|
|
Institute for Crisis, Disaster, and Risk Management Crisis and Emergency Management Newsletter Website |
|
| |
February
2006
Volume
10 - Number 1 |
|
Risks of Terrorism
By Matthew Carle I was standing on the platform waiting for the Metro
when I read about the July 2005 bombings of the London transit system.
After finishing an article describing the bombings and victims, my train arrived
and I boarded it and went to work.
By any objective measure, I am likely in the top 90 percentile of Americans in risk of becoming a victim of domestic terrorism. I live in Washington D.C, a highly symbolic city. I work in a Department of Defense facility, frequently attending meetings at the Pentagon. I take public transportation to and from work every day. Yet, despite the risk, I spend very little time worrying about being a target. In contrast, I have family members who live in the rural Midwest, far from desirable targets, but who spend a great deal of time, money and mental energy worrying about the possibility of terrorism. They stockpile food, water, walkie-talkies, N95 masks and other items they feel necessary to survive a possible attack. This hording is not rational, nor does it seem to reduce their level of discomfort about the threat of terrorism. Why the difference in attitude? In my opinion, it is because terrorism is an unknown threat for most of the US population. Few, except for New York, Washington DC and Oklahoma City, have personally seen the effects of terrorism. The unknown or the unfamiliar leads many to imagine the worst. Out of emotion they purchase items mentioned in the media, such as gasmasks, safe rooms and Cipro (Ciprofloxacin Hydrochloride), because they have no way to rationally measure the risk. Similarly, when I lived in Cleveland, I never saw people hoard toilet paper, milk, or batteries over the possibility of snow. Yet in DC, the mere mention of snow on the news leads the population to empty the shelves of nearby stores in preparation for a threat they don’t understand and with which they have little experience. On September 11th, I was close to the Pentagon and several of my colleagues died in the impact. I saw the fires and experienced the rescue and recovery efforts in the aftermath. For whatever reason, I feel like this has inoculated me against unnecessary panic about terrorism. This is not to say that I am cavalier about the threat. I keep my issued chemical/biological escape mask in my desk at work; participate in evacuation planning and drills, etc. However, I spend more energy worrying about traffic accidents, crime or a fire than I do about terrorism. As a nation Americans have shown themselves to be reasonably resilient and self-reliant throughout their two hundred year history. Historically we’ve dealt with potential crises by creating proactive programs that empower individuals. Fire and tornado drills are effective, while other programs such as “Duck and Cover” were less so in terms of the actual response, but all increase comfort levels and allow people to feel prepared in case of disaster. If I were a federal, state or local official, I would channel the nervous energy of the American public into reasonable mitigation programs that take into the context of each community’s threats. By providing a productive outlet that clarifies each person’s role, the government would help citizens cope with the nebulous threat of terrorism, help them to come to grips with the vulnerabilities that affect them personally, and even help them act in the event of a situation. |