Browse By

The Secret Reason Obama Is Doing A Terrible Job Of Reducing The Threat Of Terrorism

Today, the Pew Research Center released the results of a new poll showing that a majority of the American public – 52% – now believes that the federal government is doing “not too well” or “not well at all” at reducing the threat of terrorism.

What the poll wasn’t designed to tell us is why Americans might believe that the Obama Administration isn’t doing well at reducing the risk of terrorism. The easy presumption to make is that 52 percent of the American people believe that the Obama Administration isn’t doing a good job of reducing the threat of terrorism because the threat of terrorism is too high. Another interpretation is possible, however.

It’s possible that a significant number of people participating in that Pew opinion poll indicated that the government isn’t doing well at reducing the threat of terrorism because they know that the threat of terrorism is already so low that reducing it is almost impossible.

Since 2001, the average annual number of people in the USA killed by Muslim terrorists is TWO. No, not two percent. Just two. On average, only two people in the United States are killed per year by Muslim terrorists. That’s a threat of practically zero.

What on Earth could the Obama Administration possibly do to make the threat of terrorism lower than it already is?

(See Donald Trump, Ted Cruz, Ben Carson, and Marco Rubio for the theocratic police state option.)

shooting guns around children

5 thoughts on “The Secret Reason Obama Is Doing A Terrible Job Of Reducing The Threat Of Terrorism”

  1. John says:

    He can shoot his damn gun off around his kids and whoever else he wants because IT’S HIS RIGHT TO DO SO. Why the hell does it bother you control freeks so much to have decent law abiding citizens having the ability to protect themselves from tyranny of government, and radical Islamist? What’s really going on here? I mean your always minimizing how many people are killed by terrorists every year but when you look at how many Americans own guns then look at the number of shooting deaths per year committed by them, I would say that the American people deserve some credit just as much as the stupid terrorists your always sticking up for! What’s wrong with you?

    1. J Clifford says:

      John, we are not minimizing the risk of terrorism. We are describing it accurately. What looks to you like minimizing is in fact merely the lack of hyperbole of the sort that has become a political tool for leaders who are seeking to institute policies that will strip Americans of their fundamental liberties.

      If you want to go and build a shield over your house to protect it from meteors falling from the sky, it is your right to do so, but it is also a waste of time. Shooting guns off around your children goes into the same category, with the slight difference that you could end up hurting somebody that you love.

      Have some courage, John, and to stop exaggerating what is really a teeny tiny threat, please.

      When you exaggerate the threat posed by terrorists, you are helping in their propaganda campaign. That’s what they want you to do.

    2. Mark says:

      In the US about 30 people are killed daily by guns. Is this an acceptable rate so that you can keep your guns?

      Look at the following page detailing gun death rates by country:

      The list does not include counties with active wars or rebellions. The USA is in good company near the top of the list (Panama, Mexico, Uruguay, Argentina, Montenegro, Philippines). Western European countries, who generally have strong gun control laws, have rates less than one-third of ours. The gun death rate in the UK is only 2% of ours.

      Let’s be honest about a few things. Only the NRA and avid gun enthusiasts are talking about the government taking away all guns from US citizens. Progressives are not suggesting that draconian solution. What we want is enforcement of current laws that require background checks for ALL sales and the enforcement and expanded prohibition of ownership by certain people (convicted felons, mentally disabled, potential terrorists on federal watch lists). We would also like to see harsher penalties for the use of a gun in a crime. The only guns that we would like to see banned are military style assault weapons. There’s no reason why you need to own one of these. Nobody want to confiscate your hunting rifles or your handguns.

      1. John says:

        What the hell is going on with Jamaica?? I thought weed made you peaceful and fun loving? Hey, thanks for the info, very interesting. Look I’m not on here to condemn or judge anybody. I’m just giving my opinion. I respect you for yours, please do the same for me. At the end of the day we are all Americans, and more importantly human beings. I believe the majority of people on the earth are peace loving individuals. There is a small handful of psychopaths out there causing chaos. I agree that we shouldn’t allow a few losers to control the whole bunch. I don’t agree with Islam. I think that belief system is going to end up becoming a big problem if we allow it to grow to large here. It conflicts with American society. That’s all I’m trying to say. You guys seem very well educated so.I.enjoy arguing with you guys to get sharp. Iron sharpens iron as the good book says! Anyway I wish all you guys (even the far lefties) a merry Christmas season! 🙂

  2. Mark says:

    It’s well documented that humans are horrible judges of risk. They overestimate risks for situations in which they have little to no control, but underestimate risk for situations in which they have at least some control.

    For example, people overestimate the risks associated with air travel, terrorism, natural disasters, random shootings, vaccinations, pesticides in foods, etc.

    People underestimate risks associated with tobacco smoking, automobile driving, climate change, pollution, guns in homes, consumption of certain foods (fats, meats, sugars, processed foods), obesity, sedentary lifestyle. Often this is related to the psychological conflict of changing personal behaviors that are necessary to lessen the risk.

    On a side note, J Clifford, it’s interesting that you mention fear of meteors falling from the sky. While I don’t think anyone has ever been killed by a meteor, the risk of death from an asteroid impact is actually fairly high. While it’s a highly unlikely event, if it does happen then the likelihood of death for everyone on the planet approaches 100%. This is an exception to the examples above where our judgment of the risk associated with an event outside of our (current) ability to affect is generally underestimated by people. NASA has struggled to maintain funding for their asteroid survey project because of the general underestimation of the risk associated with asteroid impact.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Psst... what kind of person doesn't support pacifism?

Fight the Republican beast!