There must be a distinction between: 1. Actions that are physically violent 2. Actions that cause physical harm, but the action itself is not physically viole

There must be a distinction between: 1. Actions that are physically violent 2. Actions that cause physical harm, but the action itself is not physically violent If 1 and 2 were the same, it would imply that voting for a politician that decides to kill people is just as bad as killing people yourself. The consequences of that wouldn't be good. > You wouldn't say that someone firing a gun didn't commit a physically violent act just because all they did was pull a trigger. If the gun is their property, it's their fault that their property is attacking someone. It's not pulling the trigger that's wrong, its that their property attacked someone else. Same idea applies to killer robots. If the gun is not their property, then it's their fault that they used someone else's property.