Yeah, people dont need guns, countries dont need nukes. The argument is easy
this post was submitted on 17 Feb 2026
1 points (54.5% liked)
General Discussion
14310 readers
5 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy.World General!
This is a community for general discussion where you can get your bearings in the fediverse. Discuss topics & ask questions that don't seem to fit in any other community, or don't have an active community yet.
πͺ About Lemmy World
π§ Finding Communities
Feel free to ask here or over in: !lemmy411@lemmy.ca!
Also keep an eye on:
- !newcommunities@lemmy.world
- !communitypromo@lemmy.ca
- !new_communities@mander.xyz
- !communityspotlight@lemmy.world
- !wowthislemmyexists@lemmy.ca!
For more involved tools to find communities to join: check out Lemmyverse!
π¬ Additional Discussion Focused Communities:
- !actual_discussion@lemmy.ca - Note this is for more serious discussions.
- !casualconversation@lemm.ee - The opposite of the above, for more laidback chat!
- !letstalkaboutgames@feddit.uk - Into video games? Here's a place to discuss them!
- !movies@lemm.ee - Watched a movie and wanna talk to others about it? Here's a place to do so!
- !politicaldiscussion@lemmy.world - Want to talk politics apart from political news? Here's a community for that!
Rules and Policies
Remember, Lemmy World rules also apply here.
0. See: Rules for Users.
- No bigotry: including racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, or xenophobia.
- Be respectful. Everyone should feel welcome here.
- Be thoughtful and helpful: even with βsillyβ questions. The world wonβt be made better by dismissive comments to others on Lemmy.
- Link posts should include some context/opinion in the body text when the title is unaltered, or be titled to encourage discussion.
- Posts concerning other instances' activity/decisions are better suited to !fediverse@lemmy.world or !lemmydrama@lemmy.world communities.
- No Ads/Spamming.
- No NSFW content.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Except that if two people with guns disagree, they kill each other and not the entire world.
Yes, there's definitely a difference in the scale of consequences. Of course, you could go the other way. There's a difference in scale between allowing only knives in a country as opposed to assault rifles.
Many governments have demonstrated that it's possible to provide a reasonable amount of security while also having strict gun control, because the governments have the monopoly over the use of force on their territory. Basically, they can bring a bigger gun to keep the order.
That fundamentally doesn't work in global politics because there is no higher authority that can enforce nuclear weapon control or guarantee the security of a country that doesn't have them. So having having the "biggest gun" yourself is really the only ironclad security guarantee a sovereign country can have.
Consider that many countries want to develop nuclear weapons. They are prevented by pressure (of various sorts) from the world's dominant power. Thus, the world's dominant power acts as the police force.
That kind of policing only works on countries that don't have nuclear weapons, which is exactly what provides the incentive to develop them ... for example if the current "police force" can't really be trusted.
The point is, once a country has it's own nuclear weapons, it's basically "above the law". That simply doesn't work this way on a smaller scale. You privately own a main battle tank and still wouldn't be above the law.
Good point. I still believe many of the arguments still apply. I'm not in any way saying the countries that want them should get them. On the contrary, I'd feel a whole lot better if they were abolished worldwide.
Um, no.