Spot the fallacies

Buried deep in these arguments are teeny tiny microscopic errors in reasoning. See if you can find them*:

The firebombing of Dresden killed more people than at Hiroshima, so we should give North Korea and ISIS unlimited access to thermonuclear weapons since they are going to find *some* way to kill (rocks, knives, boxcutters) whatever we do.

Nuclear war is a *heart* problem, not a nuke problem. So we should give North Korea and ISIS unlimited access to thermonuclear weapons and *pray* very hard for their conversion to Christian sainthood.

Unless you can absolutely guarantee that there will never be a nuclear strike ever again, the attempt to limit North Korea’s and ISIS’ access to thermonuclear weapons is pointless.

If you try to stop North Korea and ISIS from getting nukes it is only a cover up for a plan to disarm us all and march Americans into concentration camps.

Thermonuclear weapons are morally neutral devices and exert no psychological pressure at all on people or relationships between nations. So giving North Korea and ISIS nuclear weapons will have zero effect on them and will certainly not tempt them to use such weapons. Human beings are totally autonomous moral calculating units immune to temptation and the passion for power or violence afforded by technology. For the same reason, technology like couches, cheetos and televisions do not at all contribute to gluttony or obesity. All technology is morally neutral: like internet porn sites.

It’s silly to say that the first amendment only covers an 18th Century printing press and not all forms of high tech modern media, so why do we limit the second amendment’s definition of “arms” to “guns”? Every American citizen has a right to keep and bear *nuclear* arms. The only defense against a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke. If somebody had had a thermonuclear device the other night in Orlando, they could have stopped that shooter and there would be a lot fewer people crying in Orlando today.

The second amendment was written so that Americans could make war on a tyrannous government, such as Obama. War requires military superiority. You can’t bring a knife to a gunfight. Therefore it follows that Patriot Heroes who want to successfully wage war on our tyrannical government require weapons equal or superior to those of the tyrannical state. Therefore, every American has the right to thermonuclear weapons. Because stopping FutureHitler is far more important than the problem of vigilantes incinerating 33 thousand actual people in a paranoid fever.

My two year old granddaughter is an angel. Why should she be deprived of her sacred second amendment rights just because some other bad toddler nuked his home town? The only defense against a bad toddler with a nuke is a good toddler with a nuke.

A thermonuclear weapon is a tool, as good or bad as the man using it.

*Note: These fallacious arguments apply to other forms of technology of mass slaughter too.