Is It Wrong to Assassinate the President in a Videogame?

[JWAN]

Its a game, but if it was Obama or Al Sharpton or Oprah there would be blatant racism and it would all be instigated by far right wing terrorists who only eat red meat and read bibles and watch fox news with guns.

Anyone else it would be just fine.
----------------------------------
The differences Ive noticed is that Bush would call it democracy in action. Pelosi would call them names and act like a giant whiny toddler.
----------------------------------

Finally my opinion is that it may be a game but its still not something I would play or own. If it involved killing terrorists I'm OK with that because they make it their goal in life to try and kill me.

If it was Bush while he was still president, and you were an American citizen you'd be looking at Gitmo without a lawyer. Seriously have you seen some of the fucked up reasons (or lack there-of) they put people there for?

I didn't like Bush (hated him), but I'd still feel better if they made it some "faceless" i.e not real president. Just like the iraqi politicians killed in games aren't usually real, or are complete dicks by anyone's standards.

There were people threatening to kill Bush all the time even some Canadians made a movie about it. None of them were sent to Gitmo. All you have to do is LISTEN and you will understand that Bush believed in freedom of speech and he never called the protesters Nazis or a screaming minority like Pelosi or Reed are doing now. Just listen to their interviews and you can learn what kind of people were elected. I am an American citizen look at my profile. Usually carrying a jacket laden with enough plastic explosive and ball bearings to take the constipation out of every camel owned by the local Sheik was a good enough reason. Please tell me where you found this source of information about the lack of information on the detainees at Gitmo, why would we waste our time picking up random people, shipping them off to Gitmo to throw in a cell and continue to waste money on them if we had no evidence in the first place?

 

[ShadowKatt]

Nothing wrong with it at all. In fact the mod in question is actually pretty tasteful in the reasons of why it was made. It's not simply a "rawr we hate America lets kill Americans" thing. They are trying to show people a different point of view for things.

When did it become wrong to assassinate the president in real life? I'm pretty sure the constitution gives us the right to grab a rifle and tear out the entire presidency, cabinet, and congress when we feel they're no longer listening to us. We're not too far from that happening again either.

And before you flame me, just don't. I know there's a passage in the constitution that supports this, I just don't want to find it. I think it was Jefferson.

Uh no that would be treason. You can't just take up arms against the government.

Section 3 - Treason Note

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. No Person shall be convicted of Treason unless on the Testimony of two Witnesses to the same overt Act, or on Confession in open Court.

The Congress shall have power to declare the Punishment of Treason, but no Attainder of Treason shall work Corruption of Blood, or Forfeiture except during the Life of the Person attainted.

This is Section 3 of Article III of the U.S. Constitution. The Constitutional definition of treason is

Treason
treason n the offense of attempting to overthrow the government of one's country or of assisting its enemies in war

So no, you don't have the constitutional right to pick up arms and overthrow the government. In fact Treason was one of the first issues the Continental Congress discussed when forming the original consitution. They sure as hell didn't want people rising up and trying to overthrow them. Especially because at the time they really didn't have the full support of the entire population. And as far as

We're not too far from that happening again either

The +50% approval rate of the current administration begs to differ.

Okay, first off, you're right, Obamas approval ratings are above 50%. He's setting records.
http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx

And secondly, you're right, aside from the second ammendment, there is nothing in the constitution that says you can assassinate the president. It was one of the people that wrote it that said it:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is a natural manure." Thomas Jefferson in a 1787 letter to William S. Smith.

And since he's sitting in an office backed by a one party congress and unelected, presidentially appointed czars to rule over the country without mediation, I'd say that's the closest to a tyrant since the colonists wanted to make Washington the King of the United States of America. And yes, of course this is 'treason'. It was 'treason' when Stalin executed his own people in masses and instituted his gestapo police state.

I believe I said in my original post not to flame me. You chose to ignore it. I'm not stupid and I don't need to be quoted laws and articles. So I'd advise you to just shut up and consider it, or you can PM me and we can duke it out in private.

 

[Lord George]

I'd like to be able to kill Americans more.
But too many games are fine with letting you kill Middle eastenres/Nazi's or Russians but shrink at the idea of shooting Americans.

You know, from a few of your posts, I kind of get a feeling you don't like Americans very much.

On topic: Well, I guess this does fall under free speech, and I can appreciate the intent of showing the hypocrisy of propaganda and warfare. But there is something that makes me uneasy about being an al-Queida killing US soldiers and the president, even if it's Bush, although I guess that's the statement of hypocrisy is about, I guess.

Was it the bit that said "I'd like to kill more Americans" it was wasn't it . But no I've loved all the individual Americans I've met its just the collective mass of America and its government that's annoying.

 

[Bigeyez]

Okay, first off, you're right, Obamas approval ratings are above 50%. He's setting records.
http://www.gallup.com/home.aspx

And secondly, you're right, aside from the second ammendment, there is nothing in the constitution that says you can assassinate the president. It was one of the people that wrote it that said it:

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is a natural manure." Thomas Jefferson in a 1787 letter to William S. Smith.

And since he's sitting in an office backed by a one party congress and unelected, presidentially appointed czars to rule over the country without mediation, I'd say that's the closest to a tyrant since the colonists wanted to make Washington the King of the United States of America. And yes, of course this is 'treason'. It was 'treason' when Stalin executed his own people in masses and instituted his gestapo police state.

I believe I said in my original post not to flame me. You chose to ignore it. I'm not stupid and I don't need to be quoted laws and articles. So I'd advise you to just shut up and consider it, or you can PM me and we can duke it out in private.

First of all proving you wrong isn't flaming you...it's proving you wrong. You stated something that was incorrect and I corrected you by showing you the facts.

Secondly, one party congress? When did the republicans and independents get kicked out of congress? So when Dem is in office with a majority of Dems in congress he's a tyrant but when a Rep is in the same situation he isn't? Oh the hypocrisy.

CZARS? We have had CZARS since the 1940's...let me say that again SINCE THE 1940'S. The most popular or well known Czars were the drug Czars appointed in the 1970's for the "War on Drugs". Oh and you know CZAR isn't even an official rank right? It was invented by the media and the name just stuck. It's just the nickname for the highest ranking official in a certain field, for example Drug Czar, Cyber Security Czar, Counter-Terrorism Czar, etc. Not to mention that presidential appointments have been around since George Washington so I'm not sure what your getting at with the unelected line. Presidential appointments are also lined out in the consitution so again I'm not sure what your trying to get at with that line.

Calling this adminstration the closest thing to tyrany since colonional times is one of the most ridiculous statements I have ever heard. You don't have to like Obama but please, PLEASE, don't make outragous claims like that. Your just as bad as the people who seriously compared Bush to a mentally retarded person.

I also never called you stupid. Again you stated something and I corrected you on it, period.

Edit: And I'm ignoring the Stalin line because I'm hoping and praying your not comparing Obama to Stalin. God, please don't be one of those...

 

[Craig FTW]

It is offensive to Americans that Middle Eastern people would virtually assassinate the President because the generalized 'American' is under the impression that they can dish out anything against anyone, but tehy can't do it back because it's mean/offensive.

It makes me think of the little kids you used to play with that either needed to win the game of tag/it/somethingorother or quit because they are 'unfair'= i.e. have a chance of losing. You know the ones?

No ultimately it isn't offensive.

 

[TwitchierGuitar]

absolutely not. The american public has their own points of view, and if they wanna pop a virtual cap in obama's digital @$$, I say let em'!

 

[Lord Mountbatten Reborn]

Personally I think we should have more games in which we assassinate a President. It just makes you feel bad-ass.

 

[Vordark]

As opposed to killing hordes of other people in video games?

 

[chenry]

No? I suppose as long as it's The President, and not a representation of an actual person. That's kinda dick. And not just the president.

 

[KAPTAINmORGANnWo4life]

What's the big deal? Everyone who's played Destroy All Humans! has already killed the President. And taken his place afterwards.

Ok, I realise that's not as topical and/or controversial as this has the potential to be, especially since DAH was meant to be a comedy game, but I still think frying the President alive with your trusty Zap-O-Matic is worse than shooting him with a sniper rifle. Besides, nobody seems to care about the games where you assassinate Middle Eastern political leaders, so why should killing the President be any different? I would have thought a lot of people would want to play a game where you get to kill Dubya, to be honest.

Maybe it's just me.

And everyone who has played Destroy All Humans is fucking awesome! High-five!



But I think that it's a case of blind American hypocrisy. I have nothing against America, but there was a game that came out a while ago, Ghost Recon 2 I think, where the Canadian Prime Minister is killed in the very beginning and nobody cares. The American President is only kidnapped (and let's be honest, if there's one guy who wouldn't be kidnapped for very long it'd be the President of the U.S.A.), but it's a frickin' tragedy. Nobody in the game cares about the leader of one of the other World Powers being 100% dead.


Another example would be to compare the WWE's Iron Sheik to the recent character Muhammad Hassan (but that's another story).

The main point is that these are works of fiction, and either way people should be more giving with the Americans First Amendment.

 

[klakkat]

Nothing is truly wrong in a video game.

Okay, you probably should not have games with ultra-realistic descriptions on how to maim people and get away with it (which I think we're safe from so long as game designers are lazy about researching criminal investigation methods), but otherwise, all in good fun. After all, only those who are psychotic anyway will be spurred into violence by the act of pushing buttons to outsmart a bunch of computer commands.

 

[j0z]

Its a game, but if it was Obama or Al Sharpton or Oprah there would be blatant racism and it would all be instigated by far right wing terrorists who only eat red meat and read bibles and watch fox news with guns.

Anyone else it would be just fine.
----------------------------------
The differences Ive noticed is that Bush would call it democracy in action. Pelosi would call them names and act like a giant whiny toddler.
----------------------------------

Finally my opinion is that it may be a game but its still not something I would play or own. If it involved killing terrorists I'm OK with that because they make it their goal in life to try and kill me.

I completely agree, if that game had Obama instead of Bush, the far left news media (NBC/CNN/ABC/MSNBC) plus all the other black rights activists/liberals would be up in arms.
I wouldn't play it, but I want TO be able to play it if I wanted to.

 

[Amnestic]

Its a game, but if it was Obama or Al Sharpton or Oprah there would be blatant racism and it would all be instigated by far right wing terrorists who only eat red meat and read bibles and watch fox news with guns.

Anyone else it would be just fine.
----------------------------------
The differences Ive noticed is that Bush would call it democracy in action. Pelosi would call them names and act like a giant whiny toddler.
----------------------------------

Finally my opinion is that it may be a game but its still not something I would play or own. If it involved killing terrorists I'm OK with that because they make it their goal in life to try and kill me.

I completely agree, if that game had Obama instead of Bush, the far left news media (NBC/CNN/ABC/MSNBC) plus all the other black rights activists/liberals would be up in arms.
I wouldn't play it, but I want TO be able to play it if I wanted to.

Free speech should cover every side, nook and cranny of the political spectrum be it far left, far right or upside down topsy turvy with a bag over your head (or if you're upside down, under your head?)

Sad that we've got this far in humanity's existence and we still can't go two feet without shouting RACISM or TERRORISM at the slightest things.

 

[SilentScope001]

"It is indeed wrong for people to play a video game where you can assassinate Iraqi President Saddam Hussian. This game is in poor taste and needs to be recalled. Presidents should not be assassinated."---Batah Party Press Release

 

[JWAN]

"It is indeed wrong for people to play a video game where you can assassinate Iraqi President Saddam Hussian. This game is in poor taste and needs to be recalled. Presidents should not be assassinated."---Batah Party Press Release

I don't think dictators should fall under the category as "president".

 

[JWAN]

Hmmm, if you put Obama in one of these games I'm sure you'd get someone complaining at killing the president and how it was racist. xD

And is it wrong? No...It's just fiction, if Thompson was right, then yes, but the world isn't that stupid and corruptible, is Bush dead? No, just proving it's fine to kill him as much as random US soldier #33...In a video game, of course. >.>

Did you see what happened when this photo was made?
http://images.dailyradar.com/media/uploads/beltway/story_large/2009/08/03/obama.jpg
the media went APE SHIT, people in California wanted to punish the creator to the fullest extent of the law for libel

http://varight.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/08/BushJoker-276x300.jpg

When this came out the year before no one cared in the media

Biased journalism much?

 

[RufusMcLaser]

"...step into the shoes of U.S. soldiers slaughtering Middle Eastern militants without a second thought."
...probably the most offensive thing in the whole article. I don't know Funk in the slightest, yet I already feel contempt for him. This Iraqi game? I could care less.

 

[Amnestic]

"...step into the shoes of U.S. soldiers slaughtering Middle Eastern militants without a second thought."
...probably the most offensive thing in the whole article.

Why is that offensive exactly?

 

[RufusMcLaser]

Why is that offensive exactly?

I parse the wording as implying some very unkind things about the soldiers in question. Maybe it's the choice of words- "slaughtering" implies a disinterested killing of something defenseless. Hardly the case, even in a setting like COD4. "...without a second thought." suggests something equally nasty.
The statement in question could be referring to the fact that we, as players, don't think twice about shooting (or even slaughtering) someone in game. But that's now how it read to me, and I'm perfectly willing to consider the possibility that I'm being oversensitive.