You Don’t Call Video Games “Filthiest Form of Pornography”

  • By Staff

  • December 27, 2012

  • 2

It has been little more than just a week since the terrible, terrible events of ‘Sandy Hook Elementary School Shooting.’ Ever since then much of the debate in the United States has been of gun ownership laws and how guns are readily available.

There had not been any sort of response from the NRA (National Rifle Association) that was until yesterday. For any readers who may not know NRA is a non-profit American organization that vigorously supports firearm ownership rights across the States.

NRA VP, Mr. Wayne LaPierre, hosted a press conference and in it; he identified the ‘real culprit’ of the ghastly tragedy; the videogames industry. These were his exact words:

There exists in this country, sadly, a callous, corrupt and corrupting industry that sells and sows violence against its own people, through vicious, violent video games with names like ‘Bulletstorm,’ ‘Grand Theft Auto,’ ‘Mortal Kombat’ and ‘Splatterhouse.’

Furthermore, he did not stop there but went on to describe the videogames in such a manner:

Isn’t fantasizing about killing people as a way to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography?

This is not the first time the video game industry has been blamed after a mass shooting incident. I’m sure that all of you remember the Virginia Tech Massacre and the subsequent debate surrounding videogames that transpired in the wake of that sad incident.

In fact, putting the blame on the video game industry after a well-publicized crime has become the natural order of affairs. However, this is certainly the first-time anyone has described videogames as ‘filthiest form of pornography.’

To get your ‘kicks’ by fantasizing about killing other people is a disturbing thought indeed and gamers all around the world should be outraged for being labeled as closeted perverted mass murderers.

At least, this is how I interpret Mr. Wayne LaPierre statement, and I believe there is no other way to translate it.

Most video games these days have some degree of violence in them but is it justifiable to blame an entire community because of the actions of a single mentally ill person? Moreover, what about games like the Mass Effect, Metal Gear Solid or Heavy Rain?

Sure all three of these games have violence in them but all three of them also tell tales of friendship, love and most importantly kindness.

Like any form of good art, good video games, I believe only depict the realities of the world without any of its restraints. It is not the mirror’s fault that you do not like the reflection.

I agree that most children these days are being exposed to too much violence through video games. However, is it really the video games’ fault? Age restrictions are clearly mentioned on every video game in the market these days.

If you still buy your 10-13 year olds Black Ops 2 then that is simply bad parenting, isn’t it?

When it comes to adults, I don’t think that any sane one would go on a shooting spree just because he plays violent video games, irrespective of the fact, whether he owns a gun or not.

It baffles me that ill-informed people keep on piling up the blame on the video games. These same people first put the blame on movies before that on rap music, going all the way back to the Woodstock in 69 and surely beyond that too.

Fault of failing to recognize the danger beforehand, in this case the mental state of Adam Lanza, should not simply be averted by holding video games responsible for his vile crime. And oh, what was Mr. LaPierre’s solution after portraying video games the real culprits of the Sandy Hook tragedy?

More Guns!

NRA solution to extinguishing the fire is; adding more fuel to it. They want to have an armed person in every school in America.

The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

This theory was presented by Mr. Wayne LaPierre in the same press conference. Funnily enough, his theory is exactly the same we see being applied in all the violent video games; he so vehemently opposes. He might as well have said that statement in a Kratos voice.

My question to him is this. What if the government imposes stricter laws on gun ownership? So that, it is only the good guy, who can have a gun with him. Instead having an all-out gun fest between two parties wouldn’t it be better to avoid it all together?

In the end, on the behalf of all the SegmentNext Staff, I would like to extend our deepest condolences to all the affected families of this tragedy. May these holidays bring all people who have lost a loved one, some peace and patience.

By Staff

I could be anyone from Team SegmentNext. I am called into service for posting cheats and community contributed content.

Around The Network
    • XZ

      Actually, for once, that NRA president may be correct. Most of the mass shootings that occur in the US are in Gun-Free zones. Compare that to Israel, where teachers are encouraged to have firearms to protect their classes, and you will see that mass shootings occur a lot less in their schools and public zones than in ours.

      More gun control is not an answer. Different gun control is. Make it mandatory that to own a firearm, you must not be a felon for violent crimes, and you must be able to pass a psychiatric evaluation. That would cut down the availability of guns from a lot of these people who get them last minute, though it won’t stop the thieves who steal guns from other people.

      • Ash

        If you look at most classes around the world, you will see far less violence in schools to what is happening in the US regardless to whether teachers have access to guns.
        The guns that will be at school would be a far more greater danger to the staff and student that the potential of anyone going to the school with a gun. Even with rules on how to lock them away and how to use them, Teachers are human, and with how many teachers and how many schools, that chances of there being a mistake or a student trying to gain access to the gun…something is bound to happen sooner or later.

        If you look at the number of killings either by murder or by accident, hundreds of people die or are wounded each year in the states. So is putting more guns into the mix…good guy or not….really going to help.

        Different gun control laws are needed, but they need to be restricted to a sensible level.
        Automatic weapons are designed to kill humans, there is no other purpose for them, so why the hell would you want them to be allowed out on your streets!!!
        Even if everyone was armed, if someone went out with an automatic weapon and started killing people, how many people would he kill before someone else managed to take him down.
        If automatic weapons were banned, a lot less people would die.

        The only weapons anyone would have a good reason to take out of their homes is a rifle for hunting because they have a function and they can’t be concealed.

        Handguns should only be carried on the street by people trained and have a job requiring them to have them.

        Any other weapons I don’t see why they can’t be locked away on a shooting range or somewhere people can enjoy them and they can be monitored. That way people can use them and enjoy them without increasing the danger of everyone else.

        If you enjoy displaying weapons in your home, they they should be disabled in some way so they can not be used. that way if they are stolen, they won’t be used against you or anyone else.

        With freedom come responsibility.
        Freedom to speak your mind, but you can’t spread hatred.
        Freedom to move, but respect other peoples property.
        Freedom to bear arms, but understand your responsibility to keep those people around you safe.