We are struggling with two weapons of mass destruction…the
nuclear one and the gun. The former is scary
as hell but has not killed anyone in the past sixty-seven plus years, while the
latter kills tens of thousands every year in the US alone. How to control both
of these is a major challenge facing us.
In an ideal world, there will be no nuclear weapons. All of
the existing stockpiles would be destroyed and the recipe to make them erased.
That will be the safest “steady-state” our civilization can achieve. But that
is an impossible dream to achieve.
At the other extreme is a situation in which there are no
controls and every country that wants one is allowed to have it. Given the
speed with which an unfettered technology can spread these days, every country will have these weapons in no time.
Perversely, that is also a potentially “safe” situation, because the fear of
mutually assured destruction will prevent any country from using these weapons.
The trouble is that it is a very unstable steady state. One flock of geese mistaken for incoming
nuclear missiles, or one deranged head of the state, and the entire world will
be engulfed in unimaginable horrors.
The same applies to guns. A world without guns will be the
safest alternative. As that is not possible, NRA suggests that everyone should
be armed, so that the bad guys with guns will not harm the good guys with guns.
This is their version of peace caused by the fear of mutually assured
destruction. Unfortunately, this suffers from the same issue as is the case
with nukes---one false move or one deranged individual, and what would have
been a heated argument becomes a bloodbath.
We should not allow that and seek alternatives.
In the case of nuclear weapons, there is the non-proliferation
treaty and active involvement of world community to prevent uncontrolled spread
of the dreadful weapon.
Of course, this plan of action prevents the “good” guys
getting these weapons, just as the “bad” guys.
However, this exposure to vulnerability is acceptable by the “good” guys
because it reduces the overall number of weapons in circulation and makes it
awfully hard for the “bad” guys to get their hands on one.
If we accept this plan
for preventing nuclear destruction, we
need to do the same for curbing gun violence. Yes, gun controls will make
it harder for good guys from acquiring guns, just as it does for bad, but it is
a safer alternative then the NRA proposal of going back to the days of “Wild West”.
