solved I’m working on a writing discussion question and need an

I’m working on a writing discussion question and need an explanation and answer to help me learn.

We recently read the report which stated “that we are not in the
business of eliminating all risk associated with traveling from point A
to point B. Risk is inherent in virtually everything we do. Our
objective is to mitigate risk and to reduce, as much as possible, the
potential for anyone to commit a deliberate attack against our
transportation systems”Obviously, the government has to provide some Risk Based Solutions
(RBS) to its policies. Otherwise screening would take so long no one
would want to fly. That’s would be bad for the economy. But should
they be trying to eliminate all risk? When it comes to risk where is
the cutoff, when is the risk too high to ignore? Most people feel the
risk is acceptable until something happens. That’s when they start
screaming that something should have been done. Where do you draw the
line in regards to where RBS for airport screening is vs where it should
be? Support you answer.Please research the question and provide your thoughts by responding
to this discussion post. Your response should be between 250-750 words
and needs to include at least two citations at the end of the post.
Think of your posting in terms of a contribution to a dialogue, not a
writing exercise. This is particularly important since we don’t meet in
person. Therefore, this is one of the few ways we can generate a
dialog. Make your posts clear and pertinent. Offer clarifying examples
for complex and abstract ideas. Don’t be afraid to include open-ended
questions that invite dialogue in your response. Read the other response
posts to help get an idea on what you want to say on the subject. Feel
free to offer evidence supporting the earlier post or your contrasting
point of view and ask challenging, open-ended questions.