Thursday, February 22, 2018

What is the most dangerous place in the world today?

Folks I had a senior moment and mixed up topics so this week Ramana and I wrote on different topics. My apologies to readers and my friend Ramana.

What or where is the most dangerous place in the world today? So many choices.  Dangerous to me personally? To my family and friends? To my country? To the world? One could justify a book on each of those but alas, this is a simple weekly blog so all y'all are safe. This will be short and sweet.

The knee jerk reaction would be to say a US public school is the most dangerous place. Given recent events here that would be a reasonable response. We seem to be reliving the halcyon days of the wild, wild west. Everyone needs a gun to protect themselves, their loved ones and their property. At least that is what we are told by the vocal, overly verbose 2nd amendment supporters backed by the NRA.

However, in the grand scheme of things, school mass shootings account for a smaller percentage  of deaths caused by guns (as the tool -people pull the triggers) than you might imagine  because the mainstream media covers them differently. Why is that?  Could it be simply because the preponderance of victims are white?  Or the fact that schools targeted were not in urban areas? Check the list here.  Make up your  own mind. Mass shootings in general are responsible for fewer deaths than you might imagine.

Statistically speaking, you are almost 700 times more likely to die in a car accident than from a gun discharge. Injury Facts Chart (from Wikipedia)

I should state for the record that I am not a gun owner at the moment, (I have been in the past and likely will be again) nor do I come from a hunting background. That, however, is due to the death of my grandfather when I was three as we lived with my grandparents and my Daddy Harry as I called him was an avid hunter. His best hunting buddy was a Native American Chief from Taos, NM. I know many gun owners and NRA members and I can unequivocally say they propagate gun safety every day and care more about our environment than anyone I know. That does  not make me an NRA supporter, by any stretch of the imagination.

What is my point, you might ask? Simply that in spite of the press, the USA is still  a safe place in which to live and to  visit. Yes we have a gun culture that is not likely to change -you see we, lived and loved that cowboy/wild west life popularized in books, movies and the like.

The world in general is a more dangerous place than  it has ever been so increased vigilance is required nearly everywhere. Radical Islam has hijacked the faith of millions and declared war on all things western. Based upon news reports, were I female I do not think I wouldn't feel safe in many parts of India. I'd love to visit Israel though - and that's one place where we can learn much about life under less than ideal circumstances.

Back to the original question - what is the most dangerous place? Wherever you are. I suspect there are statistics somewhere that say you are more likely to be grabbed by a flying purple eater in place X than anywhere else so everywhere is dangerous, clearly some more so than others.. Be smart. Do your homework, due diligence or whatever you care to call it. Pay attention to your surroundings and enjoy yourself. I know of no flying purple eater sightings in a long while. Live your life to its fullest as I suspect you get only one.

That's my quick take on the topic I proposed. Be sure to see what Ramana has to say here.


8 comments:

  1. I found this absolutely fascinating Shackman. I read the entire list of school shootings from the very beginning.
    it put a whole new light on the situation for me. as the wise man said "nothing new under the sun."
    the things that struck me through the whole ages were two things (NOT mental illness) but willful intolerance of others and the strong impulse of revenge.
    and revenge seems to me to be the sole reason that the middle east will be warring from now on. that and real estate. anything but what it's touted to be which is religion.
    the marine says that mankind has had a defective gene from the very beginning. and i think he's probably right!


    ReplyDelete
  2. Is the Marine religious Tammy? The religious would certainly agree with his take on genetics. Funny how god created such genetically flawed folks. Ahem

    ReplyDelete
  3. HA! nope. he is not religious at all. he thinks that the multitude of all the warring religious beliefs (especially the Christians) are what have brought about most of the misery of mankind and still are. that and the elitist belief that all of them feel that 'theirs' is the only truth! based on books written by men.
    he is a retired environmental scientist. he dealt mostly with water and plants. isn't that pathetic? I should know by now exactly what he did. I know he also took special courses in HAZMAT too. did i even write that correctly!? but to tell you the truth when he talks any of it even now he loses me so quickly I just nod and hope I understand enough not to respond like a 5 year old. LOL!
    he admits that the intelligence in nature (on the cellular level) is such that there has to be an amazing source or 'something' that created life here but that's as far as he goes. he doesn't buy into the sects that claim theirs is the only answer to it all.

    ReplyDelete
  4. To start off let me assert that for Muslims living in a non Muslim majority country, the safest place today in the world is India despite the odd report of some lynching somewhere which eventually turns out to be non religious in nature. The same goes for other religious minorities. Recently however, evangelicals have started to feel the heat from Hindu backlash and also drying up of funding from overseas which is now officiallyregulated.

    Having said that, there is also no denying that there is a lot of feeling of insecurity among the minorities in India due to the recent resurgence of Hindu nationalism. What is galling for them is that they have become unimportant in the electoral process due to the consolidation of Hindu votes which used to be fractured among many local political parties based mostly on caste considerations.

    On the other hand, if you ask them as I often do whenever I get to meet say a Muslim, they inevitably point out to the region covered by Turkey, Iran, Iraq Syria, then Yemen and to our North, Afghanistan. They also point out to Myanmar and Sri Lanka where the Muslims are under attack.

    Having given a broad picture, let me also add that there is no place on earth today for anyone that can be completely called safe. Quite where and when terror will strike is anybody's guess.

    ReplyDelete
  5. so true Rummy about no safe place really.
    who would have thought that a federal building in the middle of the country that is the 'fly over' zone would be bombed by a US militant so many years ago?
    it's interesting to me that "due to the recent resurgence of Hindu nationalism" ...
    and isn't that really what Brexit is about? an overall sense of nationalism?
    and it's definitely what Trump's administration is about.
    Nationalism on a grand scale.
    now when the world is becoming smaller and smaller in a way due to the internet and supposedly better communication between people and nationalities everywhere... we're going back to the old tribal isolationist stance. My land. Not Yours. Get Out!
    from strictly the sociology perspective it's very interesting. just the loop of history? rinse and repeat?
    but from the mother trying to find a place to live as best she can... not interesting but frightening. and sadly so.

    ReplyDelete
  6. It seems we are all essentially on the same page.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Tammy, it is not quite as simple as that about the mother wanting to find a place to live as best as she can. Let us take the Rohingyas. Saudi Arabia has all these petrodollar years has been spreading their kind of poisonous Islam amongst them. Why can't SA now take them into their land? Bangla Desh and Pakistan wanted to create Muslim lands and broke away from Hindu India at the time of partition. Why can't they take the Rohingya Muslims but want India to accept them now and ensure their safety? Such questions are difficult to answer for a Universalist / Liberal.

    You might like to read this brilliant piece of writing by, hold your breath, an American of Indian origin! https://s2.washingtonpost.com/camp-rw/?e=cnJhamdvcGF1bEBnbWFpbC5jb20=&s=5a867364fe1ff612bc299c3e

    ReplyDelete
  8. Darn. I can't read Washington Post! because I do not subscribe to it. tightwad that I am I suppose. at least the NY Times allows me 10 free articles a month! not so the WP.
    but I do see where you are coming from on this particular issue Rummy. I do take a woman's maternal simplistic view of it I'm sure which is silly. one knows the intricacies of it are vast or it wouldn't still be such a problem I suppose.
    I truly am that smiling puppy that wonders why we can't all just get along.

    ReplyDelete