01-05-2016, 08:41 AM
(01-04-2016, 11:39 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Let's try this instead of flapping our yaps:
Do you consider this incident to date an act of terrorism and those involved terrorists?
It is going to be he hardest answer because it requires a yes or no.
I'll start:
No.
Who is next?
I had shut down my tablet and went to bed after my last post or I would have responded earlier. Yes, as I have already stated.
(01-05-2016, 12:39 AM)Rotobeast Wrote: This got me to wondering why the Feds didn't jump in and charge this one cat with terrorism ?
Granted, he got more than the mandatory minimum that would apply, but he destroyed a business and put peoples lives at risk to in fact have the federal government change their policies on investigating police brutality.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/ferguson-st-louis-protester-sentenced-to-8-years-in-quiktrip-arson/
What "privilege" is at play here ?
Not enough information. Was the purpose of his violence to cause public policy change, or was it violence for the sake of violence? If someone goes home from church and murders their spouse, did they kill for their religion? The article may clarify things but I am too lazy this early to read. So, if he burned down the store with the intent to coerce or intimidate the government or to, I forget the others, then yes, it is terrorism.
