common sense that the parents are mostly to blame on these matters. Sadly, some people would rather pass the buck than admit that they might be shitty parents.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: No kidding... - [info]tsknf, 2006-02-19 06:44 pm UTC
Re: No kidding... - [info]awel_cruiz, 2006-02-19 10:42 pm UTC
Re: No kidding... - [info]brainswarm, 2006-02-20 12:43 am UTC
Re: No kidding... - [info]murdercrow, 2006-02-20 07:13 am UTC
Re: No kidding... - [info]awel_cruiz, 2006-02-20 06:19 pm UTC
This man deserves a high five
[info]finaleve
2006-02-19 05:38 pm UTC (link)
because this man has found something that we know and is (hopefully) going to try and spread that word).

I believe theat the environmental influence (school, friends, family, etc) are one of the biggest influences out there. Video games is such a small part in that influence, and if the other influences are Negative influences grow stronger, anything that could make a kid smile becomes stronger as well.

But blaming video games is like knocking over your cup of milk and blaming the cat who wasnt even in the room at all during that day. ITs just stupid and childish. Its only a real problem when its the only thing that can come up and not small probability. "theres a 2% chance video games are involved? Sounds like the culprit."

And lets not forget, there were other violent things out there that we don't seem to recognize. Remember Sock'em bobbers? Those blow-up boxing gloves pretty much said "hey kids, go beat the crap outta other people with these!" as well as many other useless toys that came around back then.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: This man deserves a high five
[info]sqlrob
2006-02-19 05:43 pm UTC (link)
Video games is such a small part

I believe the Surgeon General ranked them somewhere around 11th (as "violent media", not unique to games)

Parents are #1.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: This man deserves a high five - [info]finaleve, 2006-02-19 05:51 pm UTC
Re: This man deserves a high five - [info]bigman_k, 2006-02-19 06:10 pm UTC
Well then
[info]sir_bissel
2006-02-19 05:42 pm UTC (link)
That's nice at least

(Reply to this)


[info]jerico6
2006-02-19 06:44 pm UTC (link)
First Amendment Scholars Weigh in on Utah "Games as Porn" Bill

I love First Amendment Scholars. They are true geniuses.

"...the right issue and the wrong solution."

That's the conclusion of noted constitutional law experts Clay Calvert (left) and Robert D. Richards in a review of Utah Rep. David Hogue's notorious "games as porn" bill, now before the state legislature.


If you mean right issue as in trying to find ways to prevent 6 year old from playing Grand Theft Auto, then that's the right issue. ITs the wrong solution to impose government regulation.

Writing in an op-ed for today's Salt Lake City Tribune, credit Hogue for being concerned about youth violence, but take issue with his proposed solution.

The pair, who happen to be co-directors of Penn State's Pennsylvania Center for the First Amendment, see clear First Amendment problems for Hogue's bill.


Like I didn't know about the first amendment problems already.

Reminding readers of the sorry history of such legislation, they write, "The weight of judicial precedent.. is overwhelmingly against Hogue's bill, which would be caught up in an expensive taxpayer-funded legal battle to defend it in court were it to become law."

If it were to become a law, A lot of people would be pissed about it (and I don't mean just teenagers).

Calvert and Richards also question Hogue's focus on video games.

"Even setting aside the trampling upon parental rights and the fatal First Amendment flaws in Hogue's measure, any such law would be entirely ineffective in accomplishing its purpose. Minors are bombarded with violent images from myriad sources, including movies, music, books and even continuous coverage of war-related devastation and terrorist torture tactics on television news."


That is so true.

Their conclusion? Leave decisions about what children play to their parents.

That's what I've been saying for a long time.

"The lesson for the Legislature, then, is that some issues are better dealt with in the home rather than the House."

I don't think any comment would be neccisary for this wisdom.

(Reply to this)


[info]chicito21154
2006-02-19 07:16 pm UTC (link)
You mean someone finally stepped up and said its the parents job?!?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]warpstarmstr122
2006-02-19 07:47 pm UTC (link)
Apparently, yes.
I suddenly have a little more faith in people's ability to use common sense. Hopefully, there will be nothing today that will crush that. ^_^

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]rhanlav, 2006-02-19 07:50 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]rhanlav, 2006-02-19 07:48 pm UTC
Question.
[info]pelka64
2006-02-19 08:20 pm UTC (link)
Has there ever been attempt to pass something about video games that doesn't involve children?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Question.
[info]marbledog
2006-02-19 08:51 pm UTC (link)
Universal bans or injunctions against certain games have been proposed, but none of them have stuck in the US. Australia regularly bans games deemed to be dangerous, and Canada regulates all media imported into the country for moral content. In less politically liberal countries, video games have been banned across the board.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Nope, tey b3 wrong!
[info]jackthredson
2006-02-19 08:48 pm UTC (link)
Look gamas, if teh world go boom boom and you go Hooah, who is left?


On a more serious note, NOOOOOOOOOO!

(Reply to this)

*applauds*
[info]kurisu7885
2006-02-19 08:58 pm UTC (link)
THe honest politician may be nearing exitinction, but at least people IN politics are stil llaive and kicking.

They have hte right idea and just need to spread it around.

I can imagien if all these laws ever made it.

"The United States Government, raising your kids for you since 2006." And it would have that stupid voice liek from the "duck and cover" compaign in the 50s, and liek that, this is a useless way to get people to temporarily feel better untill the public outcry comes fro msoemthignelse. Even if video games were dealt with, soemthign new would pop up.

I mean, I'm a member of the "furry" community, not the sexual deviants everyone seems so proud of mentioning, but the ones who believe we share a kindred spirit with an animal and create a roleplaying character based off that. I fear whatwould happen if JAck caught wind of it. I mean, he'd have supporters to being with. *shudders*

(Reply to this)

You b' raht too!
[info]jackthredson
2006-02-19 09:01 pm UTC (link)
Your right. I wuld.
As for duck and cover, your wrong. That was a excellent campaign on how to defend from Nazis in the 1970's.

(Reply to this)

Article on PMRC and censorship of msuic in the 80's and 90's...
[info]shadowkatamari
2006-02-19 09:06 pm UTC (link)
http://www.philagora.org/about-the-world/pmrc1.htm

I'll repost this here. The article talks about how several states began proposing legislation to ban the sale of "parental advisory" albums...but just to minors, but to everyone! Those bills were off course all shot down, and we know that "parental advisory" albums can be bought almost anywhere today.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Egads
[info]pyrocy
2006-02-19 10:33 pm UTC (link)
A lot of the events mentioned in that article gave me deja vu. Criminal charges against selling obscene materials to minors? Where have we heard this before?

1950's: McCarthy wanted to protect the moral fabric of America by eliminating communism.

1980/90's: Tipper wanted to protect the moral fabric of America by eliminating obscene music.

Today: Jack and Hilary wants to protect the moral fabric of America by eliminating violent videogames.

So, in about 10-20 years, what will be the next scapegoat? Which politicans will repeat history?

My guess: Protecting the moral fabric of America by eliminating heated socks =)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Re: Egads - [info]jerico6, 2006-02-20 01:08 am UTC
Re: Egads - [info]psyco_chick32, 2006-02-20 03:03 am UTC

[info]dkh
2006-02-19 09:06 pm UTC (link)
The irony is that the final line ("the lesson for lesislature...") is EXACTLY the same thing these game-access-restriction laws are saying!

These laws are not saying it is illegal for children to play certain games (let's just say rated M and AO for the sake of this argument), they are saying it is illegal to sell the games to the kids. This forces legal adults to buy them (even if they're just given the money by their children/little brothers/whatever) and makes them pay a little more attention to their lives.

These laws, in many ways, are saying that the issues should be brought to the home and they're giving parents a legal edge in helping to insure what comes into their home.

We as a gaming community seem to be putting too much responsibility on parents. F'r instance, it is not even remotely unreasonable for a set of parents to want their kids to see pornography online, right? I myself know computers infinitely better than my parents do and I don't even know half the tricks there are. But I could easily download some porn and they'd never know. How are they supposed to know?

"Well they should learn how to use computers better" is a sentiment I hear too often, and it's too unrealistic. "Learning computers" is a time-consuming and pretty difficult thing, and the "learning computers" argument is applicable to nearly anything.

"Be in the room when your kid is online." How many of you would be okay with being 14 and having your parents watch you over your shoulder?

It's a difficult situation.

And there's an ironic statement in this very thread that I think exemplifies this.

"It's common sense that the parents are mostly to blame on these matters. Sadly, some people would rather pass the buck than admit that they might be shitty parents."

It's common sense that it's not our fault. The people who's fault it really would rather place the blame elsewhere!

....No.

It's a lot of people's fault. A killer is a killer no matter his situation. It's his own fault. His parents who raised him share blame. So too does his society and surroundings. A lot of things factor into all this.

And we're happily placing the blame on a few little things while blaming the other people for placing the blamde on a few little other things.

Can we please wake up and smell the irony?

(Reply to this) (Thread)


[info]jeremykpierce
2006-02-19 09:40 pm UTC (link)
No. When I had my daughter, I understood that everything she does is my responsibility. It's my responsibility to teach her right from wrong, reality from fiction. And to keep her grandmother from pushing her racist views on her.

I'm confused on your stance, though. You're not willing to take that same responsibility? How is that my problem?

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]pelka64, 2006-02-19 10:04 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]dkh, 2006-02-19 11:34 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]jeremykpierce, 2006-02-20 12:12 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]dkh, 2006-02-20 12:32 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jeremykpierce, 2006-02-20 01:27 am UTC
errmm.. - [info]heimdal00, 2006-02-21 10:59 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]ash2dust82, 2006-02-19 09:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]woundwalker, 2006-02-19 10:26 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]dkh, 2006-02-19 11:40 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]ash2dust82, 2006-02-20 12:01 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]dkh, 2006-02-20 12:37 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]dkh, 2006-02-19 11:43 pm UTC
I see your point BUT..... - [info]bigman_k, 2006-02-19 10:25 pm UTC
Re: I see your point BUT..... - [info]dkh, 2006-02-19 11:45 pm UTC

(Deleted post)
Re: I see your point BUT..... - [info]dkh, 2006-02-20 12:59 am UTC
Re: I see your point BUT..... - [info]bigman_k, 2006-02-20 01:32 am UTC
Re: I see your point BUT..... - [info]bigman_k, 2006-02-20 12:28 am UTC
Re: I see your point BUT..... - [info]illspirit, 2006-02-20 12:32 am UTC
Re: I see your point BUT..... - [info]dkh, 2006-02-20 12:46 am UTC
Re: I see your point BUT..... - [info]illspirit, 2006-02-20 03:55 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]marbledog, 2006-02-19 10:36 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]dkh, 2006-02-19 11:52 pm UTC

(Deleted post)
(no subject) - [info]dkh, 2006-02-20 12:42 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]thenamelessdan, 2006-02-20 01:13 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]thenamelessdan, 2006-02-20 01:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]bigman_k, 2006-02-20 03:17 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]bigman_k, 2006-02-20 12:37 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]marbledog, 2006-02-20 03:51 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jeremykpierce, 2006-02-19 11:32 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]dkh, 2006-02-19 11:57 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]pelka64, 2006-02-20 12:21 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]dkh, 2006-02-20 12:38 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]kharne83, 2006-02-20 01:20 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]illspirit, 2006-02-20 05:21 am UTC
First of all, 'grats for starting a long on-topic thread that isn't a flame or JT-related. - [info]tweek_20k, 2006-02-20 02:57 am UTC
Re: First of all, 'grats for starting a long on-topic thread that isn't a flame or JT-related. - [info]jeremykpierce, 2006-02-20 03:44 am UTC
Re: First of all, 'grats for starting a long on-topic thread that isn't a flame or JT-related. - [info]dkh, 2006-03-02 05:46 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]aniki21, 2006-02-20 02:45 pm UTC
(no subject) - [info]dkh, 2006-03-02 05:37 pm UTC
hmm.. - [info]heimdal00, 2006-02-21 10:22 am UTC
Re: hmm.. - [info]dkh, 2006-03-02 05:34 pm UTC
Who's getting deleted?... - [info]gpplascencia, 2006-03-02 05:04 pm UTC
Umm,
[info]jackthredson
2006-02-19 09:18 pm UTC (link)
The irony is that the final line ("the lesson for lesislature...") is EXACTLY the same thing these game-access-restriction laws are saying!

These laws are not saying it is illegal for children to play certain games (let's just say rated M and AO for the sake of this argument), they are saying it is illegal to sell the games to the kids. This forces legal adults to buy them (even if they're just given the money by their children/little brothers/whatever) and makes them pay a little more attention to their lives.

These laws, in many ways, are saying that the issues should be brought to the home and they're giving parents a legal edge in helping to insure what comes into their home.

We as a gaming community seem to be putting too much responsibility on parents. F'r instance, it is not even remotely unreasonable for a set of parents to want their kids to see pornography online, right? I myself know computers infinitely better than my parents do and I don't even know half the tricks there are. But I could easily download some porn and they'd never know. How are they supposed to know?

"Well they should learn how to use computers better" is a sentiment I hear too often, and it's too unrealistic. "Learning computers" is a time-consuming and pretty difficult thing, and the "learning computers" argument is applicable to nearly anything.
- Dude, no offense but if a fourteen year old kid knows how to put on Parental Controls. So should they.
"Be in the room when your kid is online." How many of you would be okay with being 14 and having your parents watch you over your shoulder?
I don't like Big Brother or parental supervision. Freedom, is much better. Having people watch over you is like a bunch of Nazis telling you what to say.
It's a difficult situation.

And there's an ironic statement in this very thread that I think exemplifies this.

"It's common sense that the parents are mostly to blame on these matters. Sadly, some people would rather pass the buck than admit that they might be shitty parents."
-True.
It's common sense that it's not our fault. The people who's fault it really would rather place the blame elsewhere!
-True.
....No.

It's a lot of people's fault. A killer is a killer no matter his situation. It's his own fault. His parents who raised him share blame. So too does his society and surroundings. A lot of things factor into all this.
-Thank you!
And we're happily placing the blame on a few little things while blaming the other people for placing the blamde on a few little other things.

Can we please wake up and smell the irony?

(Reply to this)

So true. In fact, that's true.

I LIED! I'm Jack Thredson the trolling lunatic from Meami! Has you cen see, I was locked up in Alabami and I have Diabetty!

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Umm,
[info]squirrelofwrath
2006-02-19 09:28 pm UTC (link)
dude, not cool.

Impersonating him is not that funny, and it can lead to a whole host of problems.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Umm, - [info]thevelociraptor, 2006-02-19 09:41 pm UTC
Re: Umm, - [info]lokiragnarok, 2006-02-20 09:24 pm UTC
Yay, some common sense.
[info]thevelociraptor
2006-02-19 09:49 pm UTC (link)
Finally, some gov't poeple dislike game bills. Other than the Feds.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Yay, some common sense.
[info]ash2dust82
2006-02-19 09:59 pm UTC (link)
Are they government people? From the name and the website, the Pennsylvania Center for the First Amendment sounds more like a private watchdog or lobbyist group than actual politicians.

Granted, that still means they can have an impact on politics and stand a pretty good chance of people assuming they know what they're talking about.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Deleted post)

[info]jeremykpierce
2006-02-20 12:15 am UTC (link)
That's one of the cutest and singly narrow-minded statements.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(no subject) - [info]soliloquy76, 2006-02-20 12:18 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jeremykpierce, 2006-02-20 01:37 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]soliloquy76, 2006-02-20 01:46 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jeremykpierce, 2006-02-20 03:46 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]warpstarmstr122, 2006-02-20 12:29 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]soliloquy76, 2006-02-20 12:30 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jeremykpierce, 2006-02-20 01:33 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]nortelrye, 2006-02-20 01:43 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]soliloquy76, 2006-02-20 01:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]jeremykpierce, 2006-02-20 03:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]soliloquy76, 2006-02-20 04:49 am UTC
(no subject) - [info]chuma, 2006-02-20 01:23 pm UTC
free speech and gamepolitics - [info]nortelrye, 2006-02-20 06:01 pm UTC
Er, about "duck and cover"......
[info]kurisu7885
2006-02-20 01:05 am UTC (link)
It was actually a propaganda in the 40s to show peopel what to do i nthe event of an atomic bomb blast. "When you see the flash, duck and cover."

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Er, about "duck and cover"......
[info]getwellgamer
2006-02-20 02:32 am UTC (link)
And to be fair, it wasn't as horrifically naieve as people say. Sure, within a few thousand feet it wouldn't make any difference, but after a little distance duck and cover would provide the same relief it does in an earthquake- protect you from shattered glass and other rubble tossed up by the shockwave.

Still, close enough to ground zero, all it would do, in the words of one comedian, is "Make it so they can clean the entire school of corpses with one push of a shop broom."

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

Ah.o.o; - [info]kurisu7885, 2006-02-20 02:39 am UTC
Re: Ah.o.o; - [info]getwellgamer, 2006-02-20 02:45 am UTC
Re: Ah.o.o; - [info]kurisu7885, 2006-02-20 03:21 am UTC
Re: Ah.o.o; - [info]getwellgamer, 2006-02-20 05:12 am UTC
Re: Ah.o.o; - [info]marbledog, 2006-02-20 05:50 pm UTC
Hmm.......
[info]kurisu7885
2006-02-20 01:05 am UTC (link)
No Jacky boy tonight. Guess this is another issue that doesn't suit his agenda.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

Re: Hmm.......
[info]warpstarmstr122
2006-02-20 01:15 am UTC (link)
Think about what day it is.
Sunday.

Anyway, I'm not complaining one bit about his absence. ^_^ I'll try to enjoy the silence while I can.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

Re: Hmm....... - [info]ace_ofspade, 2006-02-20 01:31 am UTC
Re: Hmm....... - [info]nortelrye, 2006-02-20 01:31 am UTC
Let's hope he's found another place to troll. - [info]tweek_20k, 2006-02-20 01:44 am UTC
Re: Let's hope he's found another place to troll. - [info]jerico6, 2006-02-20 01:51 am UTC
He did find another place to troll. - [info]riffraff1138, 2006-02-20 01:58 am UTC
Re: He did find another place to troll. - [info]warpstarmstr122, 2006-02-20 02:20 am UTC
Re: Good point. - [info]beardoggx, 2006-02-20 02:04 am UTC
Re: Good point. - [info]gabrielcelesta, 2006-02-20 02:47 am UTC

Page 1 of 2
<<[1] [2] >>

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…