3 ms·
I refuse to accept the "you are more likely to die in a road accident" argument. Simply refuse. Ironically the terrorist attack in Berlin last December was init
by expertentipp 9y ago
I refuse to accept the "you are more likely to die in a road accident" argument. Simply refuse. Ironically the terrorist attack in Berlin last December was initially categorized as a road accident.
- nl 9y agoWhat does refusing to accept the argument mean in this case? The statistics are pretty clear, but presumably you aren't disputing that?
- Bakary 9y agoWhat's bad about that argument? It's just statistics.
- orf 9y agoHow can you "refuse to accept" statistics though? You can "refuse to accept" that it's sunny outside all you want, doesn't stop the sun from shining.
- stevenwoo 9y agoWell if we accept that wikipedia has statistics correct, in the USA in 2006 about 18,000 people were killed as a result of drunk driving accidents. This compares to the approximate 3000 killed in the 2001 terrorists attacks, so we in the USA accept the number of victims of about one 9/11 attack every two months as a necessary risk of driving, if the cause is a drunk driver. In the same article, the USA is noted as having a higher DUI rate than either the UK or Australia in spite of both those countries having a lower legal drinking age and higher consumption of alcohol. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drunk_driving_in_the_United_St...