Posted on 12/31/2017 7:18:15 AM PST by Morgana
Statistics and math do little to inform people about many aspects of life. Reality in a statistical sense does not represent how caring human beings decide what is important.
Statistically speaking the rate at which police officers lose their lives is lower than other types of work, so if we choose to ignore anything other than math and statistics why is everybody standing along the road showing their respect to the fallen officer? We don't do that when a truck driver or a roofer dies doing his job.
And statistically speaking it really doesn't matter if there is some continuous loss of lives due to terrorism, or violence, or mass shootings. Your risk of actually being a terror victim is lower than your chance of being killed by lightning.
But life isn't just statistics, and it isn't just math. And many other things are more important to our society.
We 'stand along the road' showing respect for fallen servicemen and women too. Army rangers who died in the Osama Bin Laden raid are treated differently than the Bank President who has a heat attack on the job.
Why?
We 'stand along the road side' because these people - police officers, firemen, and our military - have chosen professions where they risk their lives PROTECTING US. They ARE the sheepdogs.
The logger, the roofer, the bank president or truck driver can die on the job and the death is a sad event for the person's loved ones and family. And those in their circle of influence will be effected and suffer a loss. But it's not the same - and YOU free and freeaing - know that...you know the difference.
Of course I do, and that difference is exactly why statistics and math, to use your terminology, don't serve as the sole determinants of why people take the actions they do.
But I also know that there is an equally big difference between a person killed in an interaction with the police (or anybody for that matter) and somebody struck by lightning. And your argument that the risk of death by lightning strike and the risk of death during an interaction with the police are comparable is simply wrong. As was your statistical analysis, since you didn't compare against equivalent risk scenarios.
But none of that matters, since statistical analysis doesn't inform one as to the appropriate actions to take in individual situations. That's my point, and I suspect you know that too.
You're right on the above. I know the difference. That said, I'm thankful you're a conservative.
That's very commendable, but for the most part, cops do not protect you. If they did there would be no victims, crime etc.
“If they did there would be no victims, crime etc. “
I guess you believe we should hire more cops————they can’t be everyplace.
.
Where did you get that?
You’re confusing a policeman with a personal 24 hour a day bodyguard service.
In your own words, you're the one who alleged the police protect you.
It had to be explained to you, if that were the case there would be no crime and no victims. Get it right.
Tell me - if all police were pulled out of Baltimore do you think the crime rate would go up... or down?
And soldiers... if a soldier dies in action does that mean we all have iron clad proof that there will never be another terrorist attack? And if there is does that mean soldiers aren’t ‘protecting’ us?
Seat belts and air bags ‘protect’ me but there’s no cosmic agreement with God that if I use seat belts I’ll never be killed in an accident.
I’ve read your stuff over the years dragnet - you’re a smart person. I don’t get where you’re coming from on this.
I don't think you'd be able to tell the difference. But the fact is, that's not going to happen. No one is walking away from their pensions in Baltimore for starters. Not a realistic scenario.
My point is the huge majority of crimes such as rapes, robberies, murders, assaults, home invasions and mass murders etc, the cops will not be there to protect you.
^THIS^
We'd sure as heck almost all be better off if "Reality in a statistical sense" was at least the #1 component in most of our evaluations. And, that IS the most caring outlook.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9_8nY_LQL3w 0:40
That doesn't mean it is the only component, or can never be overruled by compelling or multiple other components.
As for terrorism, the goal of the terrorists is far, far beyond the people they kill. The victims are only (especially to the terrorists) an almost irrelevant means to an end. And as for myself, MY own present risk, or that of my Mom, or you, or any other individual, of being a "direct" terror victim, has literally nothing to do with how I evaluate the threat from terrorism, or how I think it should be dealt with.
Immediate prayers for those deputies and their families.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.