Your argument is basically a straw-man argument/non-argument. No duh that inanimate objects can't be evil. Yet they can be used for evil purposes. And some are more likely to be used for evil purposes than others. How does that really make a difference?

My point is that the focus must be on the operators of such devices, not the devices themselves. For example, the fact that Obama likes to use drones to take out American citizens (and I guess their children and cousins?) suspected of providing material support to terrorists should make us all angry because of the lack of due process, not that a fancy new technology is used.