> I don't understand your point on nuclear proliferation concentrated in the hands of a few states preventing nuclear war or terrorism. Remember, the only two nuclear weapons used in attacks killed a quarter million people, ~90-95% civilians.

Or, another way to put it: an extremely powerful military technology the careless usage of which could destroy the human civilization was only used in one war in history and killed less than a million people, and then it was never used again over the next 80 years. I think this is a success story for humanity, and the NPT was an amazing feat of coordination.

> And like, now look at the status quo of nuclear treaties and agreements and proliferation.

I mean, sure, but giving every state (much less every person) the ability to make nuclear weaponry wouldn't make things any better.

I think the reason we think of this differently is because you believe that states are by default... corrupt, maybe, or unreliable, or evil, while individuals are mostly fine. Whereas I think that most people can't be trusted to make correct decisions on topics like "should we use this dangerous technology", while states at least have some decent track record at this.