"The marginal returns in terms of increased security from most new measures to check travelers eight years after 9/11 are likely to be less than their costs in terms of inconvenience, privacy and the fears of innocent Muslims."
-Former deputy attorney general Philip Heymann on enhanced screening procedures. This is so sensible and correct that it will almost certainly make no difference.
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
7
Quantifying the cost of fear seems very subjective to me.
I agree that fear is impossible to quantify. But there is a very interesting book or article in exploring the question of, how much is too much to spend on fighting terrorism? If you can save x lives at a cost of y dollars, does y have a limit?
Of course, the person writing said book would likely be lynched/branded un-American and/or a terrorist herself, so the question then becomes, at what personal cost is one willing to engage in this exercise?
Have you verified this "innocence"?
Can't we just just vilify everyone equally!
On the positive side, enhanced security measures totally enhance the verisimilitude of TSA Porn.
Average worldwide deaths from terrorism per year from 1968 to April 2007: 396. Most of course are in places known to be "dangerous," and not, say, here in the US. In North America over that period, BUT including
9/11, there were 3765 deaths.
Outside Israel, your lifetime chances of being killed or injured by terrorists range from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in a million (compared to, say, a 1 in 89 lifetime risk of an American dying in a car crash.)
If this weren't a comment on a blog, by god, I could go on, but in short we significantly over-rate terrorism as a threat.
It's the manner of death: more people die from bee stings than shark attacks, but being eaten by a shark is a fuck-ton more terrifying.
Being blown up or horrifically mutilated by a bomb is a whole lot scarier than a car crash.
HG: Yes, and this is a topic I can be really boring on, so watch out!