Quote:
Originally Posted by CorsiHockeyLeague
Well, no, they work as rallying points because our brains are not properly evolved to process meaningful sample sizes as such, so one girl getting shot is much more impactful than 9,000 gun homicides per year. In this case, your argument, which seems pretty practical, is "if a tragedy can spur change for the better, who cares what the underlying reasons are - good results are good results".
Which isn't always true in the case of knee-jerk reactions to statistically irrelevant events like this one, but at least where it is we might as well make the best of it, I guess?
|
Granted. Spectacular examples make for spectacular results.
But accumulation of incidents over time spurs change as well. A basic example of that is when cities fix up road intersections that are known for being dangerous. The back access into Chestermere from Highway 1 being a local example - every time there is an incident there, the calls to fix it grow. As that support grows, the pressure to do something grows. Inevitably, it will be fixed. It is sad that more people will die before it happens, but each new tragedy brings new calls and new pressure to finally make change.