Should Nuclear Weapons and other Weapons be Illegal?

Post Reply New Topic

Should there be restrictions on the types of powerful firearms available to the public? Should there be magazine restrictions? Can we extend this concept to more powerful devices such as surface-to-air missiles, nuclear weapons, mortars, IEDs, etc? How do we decide what to regulate? Should the government be allowed to regulate certain weapons? Is it in a moral position to do so and is it for society's best interest? Could we have peace, an equilibrium where nuclear weapons are allowed? I'm interested in hearing from those who think nuclear weapons should be unregulated. Could the Middle East benefit from the unfettered access of nukes? Surely it would alter the dynamics of the region. It would allow weaker actors more clout in the region and weaken the West's position.

I call the RYNO

No.

No what?

1) Yes, most people should struggle to buy a firearm of any description. BB guns and the like can be used for recreational purposes as those are less likely to cause lethal harm to people.
2) Probably
3) Quite obviously, private individuals shouldn't be able to buy these things and to be honest most governments have no need for them.
4) Regulate as much as possible- it is not practical to regulate knives, but it is for guns.
5) Yes, they should remain able to do this.
6) Yes.
7) We do (though not everyone is allowed nukes)
No, more choice of a nut doing something crazy, or nukes getting in the hands of terrorists. It wouldn't weaken the position of the West as currently any nuclear strike by America (the only country where such a thing looks remotely possible) would see retaliation strikes from every other nuclear-armed nation (except possibly North Korea which probably doesn't have the capacity to nuke America), which makes a strike on Iran totally infeasible by a sane man's standard.

People buy into propaganda so bad. They've made people fear their neighbors and surrender their liberty for the sake of 'security'.

Do you really trust your government to have a monopoly on force? It's not like there has never been bad cops or murderous governments.

Only a nation insane enough not to care about it's own complete destruction would ever use a nuke like North Korea
for example. If they ever fired one at the US or other country the retaliation would turn them in to a crater!
MAD has always ensured that any sane country knows nobody can win such a war.

But what about the individual level? What if anyone could have a nuke?

Then earth would be just another space rock

Maybe not... How much nuclear material is left? It costs a lot of money to build a bomb and also a lot of knowledge. Maybe only large institutions could get their hands on them. As a Libertarian, I want less regulation. Would we be better off from less regulation? Would the world be safer? If some countries had nukes, then they would be better able to defend themselves from the tyrants of the West, resulting in less war and casualty. Obviously this is bad for the tyrants.

No. It's not like the people who own them now are any less prone to misuse than anyone else; I have no idea why people trust the government with such but not the common person (considering that the government is made from the common person and the countless examples of governments going crazy, it's even more hilarious).

It's not like any human could afford a nuclear device anyway (barring the outliers). Sure, you might have an evil Bill Gates on the loose, and he decides to nuke Apple headquarters, but he could probably get one through illegal means anyway.

(No, I'm not a fan of nuclear devices, but I know logic when I see it.)

Having sufficient nuclear weapons to destroy the world is the only thing that keeps the U.S. from being attacked by more populous antagonists. In particular the Muslim domains and the Chinese.

While we may not win such a war we are guaranteed not to be the only or main losers.

The idea is not to win, but to avoid being the Loser.

ruveyn

They should be illegal worldwide. No non-proliferation treaties, and instead of arms reductions, how about arms cessations?

Since people know how to build them, no set of laws will prevent their existence or preclude their use.

Forget law. Law only works for law abiding people.

ruveyn