Is a person who designs a weapon of mass destruction responsible for the harm it causes?

Question

even if he does not participate in using it

Answer 1

There is no constructive use for a weapon of MASS destruction. Scientists should be trying to cure stupidity and sloth in a less indiscriminate manner.

Answer 2

I would think it has to do with intent. Many of the things used to harm people were never intended to be used against people to begin with. Let's take biological warfare for example.....a scientist is trying to come up with a cure for a disease and while testing it, it is found to have significant application in the field of biological warfare. The scientist never meant for it to be used in such a fashion, however, whoever he showed the design to in an effort to see what went wron gin his calcultaions took it and sold the formula to the government. Then the scientist should not be held responsible but the individual who turned it into something it was never originally designed to do is. That is what I mean by intent. For every action there is a reaction and everything is basically going to be used for one purpose or another. It is the individual who makes an item useful or harmful. I use diet coke to remove rust from metal, some people drink it...which is a better purpose?

Answer 3

Weapons of mass destruction usually happen as a side or by-product of peaceful research. Is Henry Ford responsible because people use cars to get away from bank robberies or drive over people when drunk or use them for car bombs? Paul Mauser designed a rifle to be the safest rifle in the world; they have an action that won't blow up in your face. Many of his rifles were and are used for hunting to feed the family and defend the family. Others were used for military purposes. Just about anything can be used peacefully or not peacefully. A knife that cuts up celery and carves a turkey can be used to kill your neighbor. You can use fishing line to fish for food or kill your neighbor. You can write with a pencil or stick it into your neighbor's brain through his eye or ear. I think you might best describe it as a human problem.

Answer 4

That's a complicated question - and not necessarily one of "Religion & Spirituality," if you ask me.

Would you say that the person(s) responsible for inventing the pistol is/are responsible for every homicide involving firearms?

One important point to remember is that weapons of mass destruction so-called aren't even really built to be used. They're provisional threats. The people responsible for inventing the fundamental technology behind WMDs could rationally justify their actions as necessary to the defense of their country, without ever supposing that they'd actually be deployed.

Answer 5

Is a person responsible for the addictions of illegal drugs because they helped make them? Yes. And the answer to your question is also yes. If what you are making is designed to cause harm to anyone, you are just as guilty as the one who used it.

If you are sitting in a car in the drivers seat and your passenger robbs a bank, and you drove off, you are just as guilty as robbing that bank as the robber was. Wrong is wrong no matter which end you participated in it's creating of it.

Answer 6

Difficult question to answer. If a man harnesses fire is he responsible for every house that burns down and every child that dies in a fire started by another human? Should we all blame prometheus? If he made it with the intent to take life then he should be held responsible when it does. If he makes it intending it to be used for mining, then no.

Answer 7

American imperialism (our government/us). while all is asserted and finished, our dependence on oil forces us, like maximum addicts, to do unusual issues to assist our habit. As we've been given a top of in New Orleans, while our commercial complicated includes a halt, chaos takes over. interior the destiny many greater "outstanding wars," humorous deals and peculiar circumstances will occurr, with the intention to not pull our plug in this electric powered based custom. once you think of of conflict over nuclear circumstances, like Korea or Iran, think of of the place the oil is. This facilitates clarify why all the rhetoric is in one area and not yet another. If the Mid-East grew to become into lined with apple orchards might we be so in contact or might we even care? Or might we seek for WMD in yet another oil wealthy area. Our choose (or greed) will kill us all.

Answer 8

There are many people who were involved in creating these weapons who are haunted until the day they die by guilt. SO I would say yes, they FEEL responsible. Although I would say their intentions are the deciding factor.

Answer 9

That's where the Nobel prize came from--when Alfred Nobel made explosives stable enough for use in construction, he realized that he paved the way for big (conventional) bombs, and felt guilty. So he created the prizes for peace and science with the money he made.

Answer 10

Should they have invaded Japan rather than drop the bomb? Would have cost a lot more lives. Hard question one evil begets another.