5 ms·

I think the idea of non-state actors using force to ensure they are not offended is a degree or two worse than governments doing the same thing. Governments usu

I think the idea of non-state actors using force to ensure they are not offended is a degree or two worse than governments doing the same thing. Governments usually behave in predictable, plodding ways. Ten thousand vehemently angry, violent people do not. So we're agreed on that. What's worse is the fact that it's not just Islamists. I wish that it were. Instead, we're growing a generation of internet-connected anger-junkies. The internet mob scene is well-known and well-documented. It continues to grow. I am afraid that soon we'll not just see Islamists, but multiple groups willing and able to use deadly force at the least offence. It should make things...interesting.

talmand 10y ago
>> I think the idea of non-state actors using force... Especially the groups seeking to have the state's legal power of force to be used on their behalf under the guise of fairness. >> ...but multiple groups willing and able to use deadly force at the least offence. I believe we are already there with the US Presidential campaigns this year.
- AnimalMuppet 10y ago
  >> ...but multiple groups willing and able to use deadly force at the least offence. > I believe we are already there with the US Presidential campaigns this year. Do you have any documented examples of deadly force in this year's US Presidential campaigns?
  - talmand 10y ago
    Ah, I see. I misread. I'm speaking of violence and other illegal activities. But, it's early yet. EDIT: this was the definition I was thinking. Deadly force, as defined by the United States Armed Forces, is force that a person uses causing, or that a person knows or should know would create a substantial risk of causing, death or serious bodily harm or injury.