NSC Study Shows You are More Likely to be Killed By a Cop Than a Terrorist

reply to post by Redwookieaz

The point guys is that the government is exploiting fear of terrorism to push an agenda of less rights for the innocent American citizen! And this is absolutely not ok!

You are absolutely correct!

The point of the OP was how far down the list the risk of terrorism actually ranks. We have so many more things to be concerned with, yet the press and the government spending is geared almost exclusively toward terrorism, even though it is one of the most remote risks!

If all that TSA effort went into product safety......
OR if all that security spending went into the electrical grid.....
OR if all that Intelligence gathering went into research projects and innovative technology.....

Where could we be today?

reply to post by getreadyalready


Yes exactly! If the government really cared about the things that are a risk to us they would be spending to stop cancer, police brutality, even lightning strikes more than terrorism! Well, maybe those can be reasoned against but again what they really want is to use terrorism to push a police state down our throats!

reply to post by BigTimeCheater


That war would begin if they tried to take away our guns.
They are way out gunned, out numbered, and surrounded.



Molon Labe

Originally posted by CX
Another thread that is a magnet to the cop haters among us.

How often do you have cops around you on duty? Lots.

How often do you have terrorists around you doing their thing? Hardly ever, in fact maybe never in some of your lifetimes.

Stats very rarely show a true story, but those who hate cops will agree with them anyway.

CX.

edit on 2/11/10 by CX because: (no reason given)

I thought it was painstakingly obvious that the average person comes into more contact with cops than terrorists.

The stats show a true story, I'm not sure why it is hard for people to understand or interpret them. If you pick a US citizen at random and follow them until they die, their death is eight times more likely to be at the hands of the police than a terrorist.

The stats apply to the population as a whole (the average citizen), or a randomly picked member of the population. Each individual would have slightly different probabilities, depending on if they were an overweight, bank robbing, train-riding nicotine addict.

For all the police fan boys, I don't know how much of the population you think is made up of the type of people dragging up the police killing statistic, but you are ignorant if you believe the average law abiding citizen is not far more likely to be killed at the hands of the police than a terrorist. You can interpret that however you like, all the study was meant to show was how unlikely you are to be killed by a terrorist, not an attack on the police. If you interpreted it as an attack on the police you have misunderstood the point of the study. There are other studies highlighting the brutality and corruption of the police you should be attempting to downplay.

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by Killface

Originally posted by MrSpad

Originally posted by sremmos

Originally posted by chrismarco
Not another person who hates the police..come on there are plenty of good patrolmen out their so go easy...as far as the terrorist attacks tell the families of the USS Cole not to worry that terrorist won't harm us. The government may be using the terrorist as excuses but the terrorists are not make believe my friend. Check out some videos on some of the more graphic sites of them doing what they do best...and please do not compare the police to the terrorist..that's disgusting

The numbers aren't lying, it doesn't matter if you are "disgusted," the fact remains you are more likely to die at the hands of a police officer than a terrorist.

Fact.

This is not a fact. The Fact would be certain people who live certain types of life styles would be more likely to be killed by a cop. Criminal actviity and/or heavy use of drugs or alcohol drugs resulting in violent behavior is going to greatly increase your chance of being killed by a cop. Terrorism on the other hand works because its target is random people whom are doing nothing other than going about their everyday life. That creates the fear. So saying he is more likely to die at the hands of cops is a fallacy unless you live a certain life style. Just like if you do not ride trains then your chance of dying in rail accident becomes almost zero. This "study" is just some idiot who took mortality data but, in no way shape or form does it use that data in any logical way. But lets not let common sense get in the way of whatever agenda you want to push.

Does living one lifestyle over another not affect your chances of dying at a terrorist's hands? Me thinks yes, so I am not sure what you are trying to say.

No, it does not. That is what makes terrorism an effective weapon. You could be at the market, at a club, at church, on a plane, at a mall, at work, on a bus etc. All you have to do is look at terrorist targets across the world over the last couple years to see the randomness of targets. The only life style you could live that would decrease your chance at being the victim of a terror attack would be to never leave your home. The randomness of terrorist targets are what creates the terror. That you can not avoid it by doing something is kind of the entire idea of it. Because you never know when or where it will occure. Thus terror.

So you are saying someone who lives a simple lifestyle in a rural area has NO LESS chance of dying from terrorism than people who live the city lifestyle working in downtown areas and/or strategic/iconic targets?

Originally posted by BigTimeCheater
When do we begin the war on cops?

Thats a war thats worth waging.

We don't need a war. We just don't need the police as much as they think we do. The only time I ever notice them is when they have some person pulled over while they are writing out a ticket.
They don't stop crime. They don't solve the crimes that they didn't stop.
I n my opinion a better way would be a service similar to the patrol specials of San Francicso. If you are unsatisfied with them you have the option of firing them.

reply to post by Exuberant1


Nothing you listed kills more than a few hundred people. The age of the nuke is over, also, as it's pretty much impossible to use them on anything except subs. So unless alqueda gets to hire a russian sub captain, terrorism is pretty much a non issue as long as people do their jobs.

Originally posted by Gorman91
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

Nothing you listed kills more than a few hundred people. The age of the nuke is over, also, as it's pretty much impossible to use them on anything except subs. So unless alqueda gets to hire a russian sub captain, terrorism is pretty much a non issue as long as people do their jobs.

I agree that no terrorist organization is going to be using a nuke. Maybe a "dirty bomb" but that is an extremely different animal. If any nuke goes off, you can bet that it was sponsored by some state, possibly even our own state. I still think a Nuke in Detroit would be a big win for the Statists and the economy, and it would serve a lot of purposes. It could be blamed on Iran, and the government would have another decade of free reign without interference by the people that are finally starting to notice how much we gave up after 9/11.

But, I don't understand why you say they are only good on subs? They do have a radioactive signature, and they couldn't just be shipped in through normal means, but I don't think it is impossible to get one into the country. It would just require the right sponsors and enough cash.

reply to post by getreadyalready


ICBMs take time, and it's not likely they'll get off the ground without somebody noticing. Shipping one is pretty lame and impossible. Subs? couple of minutes and they're dead on target. Not going to get stopped.

We gained nothing if 9/11 was planned. This is why I doubt it was. It makes no sense. Let's go spend millions to attack ourselves so that we lose billions economically. I know businesses that are like that. They go bankrupt.

The 1900s are repeating. There will be no war but big wars for the next 40ish years. SO unless a big nation with a serious ability to fight has some beef, there will be no war. Iran, like Iraq, would fall in a matter of days, maybe weeks. And it would not be any benefit at all. Most of the oil from the nations we've invaded goes to China, and that's so that they do not get hungry and go get it themselves. The policy is simple. Feed the dragon, no world war. Iran already has most of its oil going there, so the US has no reason to worry.

reply to post by Anythinggoes

reply to post by Redwookieaz


This is tiresome it is the fact that you are painting all the polic men and women out there as something worse than a terrorist and people are chomping at the bit to agree...Christ there are some good men and women out there that truly believe they are making a difference...do you really think these folks that died in the line of duty were bad people???Link

Maybe I'm just that naive but I'm shocked to see how much hatred there is out there for our law enfocement and our military...maybe I went a bit overboard on my reply but there are some venomous people on this site...

reply to post by chrismarco



This is a conspiracy website, and the police/government/army are as common to conspiracies as you can get. As such, people who use this site are generally, not always, going to fall on the side of hated or at least distrust for law enforcement. I agree with you though, there are a lot of good people out there and to paint them all with the same brush is unfair. It's just a losing battle to get certain people here to agree with you on that.

Originally posted by chrismarco
reply to post by Redwookieaz

 

Maybe I'm just that naive but I'm shocked to see how much hatred there is out there for our law enfocement and our military...maybe I went a bit overboard on my reply but there are some venomous people on this site...

There are many honest people in these professions who believe they are making a positive difference but it is difficult for many of us to sympathize with those who wish to enforce their morals and way of life on others through the use of violence or threat of violence.