The entire purpose of government is to have a monopoly on violence. Democracies give their government the power to decide when and against whom to deploy violence.

There is a real difference between giving a democratic government the tools to kill people vs attempting to kill people yourself. If you don’t believe this then you don’t believe in democracy.

I'm not sure the next batch of schoolgirls getting bombed will particularly care whether the choice was made "democratically" or not.

I also won't particularly care about the distinction when AI is inevitably used to enact violence on the US population.

> There is a real difference between giving a democratic government the tools to kill people vs attempting to kill people yourself. If you don’t believe this then you don’t believe in democracy.

Is this what we just saw with America attacking Iran?

> The entire purpose of government is to have a monopoly on violence.

... Isn't that rather against the spirit of the US' constitution? I can see it being a thought with other nations, but not this particular one.

> A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Which kinda follows the spirit of English Common Law:

> The ... last auxiliary right of the subject ... is that of having arms for their defence, suitable to their condition and degree, and such as are allowed by law. Which is ... declared by ... statute, and is indeed a public allowance, under due restrictions, of the natural right of resistance and self-preservation, when the sanctions of society and laws are found insufficient to restrain the violence of oppression. - Sir William Blackstone

A "monopoly on violence" is exactly the thing our laws are supposed to protect us against. Because if a state has that, then they have a monopoly against all rights, because they alone can employ violence to curb those who do not subscribe to the state's ideology.

I'm pretty much a pacifist. I _like_ Australia's gun laws. But, a government's purpose is to protect their people. They are to be representative - or to be replaced. If they leave no other choice for that, then violence is the only answer left.

This is a distinction without meaning. It makes no moral difference who dispenses justice, if said justice is justified.