2006-08-15 15:53:24 · 10 answers · asked by idono 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
The correct quote is "more people die driving & by murder in US than in war". We should be outraged by the crime in US & drunk drivers than in defending freedom during war time.
2006-08-15 16:04:53 · answer #1 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well eventualy terrorism will evolve to a point where they can kill thousands if not millions of people in something like a biohazard attack on a major city, so that is what the government wants to prevent for the long-term outlook in the War on Terror.
But you're right in a sense if you're thinking about the short term. All they can really do is kill 3,000 people as it stands right now and the only time 3,000 people or more died in an attack against America on American soil was Pearl Harbor and 9/11. Otherwise all terrorists have done is a few hundred or so, barely more than the number of people that die from arsenic poisoning every year in the US.
But of course there is the possibility of the synchornized attacks, an example being what would've been carried out just a week ago in Britain. If terrorists do something like that the results would be like a 3rd world war's casualties all packed into one day with 99.9% of the casualties being civilians, whether American or foreign.
But I'm assuming you meant driving as in drunk drivers or things of the sort with your reference to "war against bad drivers". Well law enforcement is obviously trying hard to cut down on those cases but unfortunitly I don't think there will ever be a single day when there are no drunk driving casualties as sad as it may sound. People do dumb things and later come to regret them either when they're in court facing manslaughter charges or in a spiritual world wondering why their life was ended when it was.
2006-08-15 23:07:14 · answer #2 · answered by I want my *old* MTV 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We can, we can make teenagers wait until they are older to drive, we can get drunk drivers and drivers under the influence off the road. We can begin to take away licenses from people who should not be driving---medical problems, etc.
We can lower the speed limit and enforce it. We can make it more expensive to drive and make insurance more expensive for people with bad driving records.
2006-08-15 23:04:11 · answer #3 · answered by starting over 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why would we go to war against bad drivers??
It's not like that way we can take over a country and reap the benefits.
2006-08-15 22:59:19 · answer #4 · answered by kenny_the_bomb 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
But the government can't keep us in line by invoking 'terrorism'
We need a 'foreign threat' to be quiet and give up our $$$ and civil liberties for example Iraq, Iran, communism, Soviet Union, Korean missiles, Cuba, Canadian Bacon etc
2006-08-15 22:58:30 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Ok, now that was a very uneducated question.
Seriously, most people that are bad drivers don't even know they're bad.
Terrorists... well they are bad on purpose.
CLEARLY
2006-08-15 22:59:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Accidents happen, I don't think people set out to cause a car wreck and die.
2006-08-15 23:00:28 · answer #7 · answered by hexa 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well....yes.....I assume bad driving includes:
Driving drunk
Stolen vehicles
Driving without a license
Speeding
Dangerous driving
etc. etc. etc...
....If caught you get fined, car confiscated, driving record, possible imprisonment etc...So what's your point?.........You can't change stupid acts unless you educate stupid people.
2006-08-15 23:27:24 · answer #8 · answered by Todd's 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
This is offensive to people that actually lost people in 9/11!!!
2006-08-15 22:58:59 · answer #9 · answered by ma_zila 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I don't know. Shouldn't we supposed to type questions so they make sense?
2006-08-15 22:58:58 · answer #10 · answered by AC 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋