Sections

Australia: Atkinson may change his stance should gamers start behaving

Tuesday, 19th January 2010 21:09 GMT By Stephany Nunneley

Michael Atkinson

South Australian Attorney General Michael Atkinson has said that despite the possibility of an 18+ rating becoming a reality thanks to a recent discussion paper, he does not plan on changing his stance on the matter anytime soon.

At least, not until gamers start to “behave in a civil fashion”.

The discussion paper on the ratings matter will receive loads of positive response he says, only because it will be gamers weighing in on the contents, not the public.

Apparently, he feels the omission of images from mature games doesn’t level the playing field for his cause, as the public cannot see the filth these products are selling.

“I don’t think the discussion paper presents a fair and balanced view of the issue without pictures of the games that would be rated R18+,” he told Gamespot (via GamePolitics). “I think the majority of the population are unfamiliar with these games and without images, they won’t be able to imagine them in their mind’s eye.

“They’ll have no idea how violent or sexually depraved they are, and what kind of torture, drug use, and blood spatter they include”.

Because this stance on mature games, according to Atkinson, he has received a number of death threats.

“It’s unlikely I’ll change my stance anytime soon, considering the last death threat I received was pushed under my door at 2.00am, presumably by someone who doesn’t like my stance on R18+,” he revealed. “It was like something out of a Hollywood film–letters cut from magazine headlines arranged together on a page.

“I receive abusive emails from anonymous senders on a daily basis.

“I’ll consider changing my mind about all this when the gaming community decide to behave in a civil fashion and apologize for the threats to me and my family. But I don’t plan to back down from the fight.

“I started my mission and I plan to finish it”.

However, not all Australian politicians agree with Atkinson’s idea of censoring or the banning of content.

Australia’s Interactive Games and Entertainment Association CEO Ron Curry, for one, does not believe that it’s the government’s place to “dictate what the population can and cannot interact with”.

Responses to the discussion paper are due by February 28.

Latest

65 Comments

Sign in to post a comment.

  1. Hunam

    To be fair, if he is getting death threats over some like this (not that freedom of art is a trivial matter, but it’s hardly worth murdering over) then I can’t blame him for fighting them head on to be honest.

    #1 5 years ago
  2. Psychotext

    …and yet, had he not acted as such a puritanical prick in the first place then he’d have garnered no negative attention whatsoever.

    The death threats and general stupidity aren’t to be excused, but to him they’re nothing more than some sort of warped justification for his stance on the issue.

    #2 5 years ago
  3. Freek

    Oh sure, let a few immature 15 year olds be the deceding factor in the law.
    Could this man be any more out of touch with reality?

    Or more likely, it’s just a convenient exuse to hide behind and hit back at the people he dislikes.

    #3 5 years ago
  4. Stephany Nunneley

    It’s not the proper way to behave by any means. If you want attention drawn to your cause, don’t act like the violent hooligans they already think that you are. Prove them wrong with poise and a bit of intelligence.

    It’s like showing up to a congressional hearing on the legalization of pot, stoned out of your mind wearing a Bob Marley shirt and reeking of patchouli. It’s just counterproductive.

    #4 5 years ago
  5. Hunam

    Heh, 15 year olds. Adults are far more mental than teenagers.

    Sure, he was being a big nobber about the whole thing, maybe because he is not of the generation of gaming and interactive violence is something big to him. But instead of informing and challenging his opinions, people resorted to threats of violence, which was never going to solve the issue.

    What’s also funny is that the Jack Thompson crusade feels like a life time ago now. He was a proper mentalist though where Atkinson seems to be a bit old fashioned and stubborn.

    I’d hate cannabis being legalised here, sure some problems would be solved with it but when people are stoned they are really fucking annoying and making it legal would just give those cunts fair game to be… well… cunts.

    #5 5 years ago
  6. DaMan

    this prick seems like a proper politician and nothing else, there’s plenty of them in every country. Jacko was either nuts or a really good actor.

    #6 5 years ago
  7. Psychotext

    JT was legally mental… so yeah, he sort of had an excuse.

    #7 5 years ago
  8. Hunam

    I felt he was illegally mental to be honest.

    #8 5 years ago
  9. Whizzo

    “Legally Mental” sounds like a really bad Reese Witherspoon movie.

    #9 5 years ago
  10. onlineatron

    I know I should care about this sort of against games political bias crap. But it’s hard to when gaming is becoming so popular and the chances are that within the next decade most of the world’s leaders, media outlets etc will be run by people who play or have played video games.

    This will all fade and die soon.

    Heck! We’re even seeing signs of it now with supposed ‘scandals’ failing to blow up with significant impact (MW2 Airport).

    #10 5 years ago
  11. Hunam

    That’s because Fox News only hates sex. Or more to the point, sex with black people or blue people.

    #11 5 years ago
  12. onlineatron

    Fucking blue people… We come to their planet, to steal their Unobtanium and all we get is grief for it!

    #12 5 years ago
  13. polygem

    he ´started a mission and planned to finish it´ hey mate you sure you´re not a gamer yourself?

    #13 5 years ago
  14. onlineatron

    Lmao! This is his game… he was banned from playing games as a young adult so swore he’d take his revenge by turning Australia in to his own virtual reality experiment!

    #14 5 years ago
  15. Galactic_Barret

    Let me just steer this discussion back to MJ for a second: How specifically do people act, Hunam, to make them seem like that word? Because, like some researchers, doctors and MJ users themselves, I believe alcohol’s effect is much worse (physically and to behavior) and is very much legal. The only people I know who poopoo it are those who haven’t tried (enough of) it and those who have escalated to the harder stuff and have gotten clean since. Have you ever tried it? Have you even felt the euphoria?

    #15 5 years ago
  16. Hunam

    I said annoying. I find people who smoke weed annoying because they think smoking weed is something special and feel that telling you over and over how amazing weed is every day after they’ve been smoking is something I care about. Yes, you are super stoned well fucking done. Oh, and the whole alcohol thing as you pointed out, that’s another thing that gets my goat, how they’re point is that alcohol is worse. This is not new information to me. I am fully aware of how bad all these exciting substances are.

    That last bit was kind of a dig at you then, sorry.

    #16 5 years ago
  17. Neolucifer

    I find them rather annoying too .

    Last i checked most people even drunk dont intoxicate their surroundings . At most they might cause accident and have violent behavior , but the rest is people harming themselves .

    I suppose the same could be said then about tobacco , but still as polluting and annoying as it indeed is , at least it wont get your victims high .

    Nothing more awesome that the lingering stench of weed in your house a sunday morning , because some idiot decides to smoke it near your windows .

    Then of course the guy would always “peace dude it’s only weed!” as if it smelled like some perfume , and start filling your head with the same annoying “hey you know alcohol is worse!!” logic and speech :p .

    If anything that kind of logic only makes me wish that alcohol and tobacco were “nerfed” back … hardly wishing equal rights for potheads

    #17 5 years ago
  18. Galactic_Barret

    I just find it curious how people could demonize it without experiencing it themselves. Its not for everyone, of course but then again, not everyone who indulges in it acts like such a word. That word I took offense to, because a drunk induvidual would arguably be more annoying and more likely to act as such (enhanced agression, slurred speech, voice volume control, fluid retention diffuculty) to a non-inebriated person compared to the same with MJ substituted. I don’t know, maybe if it were legal…

    #18 5 years ago
  19. DaMan

    I hate drunks, the most repulsive kind of druggies.

    #19 5 years ago
  20. Galactic_Barret

    Only reason I use alcohol as an example (never met someone who used MJ that needed to justify its use, let alone bring up alcohol) was because NatGeo had a show on vices or somesuch. The doc, researcher, and Hindi holy man used alcohol as a counter. And, really Neo? Do you live in a apartment complex? Because I’ve never had pot smoke or aroma move past closed doors. I don’t know how anyone could be outside your home and the smoke or aroma being able to penetrate the walls. Weird.

    #20 5 years ago
  21. Neolucifer

    I’m tired of that speech personally . Like i’ve said above , I’ve been trying it unwillingy for years …
    I’ve been stoned for pretty much the same reasons , and while i wasnt sick and at least once laughing like crazy while playing games with friend , it not at all my taste .
    Plus i just hate the smells .

    Stereotypes be darned , i’ve been dealing with that kind of behavior enough on a daily basis , to feel it’s common . At least here in the confine of my small carribean island , and not so rich neighbourhood .

    It would be one thing if mj smokers i met behaved normally and didnt try to look like movie stereotypes . I wouldnt care about people smoking weed in the sanctity of their privacy or reserved places .

    But in my personal experience , i insist on the personal part , it wasnt like that at all .

    There is also a data that is far too easily removed from the alcohol is worse argumentation . When has it even been stated that both arent mixed ?
    Plenty people drink their beers or here rhum , while indulging in weeds . I’m no expert , but it wouldnt help .

    PS : well i live in a very old house built in woods on a carribean island , and in a modest area . We dont have winter here , so those colonial styled house wouldnt be as enclosed as stuff seen in many places or in buildings . So yes such smell do get in easily .

    #21 5 years ago
  22. Hunam

    If it were legal they would still annoy me. The point is that I have never been attacked by a drunk person yet almost every stoned person I have met has given me the same response which makes me want to export them to their own island so they can leave me alone.

    On another drinking vs weed note is that weed is a culture. More people drink but it just seems like only the minority of people turn into alcoholics where people who smoke weed tend to be an all or nothing type. You either do or you don’t. It is far more addictive from what I’ve seen of it even if the raw number might show there are more alcoholics.

    Also, apologies if my rather liberal use of swearing has offended you, I certainly didn’t intend that.

    #22 5 years ago
  23. Galactic_Barret

    And I just caught something: You’d prefer being around a violent, possibly recklessly homicidal induvidual to a mellow, possibly hungry induvidual because of… pollution. Ok, good to know. So its pollution, aroma, contact high (Need to be right next to a person smoking to get one, mind), and boasting that are annoyances. Anything else? Edit: Thanks, Neo. Makes sense with a decent explanation. I can understand your annoyance with that.

    #23 5 years ago
  24. Neolucifer

    Anyway i hate drunkies too so i’m not into that argumentation as well .

    See i find rats to be worse than cockroaches , doesnt mean i still would enjoy cockroaches … (and to be a bit clearer , i equate alcohol and weed to both vermines here , not people) .

    #24 5 years ago
  25. Michael O’Connor

    Weed isn’t addictive.

    #25 5 years ago
  26. Neolucifer

    lol See i dont get how you make that leap . Who decided i’d prefer the company of a drunk ?

    I’d actually avoid them . I can’t really say that i always could with pot . It’s the common and normal thing among some of youth my age here or maybe younger . So you’re pretty much just damned if you dislike it .

    #26 5 years ago
  27. DaMan

    he meant psychic addiction, not physical.

    #27 5 years ago
  28. Hunam

    Sure it’s not.

    #28 5 years ago
  29. Michael O’Connor

    “he meant psychic addiction, not physical.”

    That still doesn’t make the drug addictive. The issue is with the person, not the drug. The drug itself doesn’t *cause* the addiction.

    “Sure it’s not.”

    It isn’t. At all. There is absolutely *nothing* in the structure of cannabis that can cause a person to become addicted to it and feel a *need* (the very definition of addiction) to take it.

    A person *cannot* become addicted to cannabis.

    If a person is relying on cannabis to an excessive amount, that is not the fault of the drug. It’s a sign of a bigger problem with the person, and the cannabis just happens to be the thing that they’re relying on to “help” them with the bigger problem.

    Just like alcohol is not addictive either.

    Nicotine, on the other hand, *is* addictive. It possesses chemicals that the body becomes dependant on when it consumes certain quantities of it, and the body reacts badly when it is deprived of it.

    #29 5 years ago
  30. Galactic_Barret

    There is no addicition in the sense of DTs, but its a pleasant feeling that you may want to feel again, so you want to smoke more. I feel sympathetic towards Neo because he has unwillingly sampled and wants no part, yet is still subjected to as much. That sucks. Now hating because there is a culture around it that you dislike seems a bit petty in relation.

    #30 5 years ago
  31. Hunam

    Honestly, I’d almost believe you if I hadn’t seen the things in my life I have seen.

    The culture is the most dangerous thing about cannabis. It’s an often inclusive culture than seems to have a problem with people who want no part of it and don’t understand why people don’t want anything to do with it. I’ve seen people throw away promising lives because they want to get high rather than be a responsible, constructive person.

    Thinking about it O’Conner does have a point about personal weakness, and the ease of getting high and doing the minimum amount the culture so enjoys is really what irks me the most.

    #31 5 years ago
  32. Neolucifer

    No prob Barret . Each country and even region got their specificity .
    When you live here and not in a “posh” neighbourhood , it’s just something common to see people smoke weeds in open air and even be defiant about it , if you complaint . Hell for some you shouldnt even be complaining .

    i’ll admit that maybe , just maybe , if it was legal , there would be less young people tempted to play the stereotypical “jamaican stoned gangsta” , as it might be less a trend then . But i’m not convinced , some just like it indeed , plenty young ones use it because bored and jobless … i dunno if it would change with a legal status .

    #32 5 years ago
  33. DaMan

    @MO’C where did I say it’s an issue with the drug? how can it even be an issue with the drug if the addiction is psychic, hmm?

    and uhh, alcohol is addictive physically.

    #33 5 years ago
  34. Galactic_Barret

    Really, Michael? Alcohol doesn’t mess with receptors and chemicals in the brain or whatnot? Did not know that. Anyway, plenty of misconceptions are going around. Although you are not advocating it, thank you for bringing some facts to the discussion. Edit: Thats a great point, Hunam. My in-laws used to smoke, before they met. One got addicted to crack, the other graduated college. The crackhead got clean, swore off weed for his wife, and they’re doing fine without it. Its all about how you handle it.

    #34 5 years ago
  35. Hunam

    I find it hard to be accused of misconceptions when all I have done is posted my first hand experience.

    #35 5 years ago
  36. DaMan

    I’m a Tera Patrick addict.

    #36 5 years ago
  37. Michael O’Connor

    “Honestly, I’d almost believe you if I hadn’t seen the things in my life I have seen.”

    You can believe whatever the fuck you want. It doesn’t change the fact that you’re wrong.

    People do not because “psychologically addicted” to the drug. They *choose* to rely on it. There is nothing *in* the drug which causes the body *or* the brain to become reliant on it.

    “There is no addicition in the sense of DTs, but its a pleasant feeling that you may want to feel again, so you want to smoke more.”

    Again, that’s the issue of the individual, not the drug. The drug itself has no addictive qualities or substances within it.

    Blaming the drug for the addiction is no different than blaming video games for violence.

    Blame the individual.

    “i’ll admit that maybe , just maybe , if it was legal , there would be less young people tempted to play the stereotypical “jamaican stoned gangsta””

    The vast majority of them grow out of that once they become adults. Take it *from* an adult who knows many of those people. Teenagers are teenagers. It’s part of the process. If it was cannabis, it would just be something else.

    Maybe if people stop treating it like it was evil, it wouldn’t have such a stigma. I’d rather have teenagers experiment with cannabis instead of alcohol and cigarettes any day.

    “plenty young ones use it because bored and jobless”

    And many, many, many perfectly integrated members of society, with jobs and families and friends, use it as well, and it never affects them in the slightest, because those people have the maturity to be responsible with it.

    Again, blame the individual, not the drug.

    “@MO’C where did I say it’s an issue with the drug? how can it even be an issue with the drug if the addiction is psychis, hmm?”

    Your exact words were “It is far more addictive”. I am simply pointing out that it is not. A mental addiction to something is the issue of the *individual*, not the object in hand.

    You can’t outlaw what people feel, which is entirely why banning cannabis is stupid, and this is coming from someone who has only touched the stuff maybe half a dozen times in the last 10 years.

    Nicotine is infinitely more dangerous to the human body, and vastly more addictive – this is a *fact*. Also, it is statistically accepted through many years of study that more people become addicted to alcohol or cigarrettes than they do cannabis.

    #37 5 years ago
  38. Hunam

    And of course any debate is now ruined because you go shatner on us.

    #38 5 years ago
  39. DaMan

    oh! so now my exact words were ‘it’s far more addictive’? please do show me the post where I ‘m saying that.

    because I only see me saying “I hate drunks, the most repulsive kind of druggies.”

    #39 5 years ago
  40. Hunam

    I think those were actually my words.

    I do find how something not addictive at all has so many people massively reliant on it and it alone. Must be a coincidence.

    #40 5 years ago
  41. DaMan

    I didn’t say I agree with you, Hunam :) my point was that you obviously meant psychic addiction.

    #41 5 years ago
  42. Hunam

    I never said you did, just that I was the one who said it was far more addictive than alcohol then went into a statement regarding these “facts”.

    Next I’ll be stunned with more facts. Perhaps the real truth about climate change… or maybe he has mapped the human genome fully and he 100% understands the cold hard truth about the human body and brain.

    Or perhaps he’ll understand that everyday experience is worth more than wikipedia.

    “my point was that you obviously meant psychic addiction.”

    Addiction is addiction is addiction. I’ve seen people walk away from smoking cigarettes for 25 years outright on the spot and not bat an eyelid and seen people promise they’ll never smoke weed again and were stoned out their faces a week later.

    #42 5 years ago
  43. Michael O’Connor

    “And of course any debate is now ruined because you go shatner on us.”

    “Going Shatner” has pretty much become short hand for anyone criticising someone’s opinion with facts and proving them wrong. You just don’t like it.

    I apologise if you don’t like *facts* over opinion. You are the one proclaiming something which is, in the most basic turns, utter bullshit.

    The debate is “ruined” because I proved you were wrong? How does that logic work exactly? Where exactly did I directly insult who you are? I did not, I simply criticised your opinion. I simply pointed out how you were wrong.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/31_07_06_drugsreport.pdf

    This report, for instance, shows that the use of cannabis is much less dangerous than tobacco, prescription drugs *and* alcohol in its social harm, its physical harm, and its level of addiction.

    The world is much, much bigger than your “experience” and “opinion”. Their is *years* of facts and evidence to prove you wrong, and that’s just the first thing I had on hand.

    You simply don’t want to admit that you are wrong, even though the proof is right there in front of you.

    “oh! so now my exact words were ‘it’s far more addictive’? please do show me the post where I ‘m saying that.”

    My apologies, I got your comment mixed up with Hunam.

    “I do find how something not addictive at all has so many people massively reliant on it and it alone.”

    Most people are *not* reliant on cannabis, and your small and extremely narrow experience of it is not the end all and be all of what the case actually is.

    Most people take it very casually and enjoy it with their friends. Most people spend their lives casually enjoying the drug without any sort of adverse effects or problems. You simply don’t see it because *they* are not the people in your face.

    “Or perhaps he’ll understand that everyday experience is worth more than wikipedia.”

    Don’t even try to go there. I can tell you horror stories of experiences involving drugs that would make it hard for you to sleep at night. That doesn’t mean I’m going to ignore the facts.

    The Wikipedia jab is incredibly trite and unoriginal, considering I’ve gathered my information from many different sources over the span of 10+ years.

    #43 5 years ago
  44. Hunam

    It was once a single mans opinion that the world was round.

    And no, I don’t like admitting I am wrong. Who does? My point was that the things I have seen do not match the things you have seen or the team that wrote that paper have seen and to be honest, what is and isn’t a fact can change in a single day.

    If I am wrong, I am wrong. Why you feel the need to enforce your beliefs as hard rhetoric is how you are pulling a shatner. There is no two ways with it. No amount of discussion will even lodge you from a single notion you have. You state your side of the story and that’s that. Lets never look into the psychological or physiological effects of cannabis again because someone at somepoint correlated a graph.

    And the actual debate was on why I (and neolucifer) don’t like people who smoke weed. Clinging onto a single aspect and using that as your hold all fact cannon again is another shatner trait.

    #44 5 years ago
  45. Neolucifer

    ok everyone make some solid arguments here , and i’m close to calling it a day so ….

    Given our position , basically a crossroad and shipping place for a lot of south american “products” , some caribbean locals have been dealing with worse drugs and weeds in huge quantities for quite a long time now .

    I wouldnt comment on the area of addiction , i expressely avoided the issue and left it to people more knowledgeable .

    Still if i make weed some evil , i can only make it the evil that i and compatriots see and experience on regular basis .
    In the end , it’s still smell in a way that not everyone appreciate , still makes people high , and still (ab)used a lot over here , and associated with some annoying behavior .

    You seem to know many people mature and responsible with it ? Good then , speaking from my own experience i can’t say that i have seen it a lot .

    And it’s precisely based on that experience that i express dislike of weed users .
    No offense but i will not be told that it’s the same culture , social economic effects and thing everywhere , when it’s not .

    Being told that alcohol and tobacco are worse for the body or mind , wich i already always agreed upon will hardly be a swaying argument in my case .

    #45 5 years ago
  46. Michael O’Connor

    “It was once a single mans opinion that the world was round.”

    Until it was *proven* that it was round.

    It was opinion that cigarettes were good for you until it was *proven* that they weren’t.

    See the correlation here?

    “And no, I don’t like admitting I am wrong. Who does?”

    You should be proud of knowing the truth when something you thought was true turns out to not be.

    “To know that you do not know is the best. To pretend to know when you do not know is a disease.”
    -Lao-Tzu ”

    It is far better to learn than to assume. I don’t share my opinion on something unless I actually know the fact, and if I don’t know the facts, I say so.

    “And the actual debate was on why I (and neolucifer) don’t like people who smoke weed.”

    That just makes you a bigot. Judge them based on who they are and how they treat people, not on what drug they take. If the people you meet that do that drug are like that, that is the *people*, not the drugs. Christ.

    “Why you feel the need to enforce your beliefs as hard rhetoric is how you are pulling a shatner.”

    I’m not “enforcing my beliefs”. I’m presenting hard fact. There is *nothing* addictive about cannabis, just as there is *nothing* addictive about video games. Any reliance on them is a *decision* made by a person, and *not* an side-effect of the substance.

    This is fact. Fact. F.A.C.T.

    “Lets never look into the psychological or physiological effects of cannabis again because someone at somepoint correlated a graph.”

    Dear lord. Now you’re just clutching at straws.

    There is *proof* of the effects of cannabis. There are chemical break-downs of the substances in cannabis done by hundreds of studies over the last decade. The only way a person could ever become addicted to cannabis if it they managed to smoke *hundreds* of lines of the stuff daily for months.

    Your experience of a handful of delinquents acting like morons is not proof to the contrary.

    Here’s another fact: Nobody has ever overdose on cannabis.

    #46 5 years ago
  47. DaMan

    “Addiction is addiction is addiction. I’ve seen people walk away from smoking cigarettes for 25 years outright on the spot and not bat an eyelid and seen people promise they’ll never smoke weed again and were stoned out their faces a week later.”

    I never said psychic addiction is better (and/or worse) than physical. like I said, you stated that people can be addicted to weed, MO’C replied that it isn’t addictive. and I noted that you were talking about psyche.

    #47 5 years ago
  48. Michael O’Connor

    “I never said psychic addiction is better (and/or worse) than physical.”

    Except that it does not cause any sort of psychological addiction either. Just like playing a video game does not make you violent.

    If people are reacting that way, the issue is with the person, not the drug.

    Neolucifer: I perfectly respect your opinion. You’re not the one trying to pawn it off as fact even with proof the contrary, and you are willing to actual admit that there is another side to the argument.

    You are not claiming opinion as some sort of fact, and admit that yes, in fact, it is not entirely that dangerous is many circumstances or with many people.

    #48 5 years ago
  49. DaMan

    oh dear god..

    “Except that it does not cause any sort of psychological addiction either.”
    where did I say the weed itself causes psychic dependence? I said there exists a psychic dependence on weed.

    #49 5 years ago
  50. Michael O’Connor

    I said psychological, not physical.

    It does not cause a psychological addiction.

    http://www.google.ie/dictionary?aq=f&langpair=en|en&hl=en&q=psychological

    #50 5 years ago
  51. DaMan

    yeah, I mistyped.

    O’Conner do you even analyze the post before replying? a couple of comments before I said “how can it even be an issue with the drug if the addiction is psychic,”.

    so once again, what I said was : people can be psychically (I prefer to call it psyche instead of psychology) addicted to weed.

    #51 5 years ago
  52. Hunam

    ““It was once a single mans opinion that the world was round.”

    Until it was *proven* that it was round.

    It was opinion that cigarettes were good for you until it was *proven* that they weren’t.

    See the correlation here?”

    Yes, your point is that people have been wrong in the past and that people could be wrong in the present?

    ““And the actual debate was on why I (and neolucifer) don’t like people who smoke weed.”

    That just makes you a bigot. Judge them based on who they are and how they treat people, not on what drug they take. If the people you meet that do that drug are like that, that is the *people*, not the drugs. Christ.”

    Then I’m a bigot. I have seen many a stoner in my life and I’ve hated them all. To continue giving them the benefit of the doubt would be foolish on my part.

    “Why you feel the need to enforce your beliefs as hard rhetoric is how you are pulling a shatner.”

    I’m not “enforcing my beliefs”. I’m presenting hard fact. There is *nothing* addictive about cannabis, just as there is *nothing* addictive about video games. Any reliance on them is a *decision* made by a person, and *not* an side-effect of the substance.

    This is fact. Fact. F.A.C.T.”

    Do you not believe these facts? Can facts not be beliefs? Is it so alien to you that a person can be confronted with facts and still not accept them? It would be like asking a police officer to not trust their gut when the facts say one thing and their experience says something else.

    Plus it’s totally not a fact.

    “Lets never look into the psychological or physiological effects of cannabis again because someone at somepoint correlated a graph.”

    Dear lord. Now you’re just clutching at straws.”

    Clutching at straws or simply pointing out how the scientific method works? We can always be wrong. Like Lao-Tzu said: “To know that you do not know is the best. To pretend to know when you do not know is a disease.” You say everything is fact and do not for a second entertain that you could be wrong. He knows a thing to too aswell… from personal experience!

    “Here’s another fact: Nobody has ever overdose on cannabis.” No one has done, but it IS possible.

    #52 5 years ago
  53. Galactic_Barret

    Thing is, Neo doesn’t like that he is more or less forced to use a substance that he has no desire to use. Even then, he doesn’t say the item is bad, just that said item had affected his habitat, and is still open-minded enough to consider a positive to legalization. You are being just as staunch in your stance as Michael is, yet he probably sees both positives and negatives. And again, you are only basing it on second-hand knowledge.

    #53 5 years ago
  54. Michael O’Connor

    “Yes, your point is that people have been wrong in the past and that people could be wrong in the present?”

    Are you actually so full of yourself that you believe your limited personal experience is more informed that the collective research, study and science of thousands of individuals over many decades, information that has been correlated, checked, and cross checked over and over?

    And people say *I’m* egotistical…

    We are not living in the middle age any more. There are no “borders” between countries in the world any more, and information is a infinite resource.

    “Is it so alien to you that a person can be confronted with facts and still not accept them? It would be like asking a police officer to not trust their gut when the facts say one thing and their experience says something else.”

    So all those millions of people who have taken the drug and suffered absolutely no problems because of it, along with the CHEMICAL STRUCTURE OF CANNABIS ITSELF… are beliefs?

    No.

    God is a belief. They are not comparable.

    “You say everything is fact and do not for a second entertain that you could be wrong.”

    No, I do not saying everything is fact.I say that facts are fact.

    That Dragon Age: Origins is a great game is an opinion. To say that cannabis has no addictive qualities whatsoever is a fact.

    “No one has done, but it IS possible.”

    Considering you can overdose on water, and considering you can kill yourself on water much faster than you could on cannabis, makes that a completely moot point. It is *virtually impossible* for a person to consume enough cannabis to cause an overdose.

    You can overdose on *anything*.

    “Thing is, Neo doesn’t like that he is more or less forced to use a substance that he has no desire to use.”

    I would be quite curious as to how exactly he is being “forced”. Forced is a very specific cause of word, as it implies a complete lack of choice in the matter.

    #54 5 years ago
  55. Hunam

    Actually, I have made a point of not discussing if I have ever used drugs or not. Because broadcasting things like that on the internet is not something I wish to do.

    #55 5 years ago
  56. Galactic_Barret

    My wife is reading this and cursing you to high heaven. You have little to no clue what you’re talking about, and I kind of wish I had never revived the topic. Today is a sad day, indeed. Edit: Michael: He said that they smoke right outside his house, and that he has gotten contact highs. He said (not word-for-word) that he asked said people to stop, but speaking ill of MJ in his neighborhood is almost seen as prudish. Not exactly forced, but as close as you could get in that situation, I would imagine.

    #56 5 years ago
  57. Hunam

    “Yes, your point is that people have been wrong in the past and that people could be wrong in the present?”

    Are you actually so full of yourself that you believe your limited personal experience is more informed that the collective research, study and science of thousands of individuals over many decades, information that has been correlated, checked, and cross checked over and over?”

    To be blunt and not trying to wind you up. The problem I have is that I cannot rationalise the facts you have presented to me because of my life long experiences. It’s not a refusal to admit wrong, it is that what you say is true is not something I can see in the real world. It doesn’t match. To accept your facts would cause a state of cognitive dissidence.

    Secondly, I’m not the only person in the world that holds this view.

    “And people say *I’m* egotistical…”

    You’re ego has nothing on mine. :)

    “We are not living in the middle age any more. There are no “borders” between countries in the world any more, and information is a infinite resource.”

    I don’t get this bit, sorry.

    So all those millions of people who have taken the drug and suffered absolutely no problems because of it, along with the CHEMICAL STRUCTURE OF CANNABIS ITSELF… are beliefs?

    No.

    God is a belief. They are not comparable.”

    The belief I am asserting is that you feel we have reached the pinnacle of chemical and biological understanding. This is again something I simply cannot believe. I will never accept in my life time that what we say is true today is what is true.

    “No, I do not saying everything is fact.I say that facts are fact.”

    This is a none statement which again does not mesh with my personal belief that we can know truth about this sort of thing. We probably know about 0.1% at most of what there is to know. To me a fact is something which can never be refuted. Tiger Woods humping a long line of blondes. That’s a fact. Those events took place. He is a rascal yes. A group of people looking at microbiology and rationalising what they saw with our current level of understanding is not a fact. You can do a thousand years into research and still be wrong despite the evidence showing otherwise. They said effect always follows cause but at a sub atomic level this is said to be incorrect. Maybe the problem is that they cannot understand fully what they are seeing or maybe they are not seeing everything there is to see. That’s my point. That is what I base everything I know and will know on and it’s not fair for you to say I am wrong in believing that.

    That was then, none flippant hunam. Rational, no?

    #57 5 years ago
  58. Hunam

    “My wife is reading this and cursing you to high heaven. You have little to no clue what you’re talking about, and I kind of wish I had never revived the topic. Today is a sad day, indeed.”

    That doesn’t sound fun. I didn’t mean to ruin your day, I’m just a guy on the internet who doesn’t agree with you. To be fair though, drugs is always a contentious issue and there will always be conflict on the matter.

    #58 5 years ago
  59. Galactic_Barret

    Thats insane. I don’t understand at all, especially the Tiger Woods part. How do you know ‘that’ is fact? Because it was told to you by a reporter and because hes a rascal (What do you mean by that?)? And now, you don’t believe in science? You blew my mind.

    #59 5 years ago
  60. Michael O’Connor

    “I don’t get this bit, sorry.”

    I was saying that back in the middle ages, people could say the world was flat and there was nothing to prove them wrong. They could check what other people in the world know at the touch of a button. Nowadays, the world is a much smaller place and information is far easier to find. Facts are far easier to find.

    “To be fair though, drugs is always a contentious issue and there will always be conflict on the matter.”

    I do believe that drugs *are* dangerous. There are many lethal substances out there, and I would *never* encourage the use of them. But the reality is that cannabis is not one of them.

    You are basically trying to tell us that your personal experience is more right than concrete, decades long research. That’s a bit of a joke.

    Galactic_Barret: I’d love to meet you and your wife. You actually seem to have some common sense on your shoulders.

    #60 5 years ago
  61. Hunam

    He admitted to having extramarital sex is what I meant by rascal. Maybe it wasn’t the best explanation. I was trying to point out that to me a fact is something that has happened. Maybe a better one is to say that Obama is president. That is a fact, there is a job of president of america and he certifiably has that job.

    Regarding science, I mean it’s educated guessing. That’s why theory has to be put into practice and why it doesn’t always turn out like they think it will. It’s like pharmaceuticals. They must test a thousand different variants of the same thing before they get the right version to combat what ever virus it was it was developed to fight and it has side effects. This demonstrates a lack of chemical and biological understanding on our part. If you drop a penny it always hits the ground, we have a pretty good idea of why that happens, but we learn things about gravity all the time when we look into space.

    #61 5 years ago
  62. Hunam

    O’Conner, why did you miss out the entire point I made and focused on a bit part?

    You are basically trying to tell us that your personal experience is more right than concrete, decades long research. That’s a bit of a joke.

    That’s not what I said and infact entirely ignores that giant paragraph I wrote about the limits of human understanding when it comes to science. I am saying that you can only trust what you have seen to occur in the real world as a basis of what you know as science is re-written everyday.

    #62 5 years ago
  63. Eregol

    Hmm, back on topic.
    So, Australia is now considering using games to bribe people to be good?
    And they think their population is corruptible.

    #63 5 years ago
  64. mojo

    “I receive abusive emails from anonymous senders on a daily basis

    have some!

    #64 5 years ago
  65. Blerk

    I like how he receives a death threat under his door at 2am and just “presumes” its from a gamer. Wouldn’t all proper gamers still be gaming at that time? :-D

    The guy quite obviously doesn’t understand games or gamers and doesn’t want to understand them. This alone is the perfect reason why he should have nothing to do with the decision.

    #65 5 years ago