Thursday鈥檚 massacre in Nice, France, cries out for some sort of action, a strong response, but we should be wary of solutions that make the problem worse.
A truck plowed through Bastille Day crowds in the Mediterranean resort city, killing more than 80 and leaving at least 200 injured. It鈥檚 the third mass killing in France in 18 months and one more of the many violent, deadly attacks that dominate the news with alarming regularity.
President Fran莽ois Hollande reacted by announcing a three-month extension of France鈥檚 state of national emergency and pledging that 鈥渘othing will make us yield in our will to fight terrorism. We will further strengthen our actions in Iraq and in Syria. We will continue striking those who attack us on our own soil.鈥�
He is more or less obliged to say such things. A government must be seen to be taking action; the citizens need to be reassured.
Elsewhere in the world, airports, government buildings and other such places are under heightened security. Authorities promise to improve intelligence-gathering and analysis. That鈥檚 what you do and say when these things happen.
Many of us have been to Nice; we鈥檝e all seen pictures from there. The people killed and injured are just like us. We can easily imagine ourselves being there when the terrorist struck. We can imagine it happening here, and we want to be safe.
Yet there鈥檚 not much a government can do to prevent a disgruntled ex-husband from plowing his truck through crowds of people. (Police were acquainted with Mohamed Lahouaiej Bouhlel, but not as a potential terrorist 鈥� he had previous convictions for domestic violence, armed theft and brawling in a pub. Neighbours said he was depressed and angry about the breakdown of his marriage.)
Nothing authorities can do will eliminate all risk. Wherever people gather in large numbers, there is danger 鈥� a crowd is what terrorists call a soft target. Think of John Nuttall and Amanda Korody plotting to explode bombs at the 2013 sa国际传媒 Day celebration at the sa国际传媒 legislature.
We should not expect 鈥� or want 鈥� governments to post armed guards everywhere, surround every public building with blade-wire fences and keep close watch on every person who might seem not quite normal. We expect reasonable measures to be taken for our security, but living in a democracy will always entail risk 鈥� it鈥檚 a degree of risk we can comfortably live with.
Canadians already live comfortably with the risk of death and injury from such things as car accidents. Governments could dramatically cut the toll on our highways with draconian controls on drivers, but we don鈥檛 want to surrender that much freedom. We walk a similar line in many other aspects of our lives.
When it comes to controlling the risk from terrorism, let鈥檚 not ask officialdom to do things that will distract from good police work and intelligence-gathering, or that will erode the very freedoms the terrorists are trying to destroy.
What can we do? We can offer our sympathy and support to the victims of the Nice attack and their families. And while we鈥檙e at it, let鈥檚 spare some compassion for the 1,087 Iraqis who were killed by terrorists鈥� suicide bombs in June alone.
We must be aware of the risks, but not paralyzed by them. We need vigilance, not paranoia; caution, not panic.
