> On the first point, these people are not numbers. They are human beings. They are someone's father, mother, child or sibling. Right off the bat you lead with

> On the first point, these people are not numbers. They are human beings. They are someone's father, mother, child or sibling. Right off the bat you lead with a red herring appeal to emotion, you've already left the realm of reasoned debate by starting off a logical fallacy. This is the premise of your argument, it is fallacious, you cannot build a rational argument on a fallacious premise. > That's where cold statistics fail us. Nobody should tolerate the idea of people being killed by the hundreds every so often in a theater or futbol field and argue that they are "a fraction of a fraction of percent". Sorry, that's just sick. It's not sick, it's realistic and rational; statistics aren't failing us, they're showing you the truth that your emotions are blinding you to, that this simply isn't a big problem compared to all the other ways people die in far greater numbers. More people die in mass from plane crashes. Here's the CDC's top 10 leading causes of death in the US. Heart disease: 611,105 Cancer: 584,881 Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 149,205 Accidents (unintentional injuries): 130,557 Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,978 Alzheimer's disease: 84,767 Diabetes: 75,578 Influenza and Pneumonia: 56,979 Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 47,112 Intentional self-harm (suicide): 41,149 It is quite clear in context, that terrorism just isn't a real problem, it's not even in an order of magnitude of the realm of a real problem, certainly not one worth destroying liberty for. > The problem with this logic is that automobile accidents are a matter of statistics and probability. There is no intent behind it. That's not a problem with the logic, it's a problem with your emotions caring about intent so much that you ignore how few people are affected. Your reaction is emotional and wildly out of proportion with the size of the problem. Terrorism only changes the world because of the inappropriate reactions of emotionally driven people who happily give up freedoms to power hungry people totally willing to have more control over the populace. The problem isn't terrorism, the problem is your reaction to it, which is the goal of terrorism. By being so emotional, you are quite literally letting the terrorist win as this is their goal. If you want to beat terrorism, stop being terrorized, suppress your emotions, and use reason instead; that's how you beat terrorism. Terrorism is simply crime, you cannot eradicate crime and your attempts to do so make the world worse for those who currently enjoy freedom. It is the actions of those like you, in your attempts to "protect" people, that makes terrorism worse. As long as there are people, there will be terrorism, accept it, stop overreacting to it, and you'll see it's not the big problem your emotions make it out to be.