Also the terrorism probability calculation leaves implicit the regulatory regime, that matters a great deal to the conclusion one draws
-
-
-
I could pull out an impressively low prob. of dying in an airplane crash, but such is the case because of the FAA & security protocols
-
Hence, it would deeply stupid to use such a number to argue against the FAA, or security protocols—analogized to CIA/DHS & "vetting"
-
Moreover, to keep that low prob., the regulatory regime quite often has to be adaptive—e.g., guarding against drones & powerful lasers
-
Similarly, the anti-terrorism regulatory regime too must be adaptive—cognizant that terrorism has migrated from states to lone wolves
-
Maintenance & adaptation require time, money, & attention—low probability of terrorism is not an argument against those things.
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
this is real news, DV needs more awareness. Also ur statistically more likely 2 b killed by some1 u know
@nytimes@nytopinion -
Tweet unavailable
-
no it's not. DV is the biggest threat to US women. Period. Stats do matter.
@nytimes@nytopinion - 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
I guess all married men should be deported and marriage should be outlawed.
-
I think all extreme white xtians should be banned until we know what the hell is going on!
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
If u want to go this route u will find that the LGBT community is the most dangerous http://www.advocate.com/crime/2014/09/04/2-studies-prove-domestic-violence-lgbt-issue …pic.twitter.com/PdeL9aGxit
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
"Maridos matam muito + na América do que terroristas jihadistas", diz colunista http://nyti.ms/2kEfs4a Armados, são + perigosos.
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.