With the recent news in El Paso and Dayton in the U.S. of mass shootings, politicians and President of the United States, Donald Trump has come out to say that video games are the source of systemic violence in the country. But the thing is, games are worldwide. They’re international. The first string of slander against video games came hours after the El Paso shootings where house minority leader Kevin Mccarthy singled out video games as a cause of increased violence in young people.
He goes on to say and I quote,
“I’ve always felt that it’s a problem for future generations and others,” McCarthy said on Fox’s Sunday Morning Futures. “We’ve watched from studies, shown before, what it does to individuals, and you look at these photos of how it took place, you can see the actions within video games and others”.
This led to a series of others joining in on the sanctimonious preaching, including President of The United States, Donald Trump chiming in and saying;
It’s not a video game issue;
That’s all fine and dandy. Video games have always been a scapegoat, especially in recent years to disregard gun legislation in America, and deal with the actual issue. But this begs the question, gaming and video games aren’t only an American thing you know.
The same games that Americans play, we play too, and I don’t feel like going out and shooting someone. There aren’t as many cases regarding video games and violence out of the U.S. are there? I’m pretty sure there aren’t anyway. People do horrible things and acts, because of a myriad of reasons, and I personally don’t think video games is one of them.
In a response to the heinous crimes, one of which happened at a Walmart, they’ve now come out and taken some initiative to stopping the gory violence. They’ve taken down signing and displays referencing violence.
This includes signs, and playable demos for video games. They also mentioned in a leaked internal memo, to cancel any events promoting combat style or third-person shooter games that may be scheduled in Electronics.
So, Walmart has stopped promoting games, but still sells guns? Yes, that’s right. Walmart is one of the largest sellers of guns and ammunition in the world. That’s the irony of it all. This seems like uniquely an America problem, rather than affecting the rest of the world. Plus, I can’t go to AEON and pick up an assault rifle, some ammunition, and walk out, now can I?
What video games are really about.
So the whole point is moot, in my opinion. There are LITERALLY no studies that directly relate video games to increased violence, or violent behaviours. Gaming has and always will be something that’s dedicated to being ‘fun’ rather than anything else. It’s meant to build a sense of community, bring you an experience unlike any other, and just have fun.
There are thousands of different types of games, from Minecraft, to Candy Crush, to Overwatch, Tetris, and who knows what else. I personally feel it doesn’t affect your psyche in the slightest. It is, at it roots, just another form of entertainment. But why is the only one that gets nitpicked every-time something like this happens?
What about TV, Movies, and other forms of Media?
Here’s the next argument. What about movies, TV shows, and other forms of media? They most of the time, depict even more graphic violence, and obscenities. There aren’t that many games that even show sexually explicit content. Like full on sex scenes anyway, unlike Game of Thrones, Spartacus, and a myriad of other TV shows. Most of them are equally, or even more so violent and graphic. In my opinion, the defence is utter bullshit.
The only thing that video games has made me violent about is me breaking my controller, but that only affects me. Sure there’s raging, and a lot of toxic behaviours online. But at the end of the day, that’s all it is. People being shitty over the internet. At the end of the day, I really don’t agree with the psychology that video games make you more violent. There’s so much that surrounds us that could influence us, but doesn’t. Why is gaming the one that gets picked on the most? How is it different from literally any other type of content? It just astounds me that it could even be perceived as such, and this is why I think the whole argument, is bullsh**t.