# America's fear of terrorism is mostly irrational xenophobia **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [January 18, 2016, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499 "2016-01-18T14:30:10Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/61 "2016-01-18T22:00:40Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > The poll found 67 per cent of Canadians believe terrorists pretending to be refugees could enter our borders. A separate Ipsos poll conducted in both the United States and the United Kingdom found this number jumps to 81 per cent, fuelling debate in the US to halt refugee resettlement programs entirely. > > But while the majority of Canadians oppose the federal government’s plan, a similar majority (67 per cent) reject the idea of closing the country’s borders entirely, while only 33 per cent agree. In other findings, 75% of Canadians believe there is a real threat of an attack on home soil – up 14 points from a poll in October. In the U.S. the number is up ten points to 91%. “Of the three countries we looked at, by far the most immigrant-friendly is Canada,” said one of the pollsters. Well, I believe that terrorists pretending to be refugees could enter our borders. And so should every American because the FBI etc has said it \*could \*happen. Which is different that “it’s\* likely\* to happen” (which it is not). The difference could be simply how the poll was worded and when it was taken. Canada has\* always\* been more immigrant friendly than the USA, as it doesnt really have a Illegal Immigrant problem. In order to show that America has a undue fear of terrorism, you also have to show where other major nations rank it, and how the poll was conducted. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 10:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/62 "2016-01-18T22:38:21Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Well, I believe that terrorists pretending to be refugees could enter our borders. And so should every American because the FBI etc has said it \*could \*happen. > > Which is different that “it’s\* likely\* to happen” (which it is not). Refugees [have been arrested](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3322649/The-enemy-Nearly-SEVENTY-arrested-America-ISIS-plots-include-refugees-given-safe-haven-turned-terror.html)for aiding ISIS already, so it may not be as unlikely as you surmise. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 10:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/63 "2016-01-18T22:41:23Z")
> [@elucidator](#): > > Your “citation” offers little, if any, support for your position. Indeed, the title of the article explicitly references the lack of reliable numbers. > > Being “How Many Mass Shootings This Year? There’s No Consensus.” > > A brief scanning of the article does not turn up even a reference to _jihadi_ terrorism. Can you point out for us the wording that supports your thesis? Two of the four mas shootings last year were carried out by jihadists, and between the two of them they account for the majority of victims. It’s simple arithmetic. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 10:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/64 "2016-01-18T22:44:13Z")
Are you very fearful of “Jihadi terrorists,” **Hank Beecher**? If you are indeed an example of someone would who answer “very fearful” on that survey, it would be tremendously helpful for us to probe that belief a little. If not, why do you think those people are more fearful than you? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/65 "2016-01-18T22:51:20Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Are you very fearful of “Jihadi terrorists,” **Hank Beecher**? > > If you are indeed an example of someone would who answer “very fearful” on that survey, it would be tremendously helpful for us to probe that belief a little. If not, why do you think those people are more fearful than you? Note the OP\>“\*… 51% of US adults are very or somewhat worried… \*” Perhaps he’s only _somewhat_ worried. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 11:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/66 "2016-01-18T23:10:22Z")
[QUOTE=Richard Parker] The chances are similar to being struck by lightning. [/QUOTE] > [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Ok. Do you believe that contradicts something I said, or reinforces it? > > Are you afraid of “Jihadi terrorists,” **Hank Beecher**? Not \*afraid. \*Nor am I afraid of being hit by lighting. But being hit by lightning is a real threat that, due to various outdoor activities I engage in. I have adjusted my schedules so as to get off of mountain tops before afternoon storms roll in bringing lighting, as I have been instructed to do by more experienced mountaineers. I have had two different jobs in which being struck by lighting was a real occupational hazard which informed workplace decisions. A triathlete died here years ago while training, I always think of her and consider packing it in if I am exposed while running or cycling and hear close thunder. A sports league I am a part of has careful guidelines for when to cancel events due to lightning. Are you trying to tell us that all of this caution is unfounded and due to irrational fear? Should golfers just bring their umbrellas or take a break under the largest tree they can find during lighting storms? Jihadi terrorists also pose a real threat that causes people to alter their behavior. The producers of South Park and Comedy Central have admitted that the threat informed their decision not to air content which satirized Prophet Mo. After the Charlie Hebdo attack last year, most news organizations were reluctant to reproduce the very newsworthy cartoons. Fear of being the next target played a part in these decisions. I am willing to alter my behavior to avoid being struck by lighting. It is after all a force of nature. No Zeus worshipers show up in discussions of how to reduce the chances of being struck by lightning and minimize the threat, or act as apologists for the danger of electricity. No one I know has been labeled a lightningophobe for acknowledging the realities of the situation. Islamists who use violence in an attempt to enforce Islamic codes of conduct which prohibit blasphemy should not be treated as forces of nature, but as the deluded human mortals that they are. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/67 "2016-01-18T23:14:04Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Here’s a [citation](http://www.gallup.com/poll/159584/parents-fear-children-safety-school-rises-slightly.aspx) that would seem to support your position, **Malthus**. It shows less concern about the subset of mass shootings that involve schools, at least, over time. > > Has there indeed been an increase in the frequency of such events? I had thought they were so rare (\<10 per year if defined as a shooting in which more than 3 people die) as to be basically statistical noise. > > And does it follow that more foreign terrorism might lead to less fear of it? That would be a paradoxical result indeed. Seems counter-intuitive, I agree. I just think that rational appreciation of statistical dangers isn’t the way people actually perceive danger. I think the familiar just gets discounted. One simply learns to live with it. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 11:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/68 "2016-01-18T23:14:08Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > Are you very fearful of “Jihadi terrorists,” **Hank Beecher**? > > If you are indeed an example of someone would who answer “very fearful” on that survey, it would be tremendously helpful for us to probe that belief a little. If not, why do you think those people are more fearful than you? They are probably more fearful because they have not figured out how useless and counterproductive fear tends to be in all but the most urgent situations, even dangerous ones. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 11:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/69 "2016-01-18T23:20:08Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Seems counter-intuitive, I agree. > > I just think that rational appreciation of statistical dangers isn’t the way people actually perceive danger. > > I think the familiar just gets discounted. One simply learns to live with it. There is some rationality to this approach. Imagine a new threat emerging that equaled the threat of lighting, but endangered us on a number of sunny days equal to the numbers of days that lightning is currently a threat. Surely it would be reasonable for people to be alarmed at the new restrictions on their activities that they would have to put in place, and question whether or not there was a way to eliminate the threat rather than avoid it. This alarm would be even greater if, unlike lighting, the new hazard could strike anyone, at any place and time, without the warning signs generally accompanying lighting, that we have grown accustomed to. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 11:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/70 "2016-01-18T23:23:59Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Again- Why is a fear of dying a horrible flaming death “irrational”? Just because there’s something else that kills more people? > > are you claiming that in order for a fear to be “rational” you can only fear them in descending order of chance of occurrence? Once again, you’re digressing into an irrelevant sidetrack. First you digressed into some idea that just because there’s a psychological basis for irrationality, that it’s not really irrational. Then you gave up on that and are insisting that fear of terrorism is justified because… well, just because. This particular argument began with your response to [this post](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=19025867&postcount=9). Given the odds, it would indeed be extremely irrational to drive across the country instead of flying because of a belief that it was safer, when it fact it’s really and provably hundreds if not thousands of times more dangerous. It would be, to use a common term, “stupid” to do it for that reason. It wouldn’t be stupid to do it if you found it more enjoyable or more economical, but it sure would be stupid to do it for reasons of “safety”. The point that is being made here is that popular and irrational misconceptions about domestic terrorism are driving government policy out of all proportion to the risks, while in the meantime the need for policies to deal with real risks like gun violence or drunk and careless driving or lack of adequate health care is either being ignored or actively suppressed. Life has risks all over, and we can never mitigate all of them. The rational person deals with risks in at least some vague proportion to their probability of occurence. So, yes, as rational individuals we do prioritize our risks and fears in some rough rational order of probability and act accordingly. The point that **Richard Parker** was making there isn’t really all that hard to understand. Try to keep up. > [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > Two of the four mas shootings last year were carried out by jihadists, and between the two of them they account for the majority of victims. It’s simple arithmetic. Two of the _ **four** _? How many jihadists were involved out of the **330 mass shootings** [that actually occurred last year](http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls)? How many jihadists out of the 2,238 gun violence incidents, 564 deaths, 1,182 injuries, 145 children killed or injured – that occurred **in the first three weeks of 2016 alone**? For all of last year, for the record, it was 52,720 incidents of gun violence resulting in 13,356 deaths, 26,947 injuries, and 3,391 children killed or injured. How many jihadists in that crowd? And that’s just gun violence. Now should we move on to drunk and careless drivers and lack of adequate health care? Is domestic jihadists really the biggest thing you’ve got to worry about? ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [January 18, 2016, 11:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/71 "2016-01-18T23:57:08Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Two of the _ **four** _? How many jihadists were involved out of the **330 mass shootings** [URL=“[Past Summary Ledgers | Gun Violence Archive](http://www.gunviolencearchive.org/past-tolls)”]that actually occurred That number is a result of a new, politically motivated, definitions intended to portray gun violence as an ever increasing threat. Most people are willing to wear a seat belt to increase safety on the roads. Many of us are less willing to abandon the tolerance that has developed in the West towards blasphemy and satire, nor do we welcome the increase in homophobia that our gay friends and family are at risk of being subjected to should Islamists succeed in their attempts to manifest their religion in our midst, especially considering how difficult the battle to marginalize the influence of our native religious fundamentalists has been. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 12:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/72 "2016-01-19T00:06:17Z")
> [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > Are you trying to tell us that all of this caution is unfounded and due to irrational fear? Should golfers just bring their umbrellas or take a break under the largest tree they can find during lighting storms? There is a significant difference between taking reasonable precautions about lightning when you are outdoors in a storm and reporting that you are “very fearful” that terrorists will attack you. Reasonable terrorism precautions might include not traveling to Syria or, if you write a famous cartoon blaspheming Islam, consider private security. > [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > They are probably more fearful because they have not figured out how useless and counterproductive fear tends to be in all but the most urgent situations, even dangerous ones. Interesting. Do you acknowledge that the odds of being victimized by a terror attack are extremely low when compared to many other sources of death, or even to other sources of violent attack? Do you think it’s strange that people report being much more fearful of something that is thousands of times less likely to affect them than something else? > [@Malthus](#): > > I just think that rational appreciation of statistical dangers isn’t the way people actually perceive danger. Of course. That’s inarguable. But acknowledging that fear of terrorism is irrational (for whatever reason, xenophobia or otherwise) seems like a big deal to me since it plays such an outsized role in American politics. If a major American party decided that combating shark attacks by drone striking great whites was going to be a central plank of its platform, I think we would do more than merely acknowledge that humans tend to be irrational about risk. It would be talked about a lot. Which makes me conclude that most people do not agree that fear of terrorism is irrational. ---
**Author:** ![PhillyGuy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/ed655f/32.png) [@PhillyGuy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/PhillyGuy)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/73 "2016-01-19T00:52:21Z")
> [@DrDeth](#): > > Canada has\* always\* been more immigrant friendly than the USA Usually, maybe. Always, no: [None is too many](http://www.edu.gov.mb.ca/k12/cur/socstud/foundation_gr6/blms/6-2-4f.pdf) Expanding on the last link, the democracy least friendly, in the 1930’s, to Jewish immigrants, was Canada. The most generous democracy was the United Kingdom. The United States was in-between. ---
**Author:** ![wolfpup](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wolfpup/32/10618_2.png) [@wolfpup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wolfpup)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 1:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/74 "2016-01-19T01:32:26Z")
> [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > That number is a result of a new, politically motivated, definitions intended to portray gun violence as an ever increasing threat. No, because consistent criteria are used as much as possible between years, so you get a FAIL with regard to your analysis of gun violence. And it doesn’t matter anyway in terms of your anti-Islamist agenda, because the numbers are what they are, and if different criteria greatly increase the number of gun violence incidents under scrutiny, then one should surely see a corresponding number of Muslims involved. Do we? According to your math, “two of the four mass shootings last year were carried out by jihadists, and between the two of them they account for the majority of victims. It’s simple arithmetic.” How does that “math” work out when looking at criteria that identify 330 mass shootings last year? Were 165 of them perpetrated by your Islamist boogeymen? Or were you cherry-picking your stats? Seems like you get a FAIL there, too. ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/75 "2016-01-19T01:47:47Z")
How does the “math” work out when using [this criteria](http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/08/what-is-a-mass-shooting) from those staunch conservatives over at Mother Jones? ---
**Author:** ![running\_coach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/running_coach/32/15836_2.png) [@running\_coach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/running_coach)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 2:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/76 "2016-01-19T02:07:36Z")
> [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > Refugees [have been arrested](http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3322649/The-enemy-Nearly-SEVENTY-arrested-America-ISIS-plots-include-refugees-given-safe-haven-turned-terror.html)for aiding ISIS already, so it may not be as unlikely as you surmise. From your link. > [@](#): > > ## US authorities have charged at least 66 men and women with ISIS-related terror plots on American soil –\*\* including a handful of refugees\*\*, Daily Mail Online can reveal. > > **The threat also comes from within, with American teenagers and Islamic converts** among those seduced by the group’s torrent of chilling online propaganda. > > ## **They include a U.S. Air Force veteran** accused of waging war on the country he once served and a **National Guard soldier** who allegedly plotted to gun down his own colleagues. \*\* Others are seemingly ordinary American citizens\*\*, including a young nurse, a pizza parlor boss and schoolgirls tricked into becoming shrouded ISIS brides. > > ## Six Bosnian immigrants, three from Missouri, two from Illinois and one from New York, were charged in February with **sending money and military equipment** to extremist groups in Syria including ISIS and the Al Qaeda-affiliated Al-Nusra Front. \*\* ‘All six individuals are natives of Bosnia \*\*who immigrated to the United States,’ the US attorney’s office said in a statement announcing the charges. > > In August 2014 Douglas McArthur McCain, 33, a Muslim convert who went to school in Minneapolis, became the\*\* first US citizen\*\* known to have died while fighting for the terror outfit. > > Days later the White House confirmed that a second Minneapolis native-turned ISIS combatant, father-of-nine Abdirahmaan Muhumed, 29, had also been killed. > > ## They include 21-year-old Abdurahman Yasin Daud, who was born at a refugee camp in Kenya and **arrived in the US when he was nine** , according to the Minnesota Star Tribune. > > Air Force veteran Tairod Nathan Webster Pugh is accused of the ultimate act of betrayal - joining the ranks of ISIS to wage war on the country he once served. > > ## Believed to be the first former US serviceman to attempt to join the terror group, Pugh is accused of trying to travel Syria to fight alongside the warped caliphate’s fanatical armies. > > ## White Muslim convert Michael Todd Wolfe yearned to play the martyr and what better place to do it than in the killing fields of Syria Looks like we’re sending more over there than are coming here. Notice there’s not one Syrian refugee in the lot. And I didn’t even go through the whole article. ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/77 "2016-01-19T02:32:25Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > Once again, you’re digressing into an irrelevant sidetrack. First you digressed into some idea that just because there’s a psychological basis for irrationality, that it’s not really irrational. Then you gave up on that and are insisting that fear of terrorism is justified because… well, just because. > For all of last year, for the record, it was 52,720 incidents of gun violence resulting in 13,356 deaths, 26,947 injuries, and 3,391 children killed or injured. How many jihadists in that crowd? And that’s just gun violence. Now should we move on to drunk and careless drivers and lack of adequate health care? Is domestic jihadists really the biggest thing you’ve got to worry about? Fear of terrorism is justified because terrorists \*kill people. \* Why is that so hard to understand? Bad stats. Since most “gun deaths” are suicides. According to the FBI, in 2012, there were 8,855 total firearm-related homicides in the US,…There were 19,392 firearm-related suicides in the U.S… Are you saying that just because there is a lower chance of terrorist violence, we should not be afraid of it all? :rolleyes: You are still evading the question :Why is a fear of dying a horrible flaming death “irrational”? Just because there’s something else that kills more people? ---
**Author:** ![DrDeth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b487fb/32.png) [@DrDeth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrDeth)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 2:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/78 "2016-01-19T02:34:54Z")
> [@Hank\_Beecher](#): > > That number is a result of a new, politically motivated, definitions intended to portray gun violence as an ever increasing threat. Yes, here is a better definition: > **[A Guide to Mass Shootings in America](https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map/)** > > Here is Mother Jones’ groundbreaking database, now documenting 151 public attacks since 1982. Four in 2015, [http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/opinion/how-many-mass-shootings-are-there-really.html?\_r=0](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/04/opinion/how-many-mass-shootings-are-there-really.html?_r=0) More bad stats. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/79 "2016-01-19T02:55:34Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > There is a significant difference between taking reasonable precautions about lightning when you are outdoors in a storm and reporting that you are “very fearful” that terrorists will attack you. Reasonable terrorism precautions might include not traveling to Syria or, if you write a famous cartoon blaspheming Islam, consider private security. That’s not the approach most people take, though. Most either refrain from committing the blasphemy, or simply take the risk. The cost of producing a cartoon is very cheap compared to the cost of pen and paper AND private security. And no longer being able to[travel to Syria and see the Roman arches](http://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/06/world/middleeast/isis-syria-arch-triumph-palmyra.html) is a result of terrorism. It’s reasonable to be fearful of a continuation of an expansion of that phenomenon, no? > [@](#): > > Interesting. Do you acknowledge that the odds of being victimized by a terror attack are extremely low when compared to many other sources of death, or even to other sources of violent attack? Yes, of course, up until this point. > [@](#): > > Do you think it’s strange that people report being much more fearful of something that is thousands of times less likely to affect them than something else? No, it’s not strange, not in this case. And I say this as someone that has long advocated a much more numerate approach to evaluating risk than is usually used. I am the first to tell people that replacing their worn out tires has a much better chance of saving their life than buying a weapon, for example. I agree with an aspect of what you present in the OP. It’s instructive to point out relative risk, and where fear or preventative measures are out of proportion to them. But I would not call America’s fear of terrorism mostly irrational, mostly xenophobic, or strange. Here is why: the difference is how the various threats originate, and how they scale. The threat of terrorism is a result of being targeted based on collective identity, by groups of Homo Sapiens. There is nothing that more deeply triggers a self defense reflex, for good reason. Humans are the ultimate predator, more dangerous than all of the other cunning and overwhelmingly powerful animal predators, especially when in groups bonded by shared ideology and directed at a common enemy. The globe is littered with the mass graves of now-extinct peoples who some group of Men decided no longer deserved to exist. Which leads to how the threat can scale. Humans have a propensity for non-linear and sometimes rapid escalation of violence when racial, ethnic, and/or religious supremacy are contributing factors. Shit can get out of control very rapidly. There are too many examples to even list the massive ones. I was just reading about Sierra Leone. One day you and your neighbor get along OK, with maybe a little ethnic tension on the level of a sports team rivalry, maybe not even that. The next day he is helping the militia, which his cousin a few villages over is a part of, round up you and your family to randomly rape, kidnap, kill, or chop the hands off of everyone. It’s the ultimate tail risk scenario. No people in history have been wiped out entirely by lightning. We have learned the patterns and take reasonable measures against lighting and are in a stable equilibrium with it, barring some unforeseen mega lighting event. Autos are very dangerous, but we manage those risks _ourselves_. Your worn out brake pads are not conspiring to kill you. Danger on the road is a combination of bad luck and bad choices of types which don’t have a history of escalating wildly out of control, taking tens, hundreds, and then thousands of times as many lives as the months pass. Muslims, Sikhs, and Hindus killed a million of each other as they rearranged themselves in the\* last\* greatest ever wave of human migration. We have seen and currently see the escalation of the manifestation of religious supremacy resulting in genocide in Iraq, Syria, and elsewhere. And there is no certainty whatsoever that we have seen the culmination of this horror. Like the Yazidis and Iraqi Christians, Americans are on the list of those who the perpetrators have determined don’t deserve to exist. This current crop of terrorist groups threatening America have gone to great length to demonstrate that they can attack us here. A somewhat cohesive group of violent humans have proven to be able to commit genocide. The same group believes that Americans should be victims of an escalation of this so-far successful campaign. They believe not only that God commands then to do this, but that they can guarantee themselves eternal life by dying to help bring about our demise. And they have show some degree of lethal reach into the homes and workplaces of our neighbors. Millions of people have been killed in rounds of genocide primarily committed by machetes. And the range of weaponry in existence now includes nuclear bombs. The same government who harbored the guy who already planned and executed an attack on NY, killing thousands, has access to them, in fact. The average person has no reliable way to evaluate how secure these weapons are, or how likely they are to be transferred or used. Taken together, plenty sufficient to set off the alarm bells. Again, however, I personally prefer a more numerate approach to evaluating and responding to risks that we collectively face. This doesn’t really lead me to think we should be _less_ concerned with terrorism, really. Just that we should have as much concern for other avoidable tail risk scenarios like extinction due to asteroid strikes, and their prevention. So yeah, we should worry as much as getting a sustainable moon base going as we do fighting terrorism, so we can hangout up there for a century or ten, and then reseed the Earth if we win the great lottery from the sky. Inshallah. ---
**Author:** ![Hank\_Beecher](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hank_beecher/32/7275_2.png) [@Hank\_Beecher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hank_Beecher)\ **Post date:** [January 19, 2016, 3:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499/80 "2016-01-19T03:05:27Z")
> [@wolfpup](#): > > No, because consistent criteria are used as much as possible between years, so you get a FAIL with regard to your analysis of gun violence. And it doesn’t matter anyway in terms of your anti-Islamist agenda, because the numbers are what they are, and if different criteria greatly increase the number of gun violence incidents under scrutiny, then one should surely see a corresponding number of Muslims involved. Do we? > > According to your math, “two of the four mass shootings last year were carried out by jihadists, and between the two of them they account for the majority of victims. It’s simple arithmetic.” > > How does that “math” work out when looking at criteria that identify 330 mass shootings last year? Were 165 of them perpetrated by your Islamist boogeymen? Or were you cherry-picking your stats? Seems like you get a FAIL there, too. The definition I am using is the one that is consistent with past definitions of mass shootings, actually. I don’t know what sort of criteria you are using to determine that I somehow fail something unless more than half of all gun violence, or some sub category of it, is perpetrated by 1% of the population. As it stands, more than half of the small number of murders committed during mass shootings last year were by Jihadist attackers. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/americas-fear-of-terrorism-is-mostly-irrational-xenophobia/743499.md?page=5)