3 ms·
Dubious statistic, I assume you're implicitly limiting the time period of consideration and/or you're excluding weaponized rockets aka missiles. Even if you e
by mcpackieh 3y ago
Dubious statistic, I assume you're implicitly limiting the time period of consideration and/or you're excluding weaponized rockets aka missiles. Even if you exclude solid fuel missiles as being too far removed from SpaceX's technology, the liquid fueled V2 missiles killed somewhere between 5000 and 9000 people on the receiving end and it is obvious that liquid fueled rockets can and are weaponized by countries like North Korea. North Korean missiles have not [yet] killed more people than terrorist truck attacks, but if you mean this to suggest that ITAR restrictions on rocket technology are superfluous you're being silly.
- jacquesm 3y agoSure, but trucks are dual use. This is a basic mistake that people that look at the world in conventional ways make all the time: they think that because a truck is meant to be used in one way they can't be used in another. For people that want to kill other people a truck is a weapon. Just like a SpaceX missile is a cargo to orbit tool on one day and a way to deliver a weapon halfway around the planet the next. But we have safeguards in place around SpaceX (at least, that's what it looks like). Trucks are readily accessible.