It's a relief to see events like this called what they are. When a person tries to make an example out of some else for a political agenda, whether through murder or other acts of violence, it needs to be labeled as terrorism. We do not make change through fear and violence, we make change through honest discourse.
Edit: In response to people referring to the technically "non-political" motivation for his actions, I'll say this. Countless acts of terror by Muslim extremists are done without claiming political motivation. A religiously motivated attack on civilians in the name of Allah would be considered an act of terror. This murder was inspired by a different ideology, but is in the same strain.
Edit 2: There are a number of responses implying that by calling this terrorism I am somehow denying that other acts of violence for political gain are not. I have also been called racist and had it strongly implied that I am a die hard liberal. None of this is true. This being labeled terrorism does not mean black people committing violence in the name of political change isn't terrorism. Terrorism is a loaded word, and every use of it should be carefully considered. This was not meant to be a partisan statement or a racial statement, it was meant to be a pragmatic response to the situation.
He said he envisioned a white woman thinking: "Well, if that guy feels so strongly about it, maybe I shouldn't do it."
That is the dumbest shit I have ever heard.
Strangely, nobody's asked me what I think of this terrorist or to denounce his actions. It's almost like even though we have the same skin color, they know he's just a homicidal asshole, and we're nothing alike. Weird, hey?
I thought that statement was interesting. He didn't kill the guy because he wanted to intimidate black people, apparently. He wanted to intimidate white women.
How nice it must be to 'accidentally' end a life and only have to worry about getting a job
And you can honestly put worry in parentheses, because it is pretty common knowledge that many of these guys just sit out for a couple months, and then move to a new department in a different state or jurisdiction. It is also relatively easy for them to get pretty decent paying security positions, because prior police or military experience is so valued.
About three or four years ago in my town, it came out, after he had already been hired for 9 months, that one of the senior officers in my town's police dept. Had just moved a state over because he was involved in a fatal shooting and asked to resign at his previous department.
The kicker was that not only was he paid his pension after resigning, but that he was able to keep collecting that pension after being hired essentially getting two salaries for killing someone.
Protect and Serve my arse.
He should be convicted of murder and sent to prison.
As long as police officers aren't punished for wrongful killing it will continue.
I'm gonna get flak for this, but I believe the pension should be untouchable. It has been earned the same as anyone else saving for retirement. It would be kind of like saying you should take away his pay retroactively or confiscate someone's 401k. That is slavery at worst, and a breach of contract, in either kind or law. And this money doesn't just support the person who earned it, but also his/her family.
If he is guilty of a crime, let the courts handle it. If the courts are corrupt, fix the courts.
It is same problem that felons face when they get out. Someone gets convicted, does their time, and when they get out they have no access to normal support structures like welfare or financial aid for college so that they can get back on track.
I get it. It feels good to act righteous about crime and punishment, but, we need to let the courts handle crime and punishment/correction, not dish out an endless parade of restrictions for suspected or past crimes. And if the courts can't do that, we fix the courts.
We got into this mess by overreacting in the first place.
What's ridiculous is that it took this long to come to this decision.
I need about $3.50
What percent of the affected pipes is this?
Between 100 & 90 %. Lmk what else u need
A politically motivated criminal act to inspire fear or terror in a targeted community - yep, that'd be terrorism.
I'm just glad the word terrorism here was appropriately and justifiably used to describe this person's actions
Man I was calling this that day one and some redditors were arguing me about it. This guys motive was about getting as much press as possible with his agenda. He went to NYC because its the media capital of the world to do his crime. That's terrorism folks.
the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.
He said he hoped to make white women think: "Well, if that guy feels so strongly about it, maybe I shouldn't do it."
I can't wrap my head around this kind of thinking. He assumes that people are going to treat an act of savage violence as rational and worthy of consideration. "Hmm, that guy just cut off his own tongue with a dirty kitchen knife. You know, I never thought about that before, but he did it, so maybe I'll give it a try!" Loony.
Why, in a country where everyone owns a gun, in a state where you can legally shoot anyone unlawfully entering your house, would you break in... with a knife
Good job on the kid and his parents for getting him trained to properly operate the AR in self defense. Signed, an Obama-loving lefty who also loves guns.
Disparity of force
Edit 1: Why am I being down voted? 3 on 1 is a disparity of force (by legal definition) and he therefore had rights to shoot.
Edit 2: Everyone is taking me to task over castle doctrine vs disparity of force. I was only throwing out the phrase to define the "3 vs 1" scenario the comment above me cited and not giving the sole reason as to why this was (at first glance anyways) a "clean" shoot.
Never bring a knife to a gunfight.
5 months from now: "Russian Youth found dead falling out of a poisoned window"
Unfortunately putin will rig the election in his favor. The only way for him to lose at this point is for someone even more nefarious and nasty in tactics (spy work) beats him to the punch. (Or someone out performs him in the campaign and he's killed and people get pissed)
Actually "Russian deaths caused by narco terrorism up by 100% this year."
"Evidently it was the pedophilic gay propaganda turning our youth against our strong president. Same-sex kissing in public is now punishable by death."
Assistant Police Chief Paul Neudigate added that hundreds of people were inside of the nightclub at the time of the shooting, and called it a “chaotic crime scene.”
I'm surprised only one confirmed dead out of hundreds in the club. Here's hoping the death toll doesn't rise.
For those unfamiliar with the norms of American violence, this was almost certainly the result of gangbanging. If you see a high casualty count but low fatalities, it means the shooter probably just fired into a crowd in a fit of rage with a handgun then ran off. See, for example, the New Orleans Mother's day parade shooting from a few years ago.
As someone who lives in Cincinnati and watches the news nightly, people around here must just have shit aim. A lot of people get shot, however the shot-to-homicide ratio is far apart. I know pistols generally have a fairly high survivability rate, but thankfully these local idiots can't aim.
Edit: Ok, people, I get it. It's because unless they're a trained professional most people's aim is shit, and also because of amazing treatment. RIP inbox.
Yep, local news reporting some victims and witnesses are not cooperating. More than likely gang related.
This is the first time I've seen that each bullet being fired is the basis for the number of charges he's facing.
It could be based on the video. If each shot taken was not justified, perhaps it could be argued each attempt could be considered attempted murder.
For example, if the guy is flat on his stomach and hands and legs spread out, and the cop shoots him in the back 8 times.
Here's the dash cam footage analysis of the shooting, looks pretty heinous to me. Kid was walking away from them laterally and went down after about 3 secs. Officer continued to fire on him for another 12 secs, that's not right. Being a police officer is a really tough job and I just don't think 90% of most people are capable of doing it for any length of time and not becoming affected by it. It's guys like this, however, becoming cops that really scare your average civilian.
I think if you look at Rodney King it went this way too... for example, with made up numbers, of 50 strikes 42 were justified, 8 were not. I think that was just the internal review of the incident.
There was, I think a 60 minutes, segment on the guard rail industry and the fatal flaws in the designs. Like hitting an end piece and it coming apart and basically skewering the car and anyone in it among others.
But the kicker was that instead of fixing the fatal flaws the industry had lobbied and had gotten laws passed in several states that held them harmless should anyone sue them because the known flaws actually did damage or maimed and killed some one.
EDIT - This is newer but this company is basically buying state AGs influence and not changing laws(same difference). This is one example. These companies are huge that produce these rails
I don't think they are any safer. Years ago a friend and I were going to work in the morning in my friends car. We swerved due to frosty roads, and hit the begining of a steel cable guard rail. The cables actually went right over the top of the hood, and crushed the roof all the way down right between us just missing either of our heads. Walked away without a scratch, but very lucky. When the police showed up he told us that he expected someone to be decapitated.
P.S. Nobody tried to bill us for the guard rail.
Edited so certain folks can sleep at night!
Pretty sure contempt of court for not paying isn't going to bother her.
A while back Indiana replaced a ton of guardrail with steel cable. I don't know if it's safer but it looks better
Good for them. The fact that this bill was passed and people are not up in arms about it blows my mind. We are slowly allowing our privacy to be stripped away from us.
One big outrage at a time. This bill still needs to go through the house. The time to make noise is when it gets closer. Just need to keep an eye on it.
Is it me, or does it just become more and more difficult to 'keep an eye on it' when there are so many 'its' to keep an eye on?
They "say" they won't, but I feel like we've been told that before