Mass Shooting at Jacksonville Madden Tournament

[ElNono]

Dude, pay attention to what everybody is telLing you, ok? What we saw in that situation is not what is referred to as terrorism.

Time to...ok I was wrong......honest.

If I have to pay attention to "what everybody is telling", then you're an old got, tbh.

Still waiting for you to come up with a better analogy than the debunked bar brawl...

[Chris]

Not confused at all, tbh, and you're not making an argument at all either, per par...

I certainly don't get why some people seem averse to call things by their name, tbh...

I know what the definition of terrorism is

[Avante]

If I have to pay attention to "what everybody is telling", then you're an old got, tbh.

Still waiting for you to come up with a better analogy than the debunked bar brawl...

Dude, not the tired worn out.."if you don't agree with me I'll call you names"....sheesh~~~~

I thought I was talking to a mature adult, yep...wrong.

ELNono, if you need to be 100%/totally/completely wrong go for it. You are so wrong it's comical.

Done with ya on this.

[AaronY]

I know what the definition of terrorism is

Same here

[ElNono]

I know what the definition of terrorism is

I know what the definition of terrorism is too... do you have a point? or you're gonna post a wall of tweets?

[ElNono]

Dude, not the tired worn out.."if you don't agree with me I'll call you names"....sheesh~~~~

I thought I was talking to a mature adult, yep...wrong.

ELNono, if you need to be 100%/totally/completely wrong go for it. You are so wrong it's comical.

Done with ya on this.

Avante, sir, did I call you that? I'm just saying, why can't we talk about this in civility and with arguments? "Everybody says A" is not an argument. "You're wrong" is not an argument.

I already posted evidence that the FBI themselves call it terrorism. I understand there's no clear standard for 'terrorism', and I also pointed out that it's definitely a matter of opinion.

I didn't call you wrong, did I?

[SnakeBoy]

It's not even confined to shooting, can also be stabbing or anything else:

In another example, from March of this year, a white man named James Harris Jackson stabbed to death a black man in New York and said he did so as a "practice" run for more killings of black people. Jackson was charged with murder in the second degree as a hate crime.
But Jackson also faces a terrorism charge in the case -- murder as an act of terrorism in the first and second degrees.
According to police, Jackson, a Baltimore resident, said he traveled to New York because it is the media capital of the world and he wanted to make a statement.

There's also such a thing as grouping certain crimes as 'domestic terrorism' according to the FBI:

Part of the confusion stems from the fact that the world has never really settled on a standard definition of "terrorism." The US Code of Federal Regulations defines it 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." But it is not a standalone criminal charge. "There is not a domestic terrorism crime as such," FBI Director Christopher Wray said in a Senate hearing in September. "We in the FBI refer to domestic terrorism as a category but it's more of a way in which we allocate which agents, which squad is going to work on it."

As it's stated, there's no standard (and thus it's certainly a matter of opinion), but that doesn't preclude LE calling it what it is: terrorism. And I think they're right to do so.

https://www.cnn.com/2017/11/06/us/wh...rnd/index.html

There are certainly gray areas but even the article you linked disagrees with what you are calling terrorism. Killing for the sake of killing or killing random people because you are mad doesn't qualify as terrorism. As the article states "So once again, it all comes down to motive. Was there a political or ideological agenda behind the attack? "

I don't know the details of the James Harris Jackson case but just from that description it's not hard to imagine that his motive might go beyond killing just to kill.

[ElNono]

There are certainly gray areas but even the article you linked disagrees with what you are calling terrorism. Killing for the sake of killing or killing random people because you are mad doesn't qualify as terrorism. As the article states "So once again, it all comes down to motive. Was there a political or ideological agenda behind the attack? "

I don't know the details of the James Harris Jackson case but just from that description it's not hard to imagine that his motive might go beyond killing just to kill.

Jackson specifically said he was going to New York because it was a big media market. It goes to sending a message and to motive.

Post #28 in this thread, probably my 2nd or 3rd post:

well, we don't have the luxury to ask the perpetrator what his motive was in this particular case, but it's clear he wanted to send a message

Some people might disagree with the last part, I'm ok with that. I do think it's one thing to be mad at somebody, and going at that person specifically, or being depressive and going against yourself, vs just shooting up random people 'coz you snapped'.

I think in the latter case, you're trying to send a message. I think it's implicit in the heinous act that was committed. Do they really need to find a suicide note at home, how he was going to show the world they can't mess with him? Or that he's been planning this thing for years? Or that he was an Isis lover? Now it's terror? Same crime. They're not going to charge him, he's dead.

This reminds me the Nuremberg trials, where most Nazis defended themselves against the 'crimes against humanity' charge saying they were just following orders. I'm sure a lot of them were. But they committed such terrible crimes, so horrendous, the motive was just implicit in their actions.