[LeifCarrotson]

Maybe it should have?

It's probably too late now - Pandora's box has been opened - but just in the US, about one school shooting or mass shooting every two days proves that at least one member of the species isn't uniformly ready to have firearms.

Assuming for a moment that sanctioned warfare is justifiable, in peacetime we have at least managed to build a political and military apparatus that has generally kept nuclear, conventional explosive, and chemical/biological weapons out of the control of the subset of the species who are vulnerable to this sort of psychotic breakdown.

Syncophantic AI chat bots are already making this weakness worse.

[spiralcoaster]

Feel free to go back to a world in which human beings stopped developing technology at the sharpened stick. It's pretty easy to buy a large, remote plot of land in many states in the US, so you can live in your technology-free paradise.

Just to clarify, this statement will always be true: "N members of our species aren't ready for technology Y". And N will always be greater than or equal to 1.

[AlecSchueler]

So I can enjoy a completely isolated life until the bomb takes me out, and the only interaction I need to have with anyone is when it's time to pay my taxes? I'm not sure that's a serious alternative at all

[soraminazuki]

Even ignoring the mass shootings, the fact that firearms are used at all against fellow human beings indicates that we aren't ready for it.

[jstummbillig]

Why would we want to be stuck in the world pre sharp sticks? I am okay with thought experiments, but it's hard to imagine the mental gymnastics required for that to become even mildly interesting.

[mionhe]

>[...]about one school shooting or mass shooting every two days proves that at least one member of the species isn't uniformly ready to have firearms.

I often see comments online descending into the argument about firearms. Besides the potential number of people hurt/killed, what's the difference between someone walking into a school with a gun versus one walking into a school with a knife? Or a sharpened spear (from other comments in the thread)?

In many ways, I think a knife could be worse. You can hurt/kill a lot of people very quietly with a knife, leaving most of the school none the wiser. They're easier to conceal, easier to make from non-metallic substances (and thus can be easier to sneak past metal detectors.) I imagine people would be a lot less concerned about a knife collection than a gun collection, etc etc.

I don't disagree with your comment about someone not being ready for a firearm. However, I think that the argument that we're not recognizing the dangers of "gun free" zones as potential targets (by at least one statistic, 94% of mass shootings in the US happen in a "gun free" zone) and mitigating that danger in a meaningful way actually supports your point about syncophantic AIs better.

[const_cast]

> Besides the potential number of people hurt/killed, what's the difference between someone walking into a school with a gun versus one walking into a school with a knife?

Yeah, and what's the difference between cutting a slice of bread and dropping an atomic bomb on Hiroshima?

Scale, it's scale. Scale matters, you can't hand wave it. If you try to, then you go to some very dumb, obviously wrong conclusions.

Everything, and I do mean everything, can be used for evil. But we don't allow everything, and for good reason.

[AlecSchueler]

Maybe look at the mass killings in schools in countries where guns aren't readily available? The issue is almost non existent.

[fwip]

In general, mass stabbings have fewer victims, and a higher percentage of those victims are injured rather than killed.

[barbazoo]

Well that just doesn't make sense because I was told that guns don't kill people, people do. So why would they only injure, not kill, someone just because they only had a knife? /s