If "technology" is defined (or construed) to more closely follow successful human evolution (which I think is reasonable), then weapons of mass destructive are a differently (albeit obviously related) phenomenon and not "technology."

It depends on how you view the age-old political question of means and ends. If the latter grows out of the former, and if governments, as monopoly-holders on initiation of violence, use force as their means, then naturally we can expect things that come from government to grow toward those ends.