"It doesn't matter anyway... An arms manufacturer. What are the other two?"

"The second is my beverage maker Rosa. Our citizens love the spring water from Aebien. To make transportation easier, Rosa built an aqueduct from the mountains to the capital. A side effect of this was to secure the water supply for the population of the capital."

"I have a feeling where this journey is going."

"I know you do... The last company has to do with the fact that Aebien has long lacked adequate medical administrative bodies and has hardly any medical staff. At the same time, or perhaps because of this, it has become a breeding ground for disease. This year alone there have already been two epidemics. Our state company, Rotkäppchen, has therefore offered its help. First, they opened a branch in Aebien's capital, then bought simple residential buildings across the country and set up clinics in them. As far as possible, patients are treated free of charge. Unfortunately, this is not always possible. It would be too much to bear the full cost of each treatment alone. The only thing we get in return from the government is a small expense allowance, for which Rotkäppchen has also had to take over the missing medical administration since last year. But it's not that bad. For Rotkäppchen, this is necessary public relations work. Unfortunately, as a pharmaceutical company, they are often criticized."

"An arms dealer who plants trees. A water dealer who gives water away. A pharmaceutical giant that treats patients for free. Your public companies are certainly doing a great job in Aebien. It's understandable that the government freely gives them so many authorities."

"Of course it is. In my eyes, it's trade between equal partners. We only mine renewable resources. We don't trade salt for gems. I have no control over what the private sector does in Aebien, or should I forbid them to work abroad?"

"According to our estimates, Rotkäppchen is the most lucrative company in the world. That's not all just through pills. They're constantly traveling to some semi-warm war zone. The criticism you're referring to is the rumors that the aid missions are just a pretext to produce weapons for the governments in the respective areas."

"I must firmly reject this accusation. Rotkäppchen mainly produces medicines and pesticides abroad. Apart from that, you are right. These insinuations are precisely why they make such an effort to improve their reputation. Unfortunately, as it seems with little success so far."

"Perhaps Rotkäppchen should start to realize that the aid missions are having the opposite effect on public perception."

"The management is well aware of that. But Rotkäppchen has a legally prescribed advertising budget, which they prefer to use in this way."

"If they really wanted to improve their reputation, it could be done without cost. They would just have to disclose where the revenue comes from. Personally, I would be interested in that too."

"This has actually been discussed before, but it was rejected by the majority of the workforce."

"And why, may I ask?"

"Rotkäppchen sees it as its duty to supply everyone who needs medicines. It could happen that they have to supply both sides in a war. If they were to disclose this fact, one side might declare an embargo against them or issue an ultimatum to stop supplying the other side. In addition, such a situation could also have political consequences for Baele. For these reasons, the decision was made not to fully disclose the finances."

"You always have an excuse for everything."

"I have to have, but in this case it's simply the truth."

"With Grünwald, the same circumstance doesn't bother you. It's ironic that you're defending your trees on the Aebian border when half the weapons of both sides come from them."

"Grünwald pursues a strict policy of not selling weapons into active war zones and not allowing partners to resell to such areas. However, we firmly believe that the targeted sale of our weapons to trustworthy partners can have a mitigating effect through deterrence in war-threatened areas, which is why we nevertheless supply such areas. To ensure that our partners only purchase our weapons for defense purposes and not as an armament for an attack, Grünwald fully discloses the files of every sale in advance. Everyone knows who buys which weapons. Of course, despite everything, our weapons may occasionally be used in conflicts as a result of theft, corruption or other breaches of contract. Nevertheless, we are certain that a strong army and the possession of modern weapons are essential for maintaining peace."

Unauthorized use: this story is on Amazon without permission from the author. Report any sightings.

"Is that the official statement? Weapons are banned in Rosenberg. If they foster peace, why is that?"

"It's a different scale, of course. Baele is a constitutional state with an executive power that can enforce legislation. Globally, there is no such thing, so one has to resort to other means, such as deterrence. And by the way, weapons are not banned in Rosenberg. That is a gross oversimplification. The possession of a weapon is merely linked to certain conditions that must be fulfilled."

"Wait a minute... It sounds like you're against weapons?" asked Mr. Jens, as if he had heard something he couldn't believe.

"Absolutely not. I'm all for owning and carrying a weapon as long as you meet the minimum legal requirements."

"That's the same thing. You're banned from owning and carrying a weapon unless you have a special state permit."

"If that's the way you want to put it..."

"It honestly surprises me."

"Why does it?"

"Is that a serious question? You are a gun dealer, an ambitious sports shooter with club membership, founder of the Women for Guns Association and owner of a magazine that focuses on guns."

"I am interested in the sport. I enjoy shooting with a gun. I like the weight in my hand and the sound of it firing. I like how the feeling of recoil slowly disappears from my arm after the shot. But most of all, I like the competition. I line it up and all the little parts of the gun all work together to achieve my goal. If it doesn't work, it's my fault. If the gun jams, I should have anticipated it. There is no new attempt. You have to be perfect. How could you not like that? But that doesn't mean I would put my personal passion before the good of the population."

"You personally are not hindered by the ban."

"There have been over 200 assassination attempts on me. If I were an ordinary citizen, I would have a special permit and constant personal protection."

"Is that why you are in favor of the ban, to make the assassinations more difficult?"

"The question implies that you believe that the restriction of weapons ownership effectively prevents such crimes. After all, it's often said that the criminals would manufacture the default quantity themselves at the same cost, quality and quantity and then sell it on every street corner out of a suitcase or something like that."

"It wasn't my intention to imply that. But I can tell you that I at least assume that you assume that."

"I do not. Laws can hardly prevent attempts on my life. It is also against the law to shoot at me. Anyone who wants to assassinate me will try to do so in a public place where he knows I will be, in other words, in a place where, for obvious reasons, no weapons are allowed anyway. Most attacks on me are carried out by people who, even with today's harsh restrictions, can still get hold of a gun very easily. The fact that you insinuate that the general weapon restrictions exist to make it more difficult to assassinate me only tells me that you have not understood the purpose of general weapon restrictions."

"What's their purpose if you know it better?"

"Weapons restrictions are not about professional criminals, but about ordinary citizens. Weapons in the hands of ordinary citizens, especially firearms, have only negative effects. The first problem is that a firearm has no deterrent effect if you don't know about it. A state spies on all its neighbors. Privately, I don't do that. But even if I know about it, it might not stop me from committing a crime. I could look for another victim. I could confront the person with a gun. I could shoot the person. None of that works with a state. A firearm doesn't only have a deterrent effect if you know about it. If someone has a gun, he feels safe, but everyone else that knows about it feels unsafe and will get a gun. That is weapon pressure. So you have armament without real deterrence. Other problems include the obstruction of justice by natural persons, the endangerment of officers due to an increased number of weapons, the lowering of the threshold for violence and thus also the increase in the escalation speed of simple conflicts. There is a big difference between carrying a gun and possibly being able to obtain a gun. In the case of impulse actions, the availability of the means plays a decisive role, but even if a crime is planned, the deaths are rarely. When possession of firearms is allowed in an area, the rates of all types of violent crime are demonstrably higher. For example, the number of robberies has continued to decline with each further restriction of weapons in Rosenberg, after previously remaining at a constant level for decades. For these reasons, I support the restriction of weapons. Weapons do not belong in the hands of untrained people, nor outside of controlled areas. This is not a question of morality. The facts leave no room for interpretation. I cannot afford to deny reality due to my passion in my position, because no matter who is murdered in this country, I am partly responsible for it."

"Nonetheless, It is again ironic that the weapons with which you are shot at come from your own factory."

"Better from my factory than from someone else's. And you really overestimated the threat that firearms pose to me. I am no ordinary leader that could be removed with a simple pistol. I don't even blame the people who hired them. It's only natural to use force to achieve your goals when you've tried everything else. I do it too. Everyone who has power does it. The only ones who abide the law are those who have never been given power."

"I have to strongly disagree with some of these statements." Mr. Jens glanced at his watch in mid-sentence. "But I will overlook it and assume that I just misunderstood you. If the assassinations really posed no threat to you, would you really have a special permit?"

"I don't want to stand in the way of speculations about me. You are welcome to assume that I sometimes fib if I think I might be caught not having done so. If you want a general answer, I have to say that the degree to which I myself feel safe would not play any roll in the assessment of this matter."

.../ End Part