ADVERTISEMENT



Google       

Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Law Students Blogs -> Nuts & Boalts

OR PHONE (866) 635-1838 for Bankruptcy Help, (866) 635-6190 for Divorce,
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense

Find a Local Lawyer

Bankruptcy (866) 635-1838
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402

Bookmark

Law Students

: Nuts & Boalts

A Crazed Ideologue By Any Other Name

ADVERTISEMENTS
Yesterday, a lone gunman (John Patrick Bedell), attacked and injured two Pentagon security force officers--and himself died of gunshot wounds.  Turns out, he "worshipped private property rights" and other screeds typically found in the pantheon of anti-government right wing agenda items that seem to rise to the surface during Democratic administrations.  And a couple of weeks ago, Joe Stack, your run of the mill tax protester (and if you've exterened or clerked at a federal court, you know who these people are; I call them "the flag has yellow fringes" people) flew a plane into the IRS building.

In both cases, the news accounts were quick to report, "No link to terrorism" (though in fairness to the news reports, they simply parrot lines from investigators).  This really pisses me off.  Domestic terrorism is defined in 18 U.S.C. 2331(5) (emphasis added):

the term ?domestic terrorism? means activities that?
(A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;
(B) appear to be 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
(C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.
What am I missing?  When someone with dark skin lights himself on fire, the entire right wing political operation is frothing at the mouth because he wasn't immediately placed in an armored personnel carrier.  When someone with an equally dangerous political ideology kills or injures Americans, we find no link to terrorism.  In fairness, Matt Yglesias had some thoughts on a topic related to this (how we generally remain calm and don't overreact in the face of domestic terror), and the House passed a resolution condemning the Austin attack as terrorism.

My objection is to the initial characterization by law enforcement and the media.  What does it mean "no terrorism link?"  It IS terrorism.  Or are we defining terrorism by religion/national origin?

Edit:  Let's add the Holocaust Museum shooting from last year to the list.  (H/t: James).  

Full post as published by Nuts & Boalts on March 05, 2010 (boomark / email).

Bloggers, promote your law blog by nominating your blog for inclusion in USLaw.com's Law Blog Directory and RSS Reader. Benefits described.
Related Searches

























































































































US Law
#1 Online Legal Resource













Your Blog Subscriptions
Subscribe to blogs

10,000+ Law Job Listings
Lawyer . Police . Paralegal . Etc
Earn a law-related degree
Are you the author of this blog? Adding USLaw.com to your Blogroll increases relevance. You qualify to display a USLaw Network badge.
Suggest changes to this blog's description or nominate another for inclusion. Register for updates.


Practice Area
Zip Code:

Contact a Lawyer Now!






0.0116 secs (new cache)