Quote:
Originally Posted by Chloé Palmas
Yes, you are right. You don't have to be a two bit hypocrite and keep saying that you ran a ship shape home office that kept Britons safe all the time, when as PM that becomes your number 1 job. Which she is not able to do. One guy with one car is just an anomaly / one that got through. How many has she now had on her watch? Not just with cars though btw. (Let's not even get started on acid / knife attacks etc). In principle I am totally with you - I think weapons bans never achieve anything. I am not even talking about banning idiotic PMs. Just wish that being home sec had taught her a single thing in life.
|
It's the nature of terrorism that the public might always be subject to an attack. That is the whole point of such acts. If confidence in the protective services can be damaged then the terrorists win.
The options the state has to protect from terror attacks is also limited by the public tolerance for invasion of privacy. Some of these acts can be staved off by weapon bans, scouring of personal information, police inquiry, etc. At some point, however, the attempts to protect the population begin to become cumbersome or intolerably invasive for the public.