This argument is so bad that I have to wonder if it's an intentional a strawman. (I don't think it deserves to be flagged, however.)

It leads with "AI Will Never Be Ethical or Safe".

The first sentence is "AI will never be *entirely* ethical or safe."

It concludes with "AI is a tool, and it can be used in ethical and unethical, safe and unsafe ways" and compares them to "hardware store clerks".

Hardware stores are *specifically* places where society has had a centuries-long conversation about risk and the products on sale represent a very intentional set of choices. In some parts of the US hardware stores used to sell dynamite, they don't anymore. That's the 'social contract' functioning in daily life.

"AI is like a tool one might buy from the hardware store" is, in most people's minds, the opposite of the opening premise.