Mansing writes: Eleven years after the attacks in the US, the citizens need to evaluate if they are indeed safer for all the "security precautions" put into place. The existing system's repeated false alarms have triggered tense, high-stakes deliberations over whether to order mass evacuations, distribute emergency medicines or shut down major venues. Is this just more money funneled to US companies, or is this really keeping the US safer? Is the same type of "security precautions" being instituted in Spain and the UK? Or is this preying on fear a uniquely US phenomenon?