Oct 3, 2017 To this I have two retorts. 1. Saying this isn't an act of terrorism is just flat wrong. First off your definition of terrorism is flawed. Second, the police and FBI have for now ruled out this being a terrorist attack perpetrated by an international terrorist organization or being influenced by one. They have not ruled out the possibility of it being a terrorist attack. So you saying that it's not is wrong because you are neither the police or an fbi agent so that's not a claim you can make. 2. If we're going by definitions it is one. Your definition is flawed and you can easily find a definition of terrorism that will say this is or is not an act of terrorism. But according to state law, this was an act of terrorism.
Oct 3, 2017 But we know that isn't true. That's not the case. What's wrong with having a word to divide terrorism in the classic sense from random acts of violence with no motive or one centered around mental instability? Makes more sense to make a distinction imo.
Oct 3, 2017 What is the reason why you refuse to call it an act of terror? Because it doesn't fit in with your perceived notion of what a "terrorist" is. People argued the same way about gay marriage. "I'm fine with gay people they just shouldn't get married because the definition of marriage is between a man and a woman" @Changeling @WavyTylerEatingDicks @Ben
Oct 3, 2017 How do you know a bunch of members of isis aren't mentally ill? How do we you know this guy isn't radicalized? He's dead, you can't ask him. He had 42 guns.
Oct 3, 2017 Why do you not want to call a person killing 58 people with a machine gun terrorism? This happens multiple times a year. There's a reason it only happens in this country. It probably is to do with mental illness. That doesn't mean it isn't terrorism.
Oct 3, 2017 Perception is a tricky thing to navigate, it isn't wrong to immediately perceive the news of these vile acts as "Oh great another terrorism attack = ISIS" but it's even worse to ignore the facts once the evidence shows exactly who or what caused the incident. If the law says, like in the case of the Nevada shooter, the person regardless of being clinically diagnosed as mentally unstable commits an act of atrocity and violence therefore that person is indeed a terrorist. End of story.
Oct 3, 2017 Maybe I misread your posts but I thought you were against calling this terrorism. If so, my b, on my phone and it's hard to keep up.
Oct 3, 2017 Nah I didn't you're somehow missing my point. I didn't say anything about nothing's going to change at all, that was Ben, and he's right. We're not going to change the way anyone views the word terrorism so trying to call this guy anything else but a terrorist is pointless imo. He caused terror, he's a terrorist. Nah
Oct 3, 2017 How do we know every member of Isis aren't radical Muslims? How do we know this guy djdnt have no motivation whatsoever and instead just had something his brain snap and lead to his heinous act? Neither of those are likely, but we just go off of what we know. Why are you so reluctant to make a distinction between motivated acts of terrorism and random acts of violence? Maybe this incident wasn't one, maybe there was a motivation--even say a religious one. But random acts of violence have been committed all throughout history.
Oct 3, 2017 guess we define terrorists differently. I dont think hes a terrorist because probably the last thing on his mind was "hope this makes everyone scared" or "hope society lives in fear after this" id agree it is/was an act of terror, but to say the dudes a terrorist gives him too much credit. group/organization doesn't matter. especially with lone wolf ISIS attacks. all those types of things have an end game of inciting terror. i'm pretty sure, if anything, that guy in vegas was bored and deranged, rather than plotting to instill fear into western society. I'm just using ISIS and the recent dude as an example. Like an example of a white american terrorist would be; guy who bomb LA times, Dylan Roof, that timmy truck bomb guy. like all of them had some kind of before, during,after plan with there attacks. Dylan wanted black people to die and white people to join his caise, he wanted blacks to feel fear. the bombins were politically motivated "see look what happens when you dont agree!" attacks, hoping to incite fear into the opposition so that they may change votes. or something similar. just dont see that same thing carry over onto a 60 yr old dude shooting out of a hotel room at randoms. was his end game to incite terror into concert goers/american public? Like I wouldnt even class the columbine kids as terrorists
Oct 3, 2017 1. Mental instability doesn't disqualify you from being a terrorist. 2. Even if there is no underlying theological reasoning for someone to s---t a group of people there is almost always an ideological reason. How many people plan something out and go through with it for no reason whatsoever? Dylan roof wasn't labeled a terrorist but radical ideology certainly influenced his decisions.
Oct 3, 2017 I actually agree with coco here, I just view terrorists (and thus the idea of performing acts of terrorism) different than supposedly random acts of violence by murderers. I make a distinction between the two and it's not really based on anything except for the acts in question
Oct 3, 2017 Because getting in a bar fight is a random act of violence, sneaking into a hotel with 42 guns and murdering 58 people is a planned act of terrorism. The reason why it's stupid to make the distinction is because the people who commit domestic terrorism are predominately white, and it lets the media portray white mass murderers as "lone wolf" mentally ill people deserving of sympathy. These people individually may be lone, but the acts clearly are not" lone" considering how often t happens. The way the media frames thins has has a GIGANTIC effect on society. That's why semantics matter, because it keeps up the notion that brown people are the problem and every crazy white guy was just a one off crazy white guy.
Oct 3, 2017 Sure but there's also been terrorist acts all throughout history the only difference is you couldn't hit up google and find out what happened in 1042 when the vikings were out raping and pillaging people.
