Monday, June 6, 2016

Personal Responsibility

By Stan G. Kain
October 23, 2003

In June 2003, two teenage boys,aged 14 and 16, went on a shooting spree in Tennessee.  As a result of their actions a Canadian man died, a woman was wounded and a third victim was injured by the resulting accident.  Both boys were convicted of the shootings and are incarcerated until they reach the age of nineteen.

When police questioned the boys, the teenagers said they were merely mimicking a video game called, "Grand Theft Auto III."  The video game has players shooting at the sides of passing trucks, earning points for each hit.  The game is no more or less violent than many other games sold in stores and above all else, is merely a game.

Victims of the teenage snipers have now filed suit in the Cooke County, Tennessee courts, seeking $46 million in actual damages and another $200 million in punitive damages.  Victims have lodged the suit against the game's maker, Take-Two Interactive Software, Inc., Sony Computer Entertainment of America, Inc., makers of the gaming equipment and Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., the seller of the game.

In court testimony, the teenagers admitted to the shootings, saying they traded off firing a rifle at the passing automobiles.  They claim they were merely playing a live re-creation of the game.  While anyone can sue anyone for anything, this is a claim in the extreme.  While the victims deserve compensation, where does the responsibility lie?

Are we to believe that two teenagers, aged 14 and 16, are unable to distinguish between the fantasy of a video game and the result of firing a real rifle at passing cars?  I think not.  In many nations, kids of this age are part of a children's army.  While they may not have had the luxury of owning a video game, they know the grim reality of live rifle fire.  Two teenagers in Tennessee, with access to a rifle also know the potential result of firing a rifle at a passenger-laden vehicle.  Someone needs a reality check, if they fail to understand that.

Sony makes a lot of electronic equipment.  How can we expect Sony to be responsible for how this equipment is used by consumers?  Certainly, if Sony manufactured a faulty product, resulting in electrocution while used in accordance with instructions and common sense, they should be held liable. I am sure Sony would agree.  Should Sony be held liable, if the consumer watches a violent program on a Sony television, then commits a violent act?  In no way could a reasonable jury rule against Sony in such a case.  Yet, this is what the shooting victims in Tennessee are asking.

A game manufacturer, whether electronic game or otherwise, should not be held accountable for the actions of consumers.  Games are just games.  Nothing more.  They are meant as entertainment and should not be in the hands of anyone incapable of understanding that.  Again, that is not the responsibility of the manufacturer, but the responsibility of the parents.  If game manufacturers are to be held responsible, the most exciting game we can hope to see will be Mr. Rogers lobbing creampuffs at a fence post.  Boring!!

The retailer, Wal-Mart in this case, is in the same situation as the manufacturer.  They are unqualified to perform a psychological evaluation on each and every customer.  Without employing "Miss Cleo" and her team of psychics at the checkouts, it is equally as foolish to expect Wal-Mart to predict what a customer will do, after purchasing an item.

Where does the responsibility fall for actions such as those of the Tennessee boys?  I'm going to take the unpopular stand that responsibility lies with the individual.  In this case, responsibility lies with each of the boys and with their parents.  Parents are responsible for having firearms in the home and for minors having access to the said weapons.  Likewise, parents are responsible for teaching their children the difference between fantasy and reality.  Similarly, parents are responsible for knowing what their children are doing out in the woods with a rifle.

The two boys are learning a lesson in reality now, as they sit in a correctional facility, convicted of reckless homicide, aggravated assault and reckless endangerment.  That lesson will haunt them for a lifetime.  Financial compensation for the victims rests with the boys and their parents, not with manufacturers and retailers.  Lawyers know families in Tennessee do not have the wealth of Wal-Mart, Sony and Take-Two Interactive Software.  Lawsuits are about money, both for the attorney and the victim, thus the far-fetching attempt to implicate everyone.  Law firms need a reality check, as well.  The responsible parties in this care are most likely not going to have $246 million.

When businesses are forced to pay huge sums of money for distant acts of negligence, the costs are passed along to all consumers.  We all are forced to pay for the actions of a few irresponsible individuals.  Let's hope a jury takes a common sense approach to this case and holds the perpetrators and their parents liable for the victim's losses.  Let's bring personal responsibility back into our society.

If you have questions or comments, please email Stan.

Copyright 2003 Stan G. Kain

No comments:

Post a Comment