The response to terrorism

We could save 15% or more on our counter-terrorism simply by not letting pig fuckers into the country.

>>132359638
>responding to terrorism.
The government's primary function is to protect it's people against violence. (by using violence)

>Budget for curing 'lifestyle' diseases
This isn't the government's job at all.

File: mlpol.png (9KB, 239x211px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 239x211px

>>132359638

>preventing diabetes, kidney failure, heart disease, etc.

sending muslims to the bottom of the sea is just preventing a disease

File: 14987191599.jpg (83KB, 610x461px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 610x461px

>>132359638
you are missing the point
the point of terrorism isnt the quantity of the people killed in the attack
but the FEAR and Terror that it causes for everybody else
Otherwise it wouldn't be terrorism it would just be murder

The argument for treating terrorism is kind of like the argument for treating hate-crime differently. It's a crime PLUS a threat of crime to others that impacts individuals and overall social happiness.

You could even say it's similar to when countries go to war. If you attack somebody and kill 100 of their soldiers, they'll go to war with you and 100,000 more could die. Why?

I guess it's to send a message. Because if somebody's threatening sovereignty or openly challenging rule of law and social life of the people, you can't just blow it off.

Take the BLM riots. I don't think anybody got killed in those riots, maybe a few beaten and property destroyed, but that's nothing huge. A year later, murder rates in those cities doubled. That's why these things matter.

>>132359638
Terrorism is only the tip of the iceberg. If you want to save lives, kick the browns back home and use the unspent welfare on medical research.