Part of the story in this wonderful film is that Tony Stark believes he's built a "weapon" so advanced and powerful that world peace will result. The problem is the bad guys already have the technology, so rather than world peace we get an escalation of hostilities. In the movie, the good guys prevail in the end, but that won't last.
It's an apt metaphor for our times, don't you think, from the warring nations and their billion-dollar stealth bombers, to the armed citizen who feel he needs a bit more than a handgun to defend his home.
I'll bet Iron Man always wins.
ReplyDeleteSo in your view only good guys develop weapons and then somehow (most likely the fault of the good guys) bad guys aquire those weapons or technology from the good guys?
ReplyDeleteIf the good guys completely eliminated all of their weapon development would world peace follow?
To bad guys ever develop weapon technology of their own?
I don't know if that's my view exactly, Jim.
ReplyDeleteWhat I believe is it's a mistake most gun owners to think they're better off with a gun in the home. They're worse off. Most of them have no real need for the gun and will never need to use if defensively. But that same gun, over the course of their lifetime can be stolen or misused in some way. For the vast majority of you, this is the case.
The parallel to the movie, although a loose one, I grant you, is the escalation that often happens. A guy decides to get a gun because of all the bad news. He's fear-driven,insecure man, who feels safer, empowered with a nice Glock handgun.
Next thing he reads in the paper about the assault weapons gangs are using nowadays. Although there's practically zero chance that he'll ever have to face one of them,he picks up a pump shotgun, and so on and so on.
How many have you known who have had just such an experience, all the while not ever needing the gun at all. They,and the rest of the world, would have been better off without.