Somebody shared a view with me the other day and I'd like

File: GhostGun-04[1].jpg (223KB, 2064x1376px) Image search: [Google]

223KB, 2064x1376px

Somebody shared a view with me the other day and I'd like to know what /k/ thinks. I'm paraphrasing here:

The material wealth of all humans on earth has increased so dramatically during the past few hundred years that people now have a higher material surplus than ever before. The advent of technical knowledge combined with this material wealth means that restricting rudimentary mechanical devices is damn near impossible. In the 16th century, the production of firearms and many other armaments was owned and funded almost entirely by state entities. This is partly due to the fact that precision metal production was only affordable in a collective market and partly due to the state's own efforts to monopolize power. However, in the 21st century people can print their own plastic tableware, run a backyard metal forge, or produce their own chemicals. The attempted regulation of weapons production in ancient times is documented in many places. Roman provincial authorities wanted to restrict certain groups like Germans and Jews from having the ability to make edged weapons. Their efforts were frequently foiled as the materials and knowledge to use them were present. In the next hundred years, the ability of states to prevent the building and use of firearms (a rudimentary mechanical device from the industrial revolution) will be reduced dramatically.

Furthermore, firearms are a durable good. One that can last essentially forever with basic maintenance. Firearms are more common among civilian populations, including Europe, than they ever were. Proliferation is taking place whether governments like it or not. The logical conclusion of this is that ALL states will eventually have to concede that firearms are a part of society.