Resource handling. Lower-level languages require you to manually release any resource you acquire. Every piece of heap allocated memory needs to be freed. Every file you open needs to be manually closed. Every network connection, mutex, or handle needs to be released. It's feasible to do, since you don't have to worry about exceptions. But it does require an incredible fastidiousness to make sure that you always clean up after yourself.
When you get to the higher level languages, you get garbage collection which means never having to manually release memory again. But everything else is stuck being released manually. You can't do it reliably in regular code, since exceptions get in the way, so they introduce things like finally or using. But again, you're relying on the people using the class to remember to clean up every single time they use it.
In C++ you can rely on stack-unwinding to clean up after you. I haven't checked in a "delete" in over 10 years of C++ coding. Every C resource we use gets a wrapper class that automatically releases it when the object is destroyed. It's really the biggest thing I miss when working in other languages.
Maybe our gadgets need to come with cat cradles.
Professor Norton Nimnul has already beaten you to it.
Fair enough, and judging by some of the other responses, you were justified in your interpretation. I guess I overestimate
This sounds a lot like what he was saying 2500 years ago.
In "the way of truth" (a part of the poem), he explains how reality (coined as "what-is") is one, change is impossible, and existence is timeless, uniform, necessary, and unchanging. In "the way of opinion," he explains the world of appearances, in which one's sensory faculties lead to conceptions which are false and deceitful.
If a right can be forfeit, then it's no longer a right - it's a privilege. In a democracy, the ability to vote has to be one of THE fundamental rights that can never be taken away. Otherwise, you end up with the situation the US currently sees where large chunks of people are disenfranchised, and the government loses its claim to be representative of its citizens.
Whether you firearm ownership is a fundamental right, a secondary right that must yield to other more fundamental rights in a conflict, or a privilege that the government has the ability to revoke, makes a big difference as to whether you feel that any level of gun control is acceptable.
Then why stop at harvesting organs? Why not use the dead as food? Why bother following a person's will, and just let the living do what they want with a person's estate?