Hacker News Reader

It seems weird to me to conflate "advocating the legal right to own technology that can be used to do X" with "doing X", even though obviously you can disagree with both.

View on HN

I think it's quite reasonable to make a distinction between Xs that are "kill people" and Xs that are not.

That same argument leads to a ban on cars, or even electricity.

That's true, the phrasing isn't quite what I intended. More accurate would be "whose purpose is" rather than "that can be used for".

Reply on news.ycombinator.com