I have trouble understanding your logic. A lot of trouble is made to prevent car accidents. We require driving licenses, we develop whole categories of law and do plenty of research to make driving safer.
Prior we had metal detectors for people and hand luggage x-ray. Now we have x-ray backscatter for people, ID and facial photography, and a whole lot of other nonsense. Liquids banned, visitors at the gate not permitted, and the list goes on…
I don’t entirely agree with the actual measures taken purportedly to prevent a recurrence, but it’s hard to argue anything other than significant steps were taken.
Roughly a million people have died in car accidents since. Was there really nothing possible to prevent a fraction of them?
Where’s the new government organization? What new laws have been passed to prevent? What safety features are now required to mitigate such?
Ok, we have backup cameras and the funny headlights that turn off when the turn signal is on. Mission Accomplished?
You're right on licensing but I wonder how it compares to the cost of the TSA?
Otherwise, this is surface-level insanity.
I’ve started downvoting inanity and flagging one-liner, content-less snark, but unless the mods get serious on stuff that hits the front page, I don’t see that trajectory changing.
Because it was a terrorist group killing people to make a point, not somebody who has lost their sanity and, failing to have any other outlets, takes it out on the weak.
How are people THIS dense?
Do you seriously believe that among the thousands of mass shootings to have taken place in America since 9/11, none were the work of sane people trying to make a statement? The shooting death toll of people trying to make a statement since 9/11, exceeds the death toll of 9/11.
Maybe you missed that since it's diluted by all the other shooting death of children and random citizens.
Though it would be unkind to accuse you of being that dense.
Getting more literal with madeup numbers you imagined that present interpretations incompatible with reality doesn't convince anyone else of your view, though I'm sure you find it effective in showing others that, as you said, any education they have to pass on will be reduced to zero when encountering you.
You made an insane statement that only a complete fuckin moron could support, then acted high and mighty when you are the one with the onus of evidence while pretending you aren't. But hey, at least you're clever enough to pretend that I'm goofy because I don't think children are terrorists. Maybe it wasn't an act. Maybe you just are that stupid.
Nobody thinks children are terrorists. If you want to make the claim that they are, prove it. Otherwise, I'm just going to keep calling you a dipshit, dipshit.
So, I've been twisting myself in knots trying to find interpretations of your comment that don't make you look like an unintelligent, bigoted asshole who loves to tell others they're wrong regardless of reality.
Since it's clear from your last comment that any alternate interpretation wouldn't be accurate, that's the end of my replies to you. If you're interested in why you're wrong, feel free to read back on how I talked about mass shootings, which you decided meant a subset of school shootings. Dipshit.