Domestic Terrorism

"Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:

• Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
• Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and
• Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.

Definition provided by fbi.gov

Terrorism. It goes by no race. No religion. No bounds. It has 1 goal: To kill, and It's time we recognized Domestic terrorism as it is in America. According to Washington post, in 334 days, 351 mass shootings have occured in America. That's 1 mass shooting per day, with the addition of ANOTHER mass shooting every 20 days.

Recently, San Bernardino has been attacked by Domestic Terrorists, and is the deadliest attack since sandy hook. The people killed were employees and volunteers of a medical facility that helps people with disorders that make it hard to learn, such as, but not limited to, Autism. The motives of the attackers have not been released, so we can't really tell WHY they did it.

Why are we so fucking obsessed with terrorist organization an ocean and a continent away from us when there are MULTIPLE in THIS COUNTRY?

Before you post, please try to leave stupid shit out like whether the terrorists are right-wing or left-wing, or if we should enforce/loosen gun control to supress terrorism. I'm done with the fucking terrorism, and I'm done with the media which doesnt call all these fucking shooters terrorists.

 

Irdk what to say about this..

 

Then don't post? lol

 

Hate to say this but I'm pretty sure that guy was in fact working with ISIS...
That said this thread is true in the fact that Terrorism isn't just based from religions.

 

Possibly..

 

I mean he did pledge allegiance to the ISIS flag >_<

 

Considering 2 days have passed, and there is no confirmation from ISIS that they did this, or that the FBI hasn't confirmed it, I doubt it. It, ofcourse, it a possibility, and America is basically going to go up in flames if it is confirmed ISIS

 

Fun fact:
I used to say
'terrorism' instead of 'tourism'
Or
'terrorist' instead of 'tourist'
back in my twelvie days.

 

Yes. Sad. But idk if its isis. My friend got an invitation to greece for soccer rip me hes better. I told him do wha u wanna do, but if u get shot down ill be at ur funeral

 

Pretty sure the 351 mass shooting statistic is false, it's most likely people caught in gang war crossfires, happens in South Chicago. Domestic terrorism is actually not that common in the States, don't confuse gang wars with domestic terrorism. Guns are being banned in parts of the country, and the government is doing a better effort now to make our country safer.

 

I'm assuming this is about California.

I havent gotten ever piece of info, but if it was an act of terrorism why wouldn't they go somewhere like time square where they can take out more

 

Well its not confirmed but their is strong reason and evidence to support the fact that he was involved in ISIS as I already said he was pleading allegiance to an ISIS flag. And If it was in fact ISIS then America should go up into flames because it makes it a much much bigger deal and raises many more questions then if it was just some random nut job.

 

Hey everyone! I'm a tourist here! I came here for-

*Millions of shotguns aiming at me*

Well shit.

 

Uhh... because the US is part of the Security Council? And because aforementioned terror organization is actually targeting the US? It's not as if your government is ignoring what is happening inside your country.

Try to understand.
Consider the national reaction if the gunmen/shooters/whatever you guys call them are called terrorists. It creates unnecessary civil and social unrest. The term may be correct, but do you truly want others to flip out and panic? That their country is under attack by terrorists? The media in your country may be described as biased, heck, all media is biased to some degree, but it's doing your country a favor by not referring to these criminals as terrorists.

I would like you to calm down and assess what is truly happening, what might happen, and why it happens.

 

Ok, yes. The US is helping secure the world, but we are spending more resources trying to stop international terrorists, who ofcourse are doing terrible things, when we got donestic terrorists attacking so often. Not even in 1 week of time, we had a domestic terrorist attack a Planned Parenthood clinic and kill 3 people, and an attack in San Bernardino which killed 14 people.

Ofcourse the media is trying to keep the public as calm as possible, but so many are already up-in-fucking-arms. With the presidential campaign raging on and idiots like Donald Trump adding fuel to the fire, people can't keep their heads, and they think "terrorist" means "Muslim person with a mask and a bomb." I think news media should push for a way to REALLY explain terrorism, and to label domestic terrorists, instead of teaching people "How to survive a mass shooting"(That actually was a program on my news station -_-)

@ItsShadow Yes, she did pledge allegiance to the ISIS flag, but here's the thing: Women can't fight for ISIS. So if she really was part of ISIS, she would be breaking the very Idea of women. That's why I'd lean torwards ISIS sympathy or just absolute Bullshit meant to try to keep us from her real motive.

@Unit50079 Ofcourse not all mass shooting would be domestic terrorism, but a good portion of those aren't in gang fights. Even then, it's a depressing number.
It basically means that over 1000 people die every year in America, thanks to guns. Whether we need more guns or less guns is always up to debate, but that would be on a different thread.

 

A good portion of them would likely be gang related violence or spontaneous crime because the majority of the 353 "mass shootings" have 4-5 or so victims
You can't really call every single on terrorist attacks due to do being affiliated with any sort of group or just being spontaneous with no political agenda tied to them. The Charleston shooting could be considered spontaneous mass shooting because he was doing it with no affiliate, while the most recent could be considered terror.

Tl;Dr Mass shootings are an event, while terrorism is a strategy for spreading a political agenda, much like propaganda, just more violent

 

Terrorism doesn't only have to be for a political agenda. As shown by the FBI's 1st definition of terrorism(i), it can be used to persuade the public and non-governmental beings, such as businesses and corporations, to do their[the terrorist's] bidding or desires. With this in mind, how are people like the man who shot up planned parenthood not a terrorist? Ofcourse there is a difference between mass shootings and terrorism, but there are so many events that news outlets called events that really should be defined as donestic terrorism as "Lobe wolfs", "madmen" and "shooters".

I 100% agree with you that it isn't acceptable, and that something should be done about it, but we live in a democracy, one where the government need's the people's opinions to get shit done. If we don't actually inform people and get items like this flowing, then how are we gonna get anything done?

Moving on to the 2nd amendment arguement(which will be the only time I'll address the 2nd amend debate on this thread), Yes, we never blame the car, and I'm not saying to blame the gun, but by their very nature, guns are tools of war, and their soul purpose is to shoot and potentially kill. And, just as we take away someone's driver's liscense if they get in a crash/kill someone with their car, we need to have something similar with guns, buf a bit different. You are waay more likely to die from a gun in America than any other country, and from what I've seen on my local news station(MSNBC, if I recall correctly), America is less than 10% of the world, but owns over 40% of the world's guns. With fucked up stats like that, no wonder we have obe pf the highest gun death rates in the world.

TL;DR If you give people guns, they are going to use them to kill. Guns are tools of war.

 

I actually disagree with this statement. I'm not saying guns are good or we should have them, but according to our second amendment, guns are a right, as every citizen has the right to bear arms. The second amendment doesn't say guns are allowed to be used to commit mass murders, as all essential rights have limits, but guns aren't entirely bad.

At the same time, I can see where you're coming from. If you hand someone a gun, they can either do serious damage with it or toss it aside and not do anything, or use it for self defense in an extreme circumstance, but with this being said, it isn't the gun itself. In both instances, the person has a gun, but only in one is there mass destruction. You shouldn't fix the guns, you should fix the people.

Also, concerning terrorism, nobody likes terrorism (except maybe the terrorists themselves). It is terrifying, but the reason people are concerned about groups halfway across the world is because these types of groups have targetted our country before. I do agree with you when you say terrorism has no race or religion though.

edit: whoops i skimmed the second part of your post, but nonetheless, your first statement concerning the 2nd amendment kinda contradicts what you said in the end.

 

They aren't. Or maybe they want to, but the allure of stories sounds better. Here's the problem with the domestic, non-religious terrorism going on: the news releases names, faces, and personal histories of the killers. This is EXACTLY what they want. The Oregon college killer? He felt neglected by society, so he lashed out, made a name for himself, and gained some sympathy as people revealed his past. The media is part of the problem.

EDIT: I was told to avoid arguing over gun control, but I can't ignore this.

Then we need a better process for weeding out mentally ill people and determining who should be allowed to own guns and who shouldn't. Like a driver's test, but mentally concerned. Just because it's the Second Amendment doesn't mean you are entitled. In fact, when you take away someone else's rights (life, liberty, pursuit of happiness and everything in the Bill) then you forfeit your own. So logically, you shouldn't own a gun if you may take away someone else's rights, yeah?