I see your point but one could argue that someone who creates a weapon is - to some extent - responsible for what happens with it. The big problem I see in the

I see your point but one could argue that someone who creates a weapon is - to some extent - responsible for what happens with it. The big problem I see in the text that OP linked is that the author did not define what he means by good design. If you assume good design must incorporate a moral dimension, then I could easily follow his arguments. Personally, I would think an object could be brilliantly designed but completely immoral or unethical. I mainly used the abundance argument to counter the either naive or malicious statement of "blaming the spoon for being fat". This is being used by gun nuts. It is not a fair comparison.