Philosophy – “Place Laws upon Cameras, if upon Guns” – 4/11/2021

“Is the mind not as, if not more, important than the body? Something as ephemeral as flesh should not compare to the eternity of the mind. If we regulate what restricts the body from its freedom, then we should do the same for the mind.”

– Modern Romanticism

There are the similarities, and then there are the differences between the camera and the gun.

It is the gun that inflicts bodily or physical harm. Even a headshot can be considered physical harm, because it is evident what did the damage. However, something not so revealed as metaphysical damage, which is due unto the irresponsibility of the camera-wielder, is not as evident.

As humans, we are only aware of physical damages being dealt. This is why such regulations go against the gun.

Humans trust what they can see, or can trust of its realness, with their own physical eyes. Physical eyes comprehend physical realness. Then, it will be trust that coincides with the realness of the damage a firearm deals.

Such similarities between the camera and the gun is in the very word “shoot”, while another is in the “flash” to which is visible at nighttime. Were the camera to be taken off of its flash, then it is similar to the gun having a silencer.

The difference between the camera and the gun is by the basic example of a hunter entering the woods, either with a gun in his hand or with a tranquilizer. To kill or to capture the animal, as this could be either or for the hunter’s motive. This is the difference between a gun or a camera in either what kills or captures the animal. It should be obvious that a gun would be the hunter’s motive to kill the animal. Whereas, in comparison to a camera that captures the image, it the hunter’s usage of a tranquilizer that also catches or captures.

To compare the notion of “kill or capture” to perhaps a murderer or a kidnapper, is the same. For a murderer might end the life, rather quickly. However, the kidnapper is more than likely to capture whoever is detained, to prolong the suffering for that individual. And, even a murderer could prolong the suffering for their victim.

It is to state that a camera compares to the prolonged aspect, by which metaphysical damage, or trauma, is dealt upon a person’s mind. Whether deception, manipulation, or distortion of truth comes into the matter, it is a camera or the camera-wielder that does these things. An image can be manipulated. An image can deceive. An image can distort truth, by showing only a singular perspective from where the camera was pointing.

It is by the honesty of death, that a person with a camera forgets the understanding that when something has ended, there will be no more suffering. It is then that to regulate firearms, is to go against honesty. It is to never regulate cameras, that a person never opposes deceit.

If the gun harms the form, though it is the camera that harms the mind by its infliction of trauma and confusion when it comes to the truth, then why not regulate the utility of this latter device in the hands of photographers?

Why not disrupt the entirety of Hollywood, every major media outlet, all freelance photographers, and even the pornography industry?

Why not bring “Justice” for those who are affected by the distortion of truth, in this way?

1 thought on “Philosophy – “Place Laws upon Cameras, if upon Guns” – 4/11/2021”

Leave a Reply