3 ms·
It's not good to be disablingly fearful of Islamic terrorism, but we do need to be prudent, and proactive in preventing it. What those silly charts get wrong,
by cb18 10y ago
It's not good to be disablingly fearful of Islamic terrorism, but we do need to be prudent, and proactive in preventing it.
What those silly charts get wrong, is that the other 'fearful' things they compare terrorism to are well understood phenomena with linear input, outputs. More vehicles on the road, more traffic casualties, more smoking, more lung cancer, more overeating, more diseases of obesity, etc. etc.
In taking precaution against terrorism we must be aware that there is potential for nonlinear type events. A single event can drastically alter any metrics of average terrorism damage over a given time frame.
A little inconvenience for somebody now or then if it means heading off a potential explosive black swan type event, is just a fact of the modern world as long as there is Islam in the west.
- DanBC 10y ago>A little inconvenience for somebody now or then if it means heading of a potential explosive black swan type event, is just a fact of the modern world as long as there is Islam in the west. But the salami slicing of convenience means hundreds of millions of people have been inconvenienced (by having to remove their shoes) because one guy one time tried to set fire to his plastique explosive footwear. How many human hours have been spent in queues at airports for this?
- cb18 10y agoThat's a good point, the way that the collateral inconvenience is dispensed is obviously far from perfect and definitely needs calibration. What's ironic about the point you raise, is that it stems from one of the main topics of this thread. Our collective refusal to admit that perpetrators of Islamic terrorism are heavily concentrated under a narrow band of characteristics means we all have to endure abject silliness like grannies and children being groped, and having to take off our shoes.
- nxzero 10y agoThere's no nice way to say this, what you're saying is racist; it's sickening that you'd publicly make such statements. What's next, suggesting for everyone's safety people are seperated from other people based on their beliefs or ethnic background?
- cb18 10y agoNo nice way to say it, and no accurate way to say it, because nothing that was said was 'racist.' (whatever that word even means anymore) Notice how my comment laid out a logical sequence of statements that amounted to coherent reasoning. While yours is nothing more than a hostile attack, attempting to a apply a witchhunt type label. What are you trying to contribute to this conversation? Edit: I initially took your comment for sarcasm. I guess it's probably not, but I find it really strange. There isn't even an implied or explicit mention of race in the comment you attacked.
- nxzero 10y agoShould Muslims, the followers of Islam, be treated differently, and if so, why and how?
- cb18 10y agoIn working to prevent Islamic terrorism obviously more attention should be given to muslims than non-muslims. Are there racial restriction on who is allowed to join Islam? Can you explain to me why you took such umbrage to me stating the obvious, which is, that chart is flawed because the calculus around terrorism is different in important ways to the calculus around heart disease and car accidents?
- nxzero 10y agoAt the very least that's illegal and unconstitutional: https://www.aclu.org/cases/raza-v-city-new-york-legal-challenge-nypd-muslim-surveillance-program https://www.aclu.org/cases/raza-v-city-new-york-legal-challe... Still believe you're right, and if so, why?
- cb18 10y agoIt'd be nice if you answered some of my questions as I've done for you. Also, I'll point out that your attitude is unbecoming, and you seem to be interpreting wrongly or to narrowly or in the wrong context the things I've said. I never said the nypd should monitor all muslims indiscriminately.