Quote:
Originally Posted by Parallex
Of course it is but that's not the point. The point is that it's exceedingly rare for anyone to be in danger due to lightning so how freakishly rare is it to be in danger due to terrorist activity if lightning is the more common COD. It's a comment less about the nature of the subject and more about how big it's "share" of the discussion should be.
I don't actually think we need a national discussion on lightning strikes... I'm just using that as a point of comparison as to why we don't need terrorism to hold outsized prominance (relative to it's actual impact) in the national narrative either.
|
Well the thing with terrorism/extremism, isn't the sheer numbers. The very definition of terrorism is to incite terror. Terror groups like Isis are incredibly adept at recruiting vulnerable people based on twisted ideology. The fear is that these folks will turn into violent people in our own society, which has happened.
Statistically speaking, we aren't at risk of being subject to a terror attack. But when they do happen, it's sucky. So the people want the government to do something to prevent attacks. But what can be done? That's why the discussion is so long. There is no consensus on what the government should do. Furthermore, there is the issue (that some people feel) that there is a moral obligation to help the innocents in regions under oppressive groups like Isis.
There is much to talk about, despite the statistical likelihood of an attack on you or me being basically nil.