Meteors exist, and there's nothing you can do to stop it, aside from clearly uneconomical shielding of every roof of every home.
Its arrogance to think we are immune from unexpected and sudden death because we are humans.
Also, cars and trucks occasionally do drive through homes, if the homes are next to large roads. Its rare, but far more common than space debris.
Also, keep in mind these space debris, even if they hit homes, are unlikely to kill, a 10cm diameter ball (Aka 80cm^2 = 0.008m area) is unlikely to hit someone in a 100m^2 home.
Why is getting killed by space debris is less pleasant than getting killed by a meteorite?
The point is there is a background risk of sky-born peril. There is tremendous opportunity in putting things in orbit. Given the frequencies of any damage or injury from extra-atmospheric debris, of our or nature's making, it would be surprising if the marginal benefits gained from optimising for more safety would outweigh the opportunity cost.
We should look for cheap optimisiations that reduce the risk of peril. But eliminating the possibility is impossible; pursuing massive reductions in risk absurd.
Its arrogance to think we are immune from unexpected and sudden death because we are humans.
Also, cars and trucks occasionally do drive through homes, if the homes are next to large roads. Its rare, but far more common than space debris.
Also, keep in mind these space debris, even if they hit homes, are unlikely to kill, a 10cm diameter ball (Aka 80cm^2 = 0.008m area) is unlikely to hit someone in a 100m^2 home.