It like saying you have to eat only at Mcdonald's and its unhealthy for you. Everyone would like to complain about that, unless there is no food and you're starving...then McDonald's seems like a more reasonable solution.
There are two other problems with this mindset. The first is that objectively quantifying the benefit vs. downside of marginalizing a particular group doesn't happen. Instead, feelings and opinions seep in -- a fear of the "other", if you will. The second is that, by marginalizing a group, you more often that not end up making your problem worse.
The "other way" is to try to understand the root causes behind such attacks, and work with the communities that are closest; in this case, Muslim communities around America. It's quite known by now that American Muslims are very willing to cooperate with authorities when the need arises.
We don't see radical Buddhist bombing things?
> We DON"T have Radical Christians, Radical Hindus, Radicial Buddhist trying to blow up civilians.
Ehh there are in fact radical Christians who kill innocents in the US. Radical Hindus and Buddhists also exist, but in other countries.
> It does mean however that more specific attention should be paid to muslims, as they are most likely to contain the threat.
So I assume you think it's OK to profile people of other religions and/or ethnicities (e.g., African Americans)?
Where? That doesn't sound credible, but let me give you the benefit of the doubt.
Don't get 1 nut job...show me what you mean?
I would argue that all terrorists are nutjobs, so...
Look up the history of attacks on abortion clinics.
It's not representative - only 9 people are mentioned.
edit: I corrected the caps...thank you. I didn't know.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
To everyone in this thread: This entire topic is incredibly contentious and as such requires even more care and benefit of the doubt when engaging in discussion. Please ask yourself, what is your goal in discussion here? To understand the others you're talking with? To express your opinion? To convince the "other side"? If you're not here for useful, constructive, civil, and respectful discussion, please just refrain from commenting. Shouting louder than every one else is not helpful, and as the mods repeatedly point out, HN is not the place for ideological flamewars.
"Of the 85 violent extremist incidents that resulted in death since September 12, 2001, far right wing violent extremist groups were responsible for 62 (73 percent) while radical Islamist violent extremists were responsible for 23 (27 percent)."