Statistically rare is itself a relative term. "Rare" is subjective, and implies the follow up questions, "Compared to what?"When we talk risk assessment in a generic sense, frequency isn’t always the deciding factor. If the thing is pretty rare, but high impact when it does occur, it may still be worth preventing.
(Note that I’ve stepped from likelihood to frequency, since events being discussed are statistically rare, but occur and appear likely to continue to occur.)
I have to ask you what you would suggest as the best way to mitigate or stop these events from happening? It’s all fine for us to argue about the semantics of statistical jargon, but how about we talk solutions?Statistically rare is itself a relative term. "Rare" is subjective, and implies the follow up questions, "Compared to what?"
It's a subjective label applied to a numeric to try and give it some context. For example, your doctor says, "There's a risk if you take this that you might die. But don't worry, it's rare." You would probably ask, "How rare? We talking 1 in 100, or 1 in a million?"
With regards to school shootings, I'd argue they are not rare, and in fact, are common. I would base that on the increasing frequency of school shootings, and the direct and indirect impact it has throughout the country. Kids are killed, as are teachers and other folks, and those who survive are traumatized by the event in many ways. Kids in other schools are impacted, as well. Whether it's increased number of armed cops patrolling their hallways, active shooter drills, armed teachers, or whatever other mitigation efforts are put in place, it is impacting kids everywhere.