> I don't understand why drones, as a weapon of war, are getting so much attention at the moment compared to other weapons of war. Dead civilians are dead whether they're killed by drones or landmines or cluster bomblets or whatever.
Guns were weapons of war (canons) before they were made portable and more people, including civilians, could get one. Likewise, club a radio controlled quadcopter with, say, an automatic rifle and you've got a home brew drone.
Since without a gun, such a home brew drone is mostly harmless (TM D.Adams), gun control would significantly reduce the risk of such home brew drones. So, yes, drones need to be included in the argument against guns.
Guns were weapons of war (canons) before they were made portable and more people, including civilians, could get one. Likewise, club a radio controlled quadcopter with, say, an automatic rifle and you've got a home brew drone.
Since without a gun, such a home brew drone is mostly harmless (TM D.Adams), gun control would significantly reduce the risk of such home brew drones. So, yes, drones need to be included in the argument against guns.