Quote:I get your argument but you're leaving out one glaring difference; guns, cars, airplanes, and red meat are not in active collusion to murder us.

 

 

 

Of course there's a difference, but my point is, how much are we willing to pay for this added safety?  We make cost-benefit comparisons on a whole bunch of stuff every day that could possibly add to our safety, and we make decisions on how much we are willing to pay, in money, in convenience, and in Constitutional rights.  There are 300 million people in the United States, and maybe 10 every year (since 2001) are killed in domestic terrorist attacks.   That is a 1 in 30 million chance that you or your loved ones will be killed by a terrorist.   Are you willing to pay $500?  $1,000?  to reduce those odds?   I'm not. 

 

More Americans are killed by lightning every year than by terrorists.  You are 35,000 times more likely to die of heart disease than by a terrorist attack.  You are 33,000 times more likely to die of cancer.   Would you take the aforementioned $500 or $1,000 per taxpayer and use it to cure cancer?  Wouldn't that be a better use of the money? 

 

 

I just want to know how much any proposed additional safety is going to cost and what it's going to look like. 

---