Quote:
Originally Posted by Kizzy
I used the wrong your... the rest is correct  |
It isn't. I don't think I'm any more or less likely to be affected by a terrorist attack than anyone else - I just know that the likelihood of any person, individually, being killed in a terrorist attack is miniscule. The likelihood of SOMEONE being killed is high. And because of that, people go down the same old path of failing to accurately understand risk statistics. I *might* be blown up by a terrorist. It is *very very very very very unlikely*. Therefore, I refuse to change how I live my life, or to live my life in fear, based on a miniscule risk. That is
exactly the purpose of terrorism and the more people play into it, the more terrorism "works", and following that, the more incentive there is to commit acts of terrorism.
The reason I don't see the need to follow hyperbolic anti-terrorism advice or to see terror spooks in every dark corner (i.e. violent story in press = MUST BE TERRORISTSTSTSTSTSTS!!) is really simple. It's the same reason that I don't walk down the street wrapped in a kevlar suit fearing that I might be attacked by a vicious dog. It's the same reason that whilst I wear a helmet for cycling - I don't wear one every time I go out for a walk that will involve crossing a road for fear that I'll be hit by a car.
I *might* be attacked by a vicious dog one day.
I won't wear a kevlar suit or live in fear of vicious dogs.
I *might* be hit by a car one day.
I won't walk around wearing a helmet or live in fear of cars.
I *might* be blown up by terrorists.
I won't fear abandonned plastic bags or live in fear of terrorism.
The only difference is that I'm far MORE likely to be attacked by a dog or hit by a car than I am to be killed as the result of terrorism
.