HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Domestic Terrorism. Let'...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:29 PM

Domestic Terrorism. Let's start calling it what it is as more citizens are killed by guns

oh excuse me - people with guns then are killed by men with long beards.

Where is the outrage?
Where is Issa? Where are the hearings????

What happened in Benghazi was horrible and should not have happened.

But neither should this, and this is alot worse, imho.

The murderer is not the alleged killer. S/he is the alleged TERRORIST.


8 replies, 699 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to jillan (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:30 PM

1. It's terrible, but it's not terrorism n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Tansy_Gold (Reply #1)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:53 PM

7. Sure it is - the gunman had an agenda and wanted to terrorize people.

Whether or not it was a personal agenda, or a political agenda, it was still an agenda - a reaction to a cause of his for which he made a plan for and went through with. The hours-long drive from New Jersey to Connecticut to shoot and kill proved that not only had he felt he had been seriously wronged, he needed to ensure his agenda was known to the world.

He wanted to terrorize, to punish people other than his original targets.

Why do suicide bombers bomb market places full of shoppers? Because they feel the need to punish everyone who ignore or dismiss them for the wrongs they perceive were done to them; they want the world to fear and respect their rage, as well as to be martyrs to their cause.

Why didn't he, the gunman, just wait and shoot his mother in the parking lot when she left her class, sparing all the children and school staff that are now dead? Why did he shoot his way into the school instead of wait and take whatever revenge he needed when she emerged?

My suspicions are that it was because he had a cause that he not only felt he needed to extract justice for, but wanted everyone else to "respect" through fear of his rage.

He wanted the world as he perceived it to burn. He willingly let the beast out of the pits of his mind to feed on innocents.

Narrowing definitions of terrorism just makes us "feel safer" as we don't have to think about how disposable our society treats people that don't fit or to isolate our troublemakers into easy to spot boxes. It also allows us to justify feeling superior to "those poor, ignorants" in other countries. For all intents and purposes, he was a terrorist.

Haele

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:32 PM

2. terrorism is high profile violence to advance a political goal

I'm unaware of any evidence (so far) that this event had any political component.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to phantom power (Reply #2)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:34 PM

3. Here is the definition from the FBI - it clearly says unlawful act against Govt OR Civilians.

There is no single, universally accepted, definition of terrorism. Terrorism is defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives” (28 C.F.R. Section 0.85).

http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:35 PM

4. I don't think terrorism is a good model for this kind of shooting.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Reply #3)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 04:29 PM

8. "In furtherance of political or social objectives."

Not just unlawful acts against civilians. Even the FBI definition you quoted includes the qualifier of a political motive.

Unless and until a political or social motive is revealed, this is not terrorism. And that's going by the FBI definition you quoted.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:46 PM

5. This is not terrorism. There is no known political or religious motivation (as of right now).

This is a gun crime. The problem is one of a person joining the Well-Regulated Militia (TM) without being adequately screened for disqualifiers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jillan (Original post)

Fri Dec 14, 2012, 03:49 PM

6. I disagree. Terrorism has a socio-political objective.

There is no such objective in the vast majority of these spree-killing cases. They're the actions of deranged persons whose motivations are poorly understood at best and are clearly pathological.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread