4 ms·
I disagree. Analogous would be how we have very limited regulations on guns, but you can’t just have a tank, fighter jet, or ICBM. Some tools are a lot more po
by mattmaroon 2y ago
I disagree. Analogous would be how we have very limited regulations on guns, but you can’t just have a tank, fighter jet, or ICBM.
Some tools are a lot more powerful than others and we have to take special care with them.
- thrwthsnw 2y agoThere are private citizens that own and operate all of those things.
- staunton 2y agoPray, what private citizens operate ICBMs?
- tick_tock_tick 2y ago> but you can’t just have a tank, fighter jet, or ICBM. ?? You 100% can in the USA it just costs a lot of money.
- oblio 2y agoOperational military ones? Tanks that are basically very dense semis don't really count for this point.
- mattmaroon 2y agoNo he’s just doing an aaaaaactually comment. Wouldn’t be HN if someone didn’t. You cannot own tanks or jets capable of using military ordnance in the US (and I’d wager nearly any country that has anything resembling rule of law). You can own decommissioned ones that are rendered militarily useless.
- oblio 2y ago> Analogous would be how we have very limited regulations on guns This is strictly limited to the US. In most advanced democracies you need a stack of papers to get even a small handgun.
- mattmaroon 2y agoRight but a gun can be had and presumably a nuclear warhead can’t, so even in countries who call the wrong sport “football” the law takes into account that some tools need to be regulated more than others.