Editorial misses the point

doi:10.1136/bmj.39164.414213.1F

BMJ 2007;334:652 (31 March), doi:10.1136/bmj.39164.414213.1F

Letters

Publisher boycott

Editorial misses the point

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

Clearly there is an unsavoury and unethical aspect to the saleof weapons,¹ but there is a legitimate trade as well. Few woulddoubt that there are benefits from various "peacekeeping" forcesin the world, though obviously there are controversial invasions.Only the most naive would argue that our own democracy was notprotected during the cold war by our weaponry. We can pretendit is not happening and let other countries dominate the armstrade, but we will still buy weapons for our armies. If my sonis to be sent to an area of conflict, I don't want him beingarmed with inferior weaponry because a non-combatant thoughtit unethical to seek the best technology.

Unpalatable as it is, there will always be an arms trade anddissociating ourselves from it will merely remove any possibilityof influencing control. Landmines would not disappear if ReedElsevier stopped organising . . . [Full text of this article]

Laurie R Davis, general practitioner

South Hermitage Surgery, Shrewsbury SY3 7JS

lauriedavis@doctors.org.uk