• Zorque@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think anyone who thinks greater access to tools of death and destruction is a net positive is deluding themselves.

    It may be net neutral, in that giving people weapons to “counter” other weapons negates other weapons… but it doesn’t protect them, it just gives them a chance to hurt others as much as they’re hurt themselves.

    It’s predicated on the idea of mutually assured destruction, but in not so nearly a potent manner as nuclear arms… which, in and of themselves, are not a universally potent enough deterrent to prevent war. Just enough that those weapons themselves aren’t used (more than twice). People still get hurt and killed by guns. And as any defender of gun death statistics will tell you, more often by the people who own them.

    If you consider that a net positive… well, I kind of feel sorry for you.

    • vlad@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      You’re making a lot of baseless assumptions about me. I’m not going to do that in return. I’ve said my piece.