Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Moderate Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: rrufff who wrote (5317)	1/1/2004 5:50:32 PM
From: Dale Baker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 20773

Just one point of view, but I would submit that the difficult choices are not how many freedoms and liberties we give up; the choices are living with risk and occasional tragic events. Government is imperfect and always will be. It can protect against some things but not all. So we accept that people die on roads and in fires and in other horrible accidents that might have been prevented, because you can't stop EVERYTHING. Life goes on. But people are freaking out over a threat - terrorism - which by definition, cannot kill on a truly mass basis. It doesn't happen. Never has. Only genocidal regimes - governments - can begin to put even a small dent in a whole population. Maybe I just don't get it. But killing 17,000 people a year with drunk drivers and spending billions because we're afraid a smaller number might be done in by baddies misses the point somehow. Other societies have lived with dozens of actual terrorist attacks over decades without losing their composure the way we have. And so it goes.... PS For old movie buffs, think about "The Battle of Britain" compared to "1941" heh heh heh....