TED Conversations

Tank General

general, Thinkingtanks.com

This conversation is closed.

Does society need guns for peace? How can humanity transcend violence?

In his TED Talk (attached) Peter Van Uhm argues that "sometimes only the gun can stand between good and evil… The gun may be the most important instrument of peace and stability that we have in this world."

Is his thesis sound? Does society need guns? Can we feasibly rid society of violence? Are guns and other forms of weapons necessary for an orderly society? Given recent outbreaks of violent large scale massacres and terrorists attacks how should governing authorities approach gun and weapon control?


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Nov 1 2012: It is usually said that guns don't kill people, people do.
    So there is a difference between the gun in the hand of a cop and the gun in the hand of a criminally minded fellow; there is a difference between a gun in the hand of someone who got a licensed one for self defense and a gun in the hand of a street thug; now, a licensed gun in the hand of an abusive husband is a wife's nightmare.
    In all, it shows that human relationships are the most important factor to be considered in our quest for a society free of violence. People have been killed with fists, stones, planks, arrows and knives. It's not as if guns are the chief evil whose removal would bring about world peace.
    We should work on building quality human relationships; so that ours would be a society that values the sanctity of human life and where mutual respect and tolerance is encouraged.
    No doubt there would be a few who would choose to be anti-society and would express such in extreme ways; guns in the hands of the right people could be helpful in such situations.
    • thumb
      Nov 2 2012: Also,
      Pursuing INVALID happiness ==> Greed ==> Violence!.
    • thumb
      Nov 4 2012: Thanks much for your great comment. I fully agree with you but with increased technology and globalization dangerous weapons are much easier to access. An argument can be made that the risk that these weapons fall into the wrong hands will continue to increase. Education, stronger human relationships, and the spread of positive culture are key but there will likely always be the small percentage of individuals who just want to see the world burn be it for religion, nationalism, nihilism, or whatever. The more their views fall on the outskirts of popular opinion, the angrier and bolder they may become.

      Technology, globalization, and education are all great but they have risks associated with them that we should be aware of. Is it possible to make the risk of dangerous weapons falling into the wrong hands negligible?
      • thumb
        Nov 7 2012: The risk of weapons falling into wrong hands is not negligible. That is why some weapons are bad news; putting humanity at risk. Some weapons are not worth celebrating (I mean their invention). But since we have them, then we have to try as hard as we can to make sure that they don't fall into the wrong hands.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.