My husband and I are democrats, and we live in a big city on the left. Given the current political climate in the United States and the deepening of concerns that he will only get worse, my husband wants to buy a firearm for security reasons. To be clear, we have no general security problems. We live in the heart of the city and I feel safe. He is concerned about political or ideologically motivated violence.
A firearm would make my husband feel on our safety, and we would be responsible for responsible firearms. I know that, statistically, having a firearm increases the chances that one of us is injured, and I cannot understand a situation in which we would really need to be armed in our own house.
I think the firearms are bad, and I think the world would be a better place without arms. But I would hate to regret not having a weapon if things become so chaotic that people need to protect themselves. Should I go against my own beliefs due to a possible future threat? – Name selected
Ethics:
In a country with more firearms than people (there were about 393 million firearms in the hands of civilians in 2017, according to Small Arms Survey), it is easy to see why your husband could feel that possessing himself could give him a certain control, a little shield against chaos. But your instinct is solid. As you know, bringing a firearm to our homes does not seem to tip the chances in our favor. Studies show little evidence that firearms protect against injury or losses during a crime. Instead, they increase the risk of prejudice within the household, by accidents, impulsive actions or suicide.
You imagine that your regret was the civic life to untangle, and you had not managed to prepare yourself. Maybe there is a “last of us” script that sparkles in your heads, where the bad guys are traveling a collapsed company, but even then, I doubt that any weapon that your husband will consider will help. In a world where some are armed on your teeth, being armed on your toes seems little to do anything other than degenerate the dangers for you. In addition, it is that you feel safe in your city. Your recognition that firearms cause more harm than good is not naive. The real control lies in the holding of your reasonable beliefs, and not to give way to fear.
Readers respond
The previous question came from a reader who used AI to create photos for its social media accounts. She wrote: “The program asked me to download several photos of myself and select clothes and background clothes. He then spat a number of photos created by AI. I was satisfied with the results. The photos of the AI looked like me, I slightly improved my social media accounts and in the barracks of the barracks, I do not make me the compliments. Disclosure that my head was generated by AI, I do not agree.
In the answer, the ethicist noted: “People generally use their self -representation on social networks – on images as much as in words – to put themselves in a good day. Technology. (Reread the complete question and the answer here.)
⬥
If we recognize This or not, we each contribute to online culture with our individual actions. I find that it is incredibly depressing how normalized retouched images have become as everyday portraits. The use of AI creates unrealistic expectations which are particularly harmful to the self -esteem of people in the younger generations. We can all be positive models for young people with our online presence. – EM
⬥
There is a difference between Photoshop, airbrush and AI, which are all different degrees of alteration. The use of AI creates a new animal. Do the Fakery if you have to, but disclose. The argument that everyone “done” looks like something I tried with my parents decades ago. It didn’t work then, and it doesn’t work now. – Kim
⬥
My other significant is also currently lounging in social networks praise of the new AI created by shots (false body, clothing and background, with a strongly edited face). Respond to comments with “Thank you!” The aggravates, because it is proactive by taking the credit for something you have not done. But I suppose that there is no shame not recognized if people do not say: “Look at these impressive head shots generated by AI!” – Beryl
⬥
There is another ethical component It is necessary to consider: the important costs for the world of the service of AI itself. I will refrain from a recitation of environmental impacts and intellectual property flights inherent in most AI systems today, but note that these damage is generally hidden from the user. The use of one of these services, then the concealment of its use of its peers seems doubly irresponsible. – Ben
⬥
Long before Adobe Photoshop And the AI, the photos were tampered with in the photo studio, retouched in the dark room and they were often modified using soft or wide -angle focus lenses during photography. So this is nothing new. Anyway, I agree with ethics that images that are significantly different from reality can lead to shock in person. – Linda