Real vs. Percieved Security

Is there a difference between being secure and feeling secure? Yes, I think there is a huge difference. Actual security does not ever have to correlate with the public’s perception of security. Most people felt secure before September 11, but obviously the United States was more vulnerable towards terrorism than the general public realized. After September 11 many people began to fear terrorism while our leaders made claims that the United States is actually safer due to the war on terror. Assuming that what our leaders say is true, the public perception of security was misguided in both cases.

Whether or not it is effective, our governments security programs’ goals are to maintain and increase our security, not just to appease the public. Yes, maybe people should worry more about heart disease. It is one of the biggest killers in America and there are concrete steps that can be taken to prevent it. But just like heart disease, people should worry about terrorism. It has the potential to change the way our country is run and the way we live our lives, and there are concrete steps that can be taken to prevent terrorism. If the general public stopped hearing about heart disease and the things that help prevent it, the lack of education would most likely lead to an increase in heart disease. Likewise, if the government stopped trying to prevent terrorism, the lack of preventative measures would almost definitely lead to a sharp increase in terrorism. That being said, I do think that public perception is an important subset of actual security. It is something that makes the United States an enjoyable place to live and is a key part of our society. I think that the focus on terrorism still cannot make us 100% secure and our government’s efforts are often misguided, but to write security off as a perception rather than a goal to be achieved is a much more serious mistake.