If we have a President who at his press conference said, regarding the 2022 elections, "It all depends on whether or not we're able to make the case to the American people that some of this is being set up to try to alter the outcome of the election," he said, referring to stricter voting rules enacted by Republican state houses," is he using words as weapons for his purpose? According to BBC, "…In his second ever solo White House press conference on Wednesday, Mr Biden was asked if November's congressional elections would be legitimate if he could not pass his voting plans. And as well, Mr. Biden said, "I'm not saying it's going to be legit," which BBC said, he did, "...when asked about the possibility of fraud in the forthcoming elections that will decide the balance of power in Washington."
Is a word like "legit" short for "legitimate" an example of a "weaponized" word?
As for forbidding "hate" speech, or what some say is hate speech, forbidding "dissent" of government mandates and calling someone "racist" are all prime examples of using "words" as "weapons"?
And what are the "weapons?"
The "weapons" are "penalties" imposed by those in power in government who make the "rules." Are we entering an era of certain groups making the "rules" for others who are not in their "group"? When describing "protected" characteristics, such as the color of skin and whether they are LGBTQ are these "protected" characteristics used as "weapons" too? Can "religious affiliation" be weaponized words, too?
As evident by the definition of the word "legitimate," those who make the "rules" can choose a "trigger word" to be used as a "weapon," and that's what elections are for.