“Deception is the only tactic of those who yearn to prolong suffering, over simply ending it.”– Modern Romanticism
The responsibility of a person comes first into question, upon the witnessing of an incident.
For if one saw that their own house was burned down, would they blame the simmering fires, the few trailing sparks, the smoldering coals? If one has been cut by a knife, would they blame its sharpness? Does one ever question the eagle on its ability to fly? In science, does one ever question why a person walks? Is there any reason? One has legs. They were meant for walking.
To question the purpose of the fire, the knife, the wings of an eagle, or the ability to walk by legs, is pointless.
One questions where a person is going with a torch, where a person is going with a knife, where the eagle is flying off to, or where the person is walking. For this defines the essence of responsibility.
When we acknowledge the person, who we see with a gun, as responsible, we simply trust them. Why would we ban the gun, when the responsibility lies upon the person who uses it?
The arsonist who set the fire, is responsible for that. The person who murdered another by drowning them in a bathtub, is responsible for that. Or, the person who committed suicide by jumping off a bridge into the ocean, took full control of that action. Whereby suicide is no method of being responsible, it is to the person who cares for that suicidal someone who may stop them from doing this.
What if we were to ban the camera?
By this, it only means that the mind has been damaged by the camera, as the gun damages the body.
Since its invention by a Frenchman, who by no special mention must be understood that such a device couldn’t be made in Zimbabwe or Mexico, or any other place, it has been a tool for deception’s tricks.
The camera obscura was the first usable model of the camera.
Soon after, Photoshop came around, that furthers the deception of this device. Its lies, which are only guaranteed because of its function in taking a shot of a specific place, make such a capturing needing to be very particular. For of any person who lies, only they know the truth. As in, whatever such a cameraman had taken, might not of been the whole scene.
People will say that the camera has saved lives. So has the gun. It should be instead said that the gun is honest, while the camera is deception.
If there’s full-on trust needed for a person with a gun, is there any needed for a person with a camera? Does “trust” even come into the equation, when one could simply use Photoshop to make real an unreality? Yet, when the gun kills a person, the evidence is plain as day.
Think on an example of a hunter. If the hunter heads into the wilderness, carrying a net in one hand, with a rifle in the other, one device will be used to capture, while the other will be used to kill. Think on that, when one compares the camera to the gun. One prolongs suffering, while the other silences it.
Think on the net that the hunter holds, to capture the deer and keep it in some foreign place. Think on that, when one can compare it to a kidnapper, who abducts a child in the streets.
Think of R. Kelley, the infamous abductor, and then compare him to each and every Journalist who lives.
Cameras should be banned, if the gun is to be banned. Prolong suffering, with a camera, with abduction, with deception, and one is merely a torturer, not ever honest about the idea of ending the pain.