Viewing Thread:
""N64 Killed my boy" Your thoughts........"

When I saw this news item on the SR wed page I could understand that a person would feel grief for the death of his or her son, but it give them no reason to vent there grievences on an innocent entertainment company such as Nintendo. The warning about video games were perfectly clear, which brings me back to another law suit where a lady dropped a cup of boiling hot cofee on herself and sued the shop for not putting a "HOT DRINK" sign on the cup, which although farfetched can be justified. They said that if it had that sign they would not have sued, so surly if the manual had a warning about the dangers of video games on it, they should surely not be sued. The claims that video games are addictive is, in my view, not correct, dugs are addictive but you cannot compare cumputer games to that, and the number of people who have died from video games, to my knowladge, is currently at 1. This is a tragic accident, Nintendo never set out to kill anyone quite different in fact, and it is not Nintendo's fault that he played on it for 8 hours a day, 6 days a week. After all there were warnings about playing too long, and that you should take a break every 15mins, and if he chose to ignore that then it's not Nintendo's fault. But then again, looking at the size of Nintendo's pockets, the least they could do is pay for hospital care etc. as a kind of "we're sorry" thing. But still I don't think they should be sued, you don't sue a car company who's car crashed and killed someone because they made it so the car went too fast, and I think the same thing is happening here, in a way. All this is terribly tragic and we give them every condolences, but still accidents happen, and you can understand that people need a way to vent their grief and everyone has a different way. Some times , especially in the U.S.A, law suits are taken a bit too far.

Please post your responces and views.......

I read that the "kid" was 30 years old?? Is that true? BWah Ha Harrrr!

The little tart shouldn't have been playing games for 8 hours a day in the first place. The Mother knows it was her fault but she's trying to find some way of avoiding the blame.

CAn you explain in more detail what happened please? I'd like to know.

I heard about a court case against McDonalds. A woman was driving, decided to put the coffee she had just bought between her thighs. She recieved 2nd degree burns. Although the cup clearly have Warning! Hot! written on them, her lawyer argued that McDonalds were 'greedy' for serving the coffee too fast thereby not giving it a chance to cool down. He claimed they did this despite public safety risks, and that they should be taught a lesson.

She recieved 3.3 million $.

The US courts are unbelievable!

When I saw this news item on the SR wed page I could understand that a person would feel grief for the death of his or her son, but it give them no reason to vent there grievences on an innocent entertainment company such as Nintendo. The warning about video games were perfectly clear, which brings me back to another law suit where a lady dropped a cup of boiling hot cofee on herself and sued the shop for not putting a "HOT DRINK" sign on the cup, which although farfetched can be justified. They said that if it had that sign they would not have sued, so surly if the manual had a warning about the dangers of video games on it, they should surely not be sued. The claims that video games are addictive is, in my view, not correct, dugs are addictive but you cannot compare cumputer games to that, and the number of people who have died from video games, to my knowladge, is currently at 1. This is a tragic accident, Nintendo never set out to kill anyone quite different in fact, and it is not Nintendo's fault that he played on it for 8 hours a day, 6 days a week. After all there were warnings about playing too long, and that you should take a break every 15mins, and if he chose to ignore that then it's not Nintendo's fault. But then again, looking at the size of Nintendo's pockets, the least they could do is pay for hospital care etc. as a kind of "we're sorry" thing. But still I don't think they should be sued, you don't sue a car company who's car crashed and killed someone because they made it so the car went too fast, and I think the same thing is happening here, in a way. All this is terribly tragic and we give them every condolences, but still accidents happen, and you can understand that people need a way to vent their grief and everyone has a different way. Some times , especially in the U.S.A, law suits are taken a bit too far.

Please post your responces and views.......