Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 5072059" data-attributes="member: 19675">Not all of the judges, just d% judges.<img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />Wisconsin is kind of odd, legally speaking.  In some areas, they're very no-nonsense & conservative.  However, in others, they can be fairly lassaiz-faire.Here, they're being conservative.But again, I must point out that they're just preventing him from having the stuff in his cell.  Whether he could run D&D in a controlled rec center might be another matter.Then again, there is this oddity: he argued this case on the grounds of free speech.  But playing D&D is no more free speech than any other hobby...such as reading porn.Oddly enough, most prisons place porn on the contraband list, and porn has already won a fair number of free speech lawsuits.  If a prison can make porn contraband, I can't see D&D winning on those grounds.In addition, despite some pretty good testimony for the prisoner, the Judge had it right when he brought up Meyer v. Branker, 506 F.3d 358, 370 (4th Cir. 2007) (noting that defendant Meyer “was obsessed with Dungeons and Dragons,” and that “this obsession caused ‘[him] to retreat into a fantasy world of Ninja warriors’”) as evidence that the game could cause problems in a prison setting, and that its ban had some merit.</blockquote>

Verification