"It's very plainly about control more than human life." You're asserting that a system that does not exist, and would save human lives if it did exist, could n

"It's very plainly about control more than human life." You're asserting that a system that does not exist, and would save human lives if it did exist, could not exist for that provable, measurable reason, but instead can only exist for the paranoid reason you've asserted with no evidence. Do you see the flaw in that logic?