Required Saftey?

On Monday a tornado devastated much of Oklahoma, and destroyed many homes and uprooted thousands of people. Many people also faced serious injury or death as a result of the tornado. Now, we can only attempt to restore what is left of the towns, as we can not go back in time in order to prevent the disaster. It is impossible, however, to avoid all of the what if questions. What if more safe shelters were required in Oklahoma? Would there be far fewer casualties? Probably yes. That is why we have to consider now whether shelters should be required in tornado prone places.

The aftermath of the Oklahoma Tornado

Yes, shelters are difficult to build and are very important, but isn't the safety of our citizens worth the extra expense? We are willing to put billions of dollars into the armed forces in order to protect our country from foreign countries, so shouldn't we be willing to pay in order to protect our country from natural disasters, which have proven to be much more dangerous and frequent?

It might seem like the tornado was extremely rare, and now that it has passed, nothing as bad will happen again. Because of this perception many places don't feel they need to require shelters at this time. But if we look to 1999, when another devastating tornado hit, according to the NY Times, it was said, "If another storm comes, “there’s only a less than 1 percent chance of it being as strong and violent as what we experienced” before." So while the chances of another equally devastating storm may be unlikely, its better to be safe than sorry.

What else do you think could be done to prevent such devastation from natural disasters? Do you think the government should provide a role in requiring certain safety precautions?