It doesn't. I'm not a pacifist. I just note that it doesn't seem to make people more resistent to tyranny.

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Because of game theory, I assume.

threat is a cost to the attacker

if it costs me the risk of getting my head blown off, i may consider it more economic to be peaceful

Yes, I'm saying it works the other way around, too. If my first move is to blow someone's head off, I may consider it more economic to be peaceful.

Guns make both sides more peaceful. 🤷‍♀️

tyranny has been sliding in like a creepy rapist to everyone nonstop everywhere they speak latinic languages for the last 150 years

Yeah. I'm saying that the American arsenals haven't stopped that because using them is too draconian.

It's just something I think about, sometimes.

Arsenals are useful in a violent war, but who wants to start a war?

I have a steaming hot take here:

It hasn’t stopped them because people are weak now. Why take the guns when you can weaken the ones holding them until they’re useless?