Health & Fitness
"Indulging Our Fears" of Terrorism?
In the post 9-11 era, how concerned should we truly be about terrorism?
By even the most conservative estimates, federal, State, and local government components in the United States combine to devote billions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of man-hours each year in what has become known as the nation's "War on Terrorism."
Between the civilian efforts (conducted both domestically and internationally by various intelligence and law enforcement agencies) and the military efforts (conducted in far off places like Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Yemen) a very large percentage of our various annual budgets is consumed by some aspect of anti- and counter-terrorism activities.
From the soldier in the field in Afghanistan, to the CIA and FBI agents monitoring and infiltrating terror cells both internationally and domestically, to the cop on the beat in every large city like Long Beach, it is safe to say that -particularly since September 11, 2001- combating terrorism has become a primary focus of our nation's military and law enforcement efforts.
Find out what's happening in Belmont Shore-Napleswith free, real-time updates from Patch.
How did this great national effort and expenditure evolve? Why are we spending so much time, expense, blood and, lives, and ceding so much of our freedom in the conduct of this war?
Are we truly safer now than we were before the towers fell? I believe we most certainly are, but is the safety we have gained worth the prices we have paid and continue to pay, for it?
Some, like Cato Institute's Ben Friedman and Jim Harper, seem to believe that as bad as our collective losses were on 9-11, the greatest casualty of all -that day and since- may well have been the fear that the attacks generated within us; a fear which they and many others believe is now being used against us, and not so much by the terrorists, but by some of our own elected officials.
In December 2007, Friedman wrote a piece called "The Politics of Chicken Littleism" in which he warns that "it is prudent to prepare for dangers. But it is also prudent to consider the costs of excessive prudence."
Find out what's happening in Belmont Shore-Napleswith free, real-time updates from Patch.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/04/AR2007120401928.html
Later, in 2009, Friedman wrote another piece entitled: "Terrorism Hysteria Watch" in which he gives clear examples of how he feels government officials and some media outlets tend to hype terrorist capability which, in turn, feeds upon and exacerbates our fears in this area.
http://www.cato-at-liberty.org/terrorism-hysteria-watch/
The article that truly caught my attention, though, and which led me to write my own column on this topic, came from Cato's Jim Harper on August 10, 2012 entitled:
"You're Eight Times More Likely to be Killed by a Police Officer than a Terrorist."
Alrighty then! That's a title that will surely catch the eye of all sorts of folks but, perhaps most especially, those pre-disposed to dislike cops. Harper's data comes from a site called "Washington's Blog" posted in June 2011 and entitled "Fear of Terror Makes People Stupid" which, in turn, cited a National Safety Council (NSC) document from 2004.
The risk of trying to use second- or third-hand statistics to support one's political views is that such data often fails to stand up to close scrutiny. Harper's own comment in the article seems to demonstrate his own awareness of this risk:
"I picked up the statistic from a blog post called: “Fear of Terror Makes People Stupid,” which in turn cites the National Safety Council for this and lots of other numbers reflecting likelihoods of dying from various causes. So dispute the number(s) with them, if you care to."
In truth, neither the phrase "police officer" nor the term "terrorist" occurs anywhere in the NSC data. I think Harper, as a journalist, might have taken the couple of moments necessary to determine these facts and, so, perhaps avoid relying upon that particular quote to support his premise.
Despite Harper's clear unwillingness to even attempt to defend the numbers he chose to borrow from somone's blog, he was nonetheless anxious to use them to support his statement that he is "not satisfied that standards of (police) professionalism are up to snuff" and his premise that if we want to be fearful of people that can kill us, we are better served to fear our own police, than we are to fear terrorists.
Such a premise may be a column for another day. For now, what do you think about our anti- and counter-terrorism efforts here at home and around the world?
Do you feel any safer when you are removing your shoes and submitting to pat-downs at Long Beach Airport?
Do you feel more at ease when local opinionists like Greggory Moore or Sander Wolff are detained by deputies or Long Beach Police officers while taking photographs that include public buildings like our Courthouse or critical facilities like an oil refinery in town?
Have we gone too far, spent too much public funding, or eroded to many civil liberties in seeking to protect ourselves from another terrorist attack? What do you think?
I welcome your questions and comments.