My Thoughts on the U.S. Gun Debate

Happy Friday everyone! I hope you are having a great day before Christmas is here. As usual, it’s time to cover another topic at “Delvarian’s Assorted Stuff”. Today’s topic will be my general thoughts on the debate on guns in the U.S. Like every other article on this site, your mileage may vary – you may have other opinions on this topic. And seeing how heated this debate is and how passionate some of the arguments are on both sides, this is a must have. But enough with the disclaimers and whatnot, time to dive into the topic at hand.

As many of us can recall, gun debates have been happening all across the U.S. Not just simple ones, but serious ones. As in whether if people should have guns at home or should be prohibited from carrying or owning a gun. One of the proponents’ (for having guns) arguments is that guns are needed for self-defense and without them, security will decrease. On the other hand, opponents say that it will be misused and people will go crazy. On both sides, cries of government doing too much or too little and people’s rights being violated are thrown into this heated debate. It has gotten so huge that even state and government officials fight for either side – leading to some states having different gun regulations. But, one of the main problems of this major argument is that many people cite that gun regulations have a black or white morality or something related to this. When in reality, morality with guns is more or less in shades of gray.

Guns have a proper usage and an improper usage. They can be used for hunting and self-defense or they can be used for criminal acts. Yet, the main problem is with the person, not the gun itself. The gun is just a tool and therefore, has no morality attached to it – it doesn’t make any decision. Rather, it just follows the demands of the wielder. On the other hand, the person holding the gun has a morality and acts by him/herself – in other words, he or she is sentient. Thus, he/she has the ability to follow the right path, follow the wrong path, or most commonly, follow a mix of the paths. They can make the gun a tool of benefit or a tool of death and destruction. So, if politicians wanted to eradicate the gun problem, the best solution would be to fix the nature of human beings – an impossible task. But, the main point is that, the human, not the gun chooses to make a decision, and that decision is most of the time, morally gray. Therefore, gun debates cannot use the saying that there are only good and bad ways to use a gun. There is a proper usage but, when used with other people of shady morality, the “correct” decision becomes hard to determine.

For example, let’s say a criminal were to break in a home and threaten the residents with a loaded gun. In this case, if someone had a gun and was willing to the protect his fellow residents, then he had permission to take out the intruder for the sake of saving more lives. Here, the decision taken was not sparkly clean (in most morality systems and religions, killing is generally wrong) but, he averted a possibly more tragic outcome of many or all people being killed. Imagine if guns were restricted and not allowed – the outcome will have been totally different and would be based more upon the criminal’s morality. So, the argument and belief of the usage of guns having a black and white morality is completely false. Nothing in life is completely right or wrong – sometimes people cannot even tell what some decisions’ outcomes will be.

So what can we do to fix this issue? Well, first off, education is a must. Most of the time, people who argue in this debate are misguided due to not having a clear viewpoint or an open mind. Fixing a closed-mind may prove tough to accomplish, but the main point would be to educate the masses on both sides of this issue. People can demonstrate how morality for guns, as with everything else, is gray, not purely right or wrong. But most importantly, emphasize that the debates aren’t bad in themselves - it is just the miscommunication and misinformation that are bad. Proper gun laws have to be put in place to make the country better. However, it must be done in the proper way so it balances the right of the people and the safety of our society. Of course, any change will bring controversy and outrage. But, it’s just that we, the people of our nation, how will have the final say on this topic and how the nation will move forward in the years to come.

Thanks once again for staying with me folks. I hope you enjoyed my general insights into the gun debate. The topic is more complicated than what it appears to be. But, this provides a brief look in what needs to be improved or fixed. Well then, like usual, comments, suggestions, and corrections are always appreciated. I hope you all have a great Christmas beginning tomorrow! This is Delvarian from “Delvarian’s Assorted Stuff” signing off! Have a wonderful holiday!

My Thoughts on If Video Games Are Works of Art

Welcome again to “Devlarian’s Assorted Stuff”. Today’s topic will be on the very controversial issue on whether video games are a form of art or not, and some of the surrounding arguments. Remember folks, considering how controversial (and flame-bait worthy) this topic is, take into mind that your mileage may way. Your thoughts on this issue will vary in some way or another. This is why it is (highly) not recommended to start a discussion on this in many sites or forums. But without further to do, let us delve in and explore this interesting topic.

Looking at the humble beginnings of video gaming, video games were intended to be for entertainment for kids – nothing more. As seen by this early (first) era of gaming, most games were made for arcades and arcade-like systems. Of course, the market shifted to Japan after the Great Video Game Crash of 1983 with the introduction of the Nintendo Entertainment System or the NES for short. Even then, most if not all games, were intended for entertainment and for kids – though the stories improved in this time period. As the years went by, technology improved leading to better systems (such as the SNES) with better graphics, sounds, and gameplay, as well as other things such as story and mechanics. All in all, it was considered by many veterans to be one of the best time-frames in gaming thanks to all the amazing (at that time) advancements. However, it is key to note that as mentioned before, stories began to improve and became (for the most part) more complex, and had more moral and philosophical meaning. For example, instead of the simple save the princess plot, it was more like save the world from the evil empire with many people having their own agendas – slightly simplified though. The game developers were dipping into deeper parts of telling a story and providing an impact to life like a book or movie.

Of course, even at that period, most people considered it to be for entertainment and children – not a work of art. It wasn’t a bad thing at all considering that most plots were still simplistic and only a few – could have been considered a work of art. Thus, there were not enough examples to convince the populace into moving onto deeper concepts. As the time went by however, companies began to trudge into more complex storylines with connections to real world events. Many people applauded these changes yet, some critics and activists defied this stating that it would “ruin society” or something similar. This was the start of the age of T-rating games, exploration into deeper concepts, and the beginning of video game controversies and the general stupidity of activists and critics.

Here, developers wanted to push forward into deeper more moral ideas like in movies and books but they further they went, it seemed that more issues came up from the stupidity of the populace. Take Mass Effect 2 from the fairly recent day. Many (misguided) people (including FOX News) decried it as a “porn simulator” and cautioned people to keep their kids away from it. The same thing happened with Grand Theft Auto IV, where critics decried it as a “murder simulator” (though there were slightly right, but the game wasn’t about random murdering or the simulation of the act). In fact, the content was much subtler and was more or less (for the case of Mass Effect 2) implied never shown on screen. But of course, critics and activists still decried and complained about it. This has happened to several games over the years and many companies have been afflicted from these people’s misguided crusades. Even some states over the years wanted to pass laws several regulating gaming and pushing back M-rated games.

The main issue with this is that people cannot decide whether video games are a form of art or not. Consider books and movies, and how they can show touchy and controversial issues without the same level of complaining that ensues when video games show it. In fact, this problem also stems from the fact that video games are still perceived by many to be for the children and that a lot of video game enthusiasts back down from defending. Heck, the issue has gotten so heated that even the Supreme Court has opened a case to see whether video games are protected by the First Amendment (freedom of speech). Many fans, critics, and activists on both sides fight on whether video games are art citing many examples and counter-examples with no avail on either side. Some people cannot wrap their heads around the idea that video games have matured to the point that not all are for kids – some are, but others are for more mature-minded people.

Because of this huge debate, if a game were to cover a controversial topic (e.g., war, genocide, fear, torture, etc.), it would face a huge deal of controversy unlike books or movies. Books and movies have already covered many hard-to-read topics, so why not video games. As many have said before me, we need to stand up for our medium and push forward and “mature” our medium. If books and movies have done it beforehand, so shall our medium. For this to happen, we need to defend our works when faced with controversy, try making more meaningful stories, and provide enough evidence that video games are in fact, a form of art. The Supreme Court’s decision will have a major impact on gaming, and will either improve or destroy the genre. But no matter what it will come to, we gamers should rally together and stand up for our genre and educate the masses. If we push forward, our medium will never be the same again – just like entering adolescence or adulthood. As they say, “beauty is in the eye of the beholder” – anything could be a work of art but will vary depending on the viewer.

Thanks for staying with me folks! I would like to give many thanks to Daniel Floyd, for inspiring me (and other fellow gamers) to speak up for our medium. Keep on rolling Mr. Floyd and as for everyone else, have a wonderful day! Remember, comments, suggestions, and corrections are always appreciated. This is Delvarian for “Delvarian’s Assorted Stuff” signing off for now!