Two Quick Notes on Video Games and the NRA

No super-deep point to this post, but I wanted to add some information on two issues related to the topic of the NRA’s denunciation of certain video games.  To put things into context, here’s what LaPierre said on the subject:

And here's another dirty little truth that the media try their best to conceal: There exists in this country a callous, corrupt and corrupting shadow 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. And here’s one: it’s called Kindergarten Killers. It’s been online for 10 years. How come my research department could find it and all of yours either couldn’t or didn’t want anyone to know you had found it?

Then there’s the blood-soaked slasher films like "American Psycho" and "Natural Born Killers" that are aired like propaganda loops on "Splatterdays" and every day, and a thousand music videos that portray life as a joke and murder as a way of life. And then they have the nerve to call it "entertainment."

But is that what it really is? Isn't fantasizing about killing people as a way to get your kicks really the filthiest form of pornography? In a race to the bottom, media conglomerates compete with one another to shock, violate and offend every standard of civilized society by bringing an ever-more-toxic mix of reckless behavior and criminal cruelty into our homes — every minute of every day of every month of every year.  A child growing up in America witnesses 16,000 murders and 200,000 acts of violence by the time he or she reaches the ripe old age of 18.

Now, I said yesterday and I continue to say it today, video games are not at fault in this and to LaPierre’s credit he doesn’t suggest taking any action beyond public shaming.  But just two points have come up in conversation that deserves a little more illumination.

First, yes the NRA did make a video game.  It’s called NRA Gun Club.  Here’s a picture of it:

From what I have gathered, it was basically a game where you use supposed simulations of authentic licensed firearms and pretend to shoot them at targets.  And when I say targets I mean as in bull’s eyes, paper targets, that sort of thing.  So basically it is a gun range simulator, without all the excitement of really shooting a gun.

So there are two common takeaways from it: 1) it is not violent in the slightest and indeed it is safer than going to a real gun range (because no actual guns are involved, duh) (that’s why it is rated E 10+) and 2) it’s a really, really awful game.  The controls suck, the graphics suck, the gameplay sucks; IGN’s reviewer joked he wanted to shoot the disk when he was done and gave it an abysmal 1.5 out of 10.

I don’t know why they chose to simulate the most cryingly dull part of using guns.  I mean, heck, why not at least turn it into a decent hunting simulator?  Then you can use the guns, track animals and shoot them and still not be glorifying violence against humans.  Or perhaps a simulation of the famous Hogan’s Alley (which has already been the subject of a game) where cutouts of criminals and civilians pop up and you have to decide in a split second whom to shoot or save.  But that is what they chose to make, and it seems to be about as far from Grand Theft Auto as the Lord of the Rings is from the Smurfs.

And certainly it doesn’t make them hypocrites as some slowpokes on the internet have implied, such as this guy:

That awkward moment the #NRA attacks violent video games after releasing "NRA Gun Club" for PlayStation. amazon.com/NRA-Gun-Club-P…
— Overthrow the NRA!!! (@NoWayNRA) December 21, 2012

Look at what LaPierre said, again.  He wasn’t denouncing all games any more than he was denouncing all movies.  He wasn’t blaming the Newtown Massacre on Pong or on The Little Mermaid.  He was blaming it on some games (and movies) that are pretty dang violent.  I mean whatever you feel about violent video games, this NRA Gun Club isn’t one of them.

Now for my money I see no more morality in shooting a fake digital person than shooting a target that looks like a person.  Neither one harms actual people.

By the way, some people decided to write some smart-@$$ reviews over at Amazon.  Most of them were just feeble when they attempted to make jokes, but a few were genuinely funny.  Each paragraph is from a different review:

I bought this game for my ten year old and now he wants a gun. He borrowed mine but apparently this game doesn't actually teach gun handling skills and now our cat is dead. Would not recommend this game.

Played this game for about 3 hours before getting the sudden urge to go Donald Duck hunting. This video game has warped my fragile little mind.

This game made me a miscreant. Now I run around to various schools shooting them up. Before this game, I had no idea guns killed people.

I mean I support the right to bear arms, but “now our cat is dead”?  That’s just funny.

Anyway on another note, you might have been wondering what the hell this Kindergarten Killer game was.  Well, Kotaku is on the case:

Kindergarten Killer was the center of a controversy after a website removed it after a mass shooting in Finland in 2008, six years after it was released. But not much else is known about the gory shooter or Gary Short, the person who allegedly made it.

Kindergarten Killer originally appeared on browser game portal Newgrounds but was pulled after outcry from users of that website. A memorial page still exists where the mechanically rough, cartoon-styled shooter lived and Kindergarten Killer has been reposted on dozens of sites all over the web.

They go on to discuss what the hell he was trying to say or do creating a game like that, including revealing that the guy has a pretty tough view of crime and punishment.  So go over and read the whole thing.

On a similar note, Bethesda Software has famously created open world games where you can theoretically kill almost everyone in the game...  except the children.  This is an editorial supporting that decision.

---------------------------------------

My wife and I have lost our jobs due to the harassment of convicted terrorist Brett Kimberlin, including an attempt to get us killed and to frame me for a crime carrying a sentence of up to ten years.  I know that claim sounds fantastic, but if you read starting here, you will see absolute proof of these claims using documentary and video evidence.  If you would like to help in the fight to hold Mr. Kimberlin accountable, please hit the Blogger’s Defense Team button on the right.  And thank you.

Follow me at Twitter @aaronworthing, mostly for snark and site updates.  And you can purchase my book (or borrow it for free if you have Amazon Prime), Archangel: A Novel of Alternate, Recent History here.  And you can read a little more about my novel, here.

---------------------------------------

Disclaimer:

I have accused some people, particularly Brett Kimberlin, of reprehensible conduct.  In some cases, the conduct is even criminal.  In all cases, the only justice I want is through the appropriate legal process—such as the criminal justice system.  I do not want to see vigilante violence against any person or any threat of such violence.  This kind of conduct is not only morally wrong, but it is counter-productive.

In the particular case of Brett Kimberlin, I do not want you to even contact him.  Do not call him.  Do not write him a letter.  Do not write him an email.  Do not text-message him.  Do not engage in any kind of directed communication.  I say this in part because under Maryland law, that can quickly become harassment and I don’t want that to happen to him.

And for that matter, don’t go on his property.  Don’t sneak around and try to photograph him.  Frankly try not to even be within his field of vision.  Your behavior could quickly cross the line into harassment in that way too (not to mention trespass and other concerns).

And do not contact his organizations, either.  And most of all, leave his family alone.

The only exception to all that is that if you are reporting on this, there is of course nothing wrong with contacting him for things like his official response to any stories you might report.  And even then if he tells you to stop contacting him, obey that request.  That this is a key element in making out a harassment claim under Maryland law—that a person asks you to stop and you refuse.

And let me say something else.  In my heart of hearts, I don’t believe that any person supporting me has done any of the above.  But if any of you have, stop it, and if you haven’t don’t start.