PHO
T
OGRAPHY B
Y
Shutter
stock
65
LM
sp16
I
began writing this article a few weeks after the Paris
attacks in early December 2015. By the time you read
this, who knows what will have happened in the
world. Which is, actually, the point of this article: We
cannot predict or control what is happening around
the globe. And though we also cannot predict dangers
in our backyard, unfamiliar locations naturally cause us
to be on alert and sometimes fearful.
Fear ferments independent of facts. Fear can too
often be irrational. Statistics are rational. We know from
statistics that we are much more likely to be injured
or killed driving to the grocery store than while flying
across an ocean. But people do not (most of us, at least)
clench the steering wheel with the same angst as we
clench an airplane armrest, or feel the need to self-
medicate every time we make a run to the gym or get
the kids from school. And we don’t obsess about other
dangerous activities, like riding a bike, which presents
far greater statistical danger than a terrorist act. Compare
726 cyclist deaths and more than 49,000 injuries in 2014
alone to those killed or injured by a domestic terrorist
act, which was 23 and 22 respectively (of which more
were caused by white-supremacist and anti-government
fanatics than by jihadists).
So, how can we assess real danger? The current
U.S. State Department travel system is practically so
broad as to be useless: “U.S citizens should exercise
vigilance when in public places or using transportation.
… Be aware of immediate surroundings and avoid
large crowds and crowded places.” But it is hard to
translate words like ”exercise vigilance” and “be aware
of immediate surroundings” into behaviors that actually
make a difference. The subtext is that, to be safe, you’re
better off staying home and locking the doors.
You shouldn’t feel guilty for worrying about
international travel. But you can worry less
if you take some precautionary steps and
control what you can.
– Susan Kraus