My 2 pence.. Personally I dont need, or have the desire for the police to define terror for me. Thats just my personal opinion. (Leaving the gun control debate aside) The idiot that walked into the Charleston Baptist Church and killed the black congregates, that wasnt (or barely) termed as an act or terror. There was rumblings of the double standard attributed to these types of acts. But for the most part the media/police mostly called it a mass shooting. The synagogue shooting near Pittburgh a few months ago, the media/police called it mass shooting, not terrorism. But the couple in San Bernardino that killed people in an office building a few years ago, once it was determined they were Muslim, the media/police immediately switched to calling it a clear act of terrorism. Same thing with the Orlando nightclub shooting. Mass shooting at first then when the identity is revealed, they switched to terrorism(though they still waver with the definition of this act). A guy literally shooting and sniping a concertgoers from a Vegas hotel room... Its still termed as a mass shooting. To me that is terrorism. (no one will convince me otherwise) The Oklahoma City Bombing, clearly terrorism....they danced around using the word terrorism for ages, then they finally settled on "domestic terrorism" after quite awhile afterwards. This is a larger discussion. BUt i do think depending on who you ask the definition of what constitutes terrorism can be different. My personal definition of terrorism is likely much larger, broader and wider than most.
[Steps off soapbox]
Last edited by Mouseboy33 on 15 March 2019 9:37pm - 2 times in total
I'm here to give you something to talk about!