this post was submitted on 25 Nov 2025
64 points (97.1% liked)

Asklemmy

53800 readers
622 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy ๐Ÿ”

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[โ€“] Truscape@lemmy.blahaj.zone 0 points 4 months ago* (last edited 4 months ago)

My comment was referring to the fact that it is difficult if not impossible for governments to restrict a civilian's access to effective lethal weapons. Legally, a government does maintain a monopoly on violence, and they can attempt to continue restricting the civilian's access, but the continued development of technology is eroding the barrier of entry for effective weapons.

I understand it's not a department or office lol, what I'm saying is any average joe now has the ability to download a single file off the internet and assemble a functional, reliable firearm with no prior experience. Or manufacture effective fragmentation IEDs. Or 3D print a lethal drone that can be controlled with a phone or a portable game console. With those developments, no population can be fully or effectively disarmed - so governments must accept that the population can be armed regardless of their wishes, and can disrupt the monopoly at any time.