8 ms·

> Its a hate crime, not terrorism. I'm not sure that it's any more or less 'terrorism' than the vehicular attacks by Islamists in Europe. How would you descri

by abiox 9y ago

> Its a hate crime, not terrorism. I'm not sure that it's any more or less 'terrorism' than the vehicular attacks by Islamists in Europe. How would you describe those?

toomuchtodo 9y ago
> How would you describe those? Premeditated violent acts designed to strike fear into the local populace. Far different then an angry protestor getting in his car to hit other protestors. I would even go so far as to say that most people will continue to think they're safe as long as they're not at a protest (whereas Islamic terrorists in Europe want everyone to feel unsafe everywhere, all the time). The act in question was rage plain and simple, not an act designed to spread fear. Terrorism, by definition, is a violent act designed to express and spread terror in a populace, therefore I don't believe it warrants that definition.
- jacquesm 9y ago
  If you really insist on continuing to want to split this hair consider the possibility that the act of driving that car into a crowd of protestors was to send a message of what could happen to people that take part in counter protests to Neo Nazis. There, that fits your description of terrorism. Now of course we can't know if that's true but at the same time your 'roadrage' argument is ridiculous. Roadrage had less to do with this than it has to do with terrorism.
  - pharrington 9y ago
    That is possible, but far from known. toomuchtodo is trying to make the most accurate assessment possible based from apparent facts.
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      > That is possible, but far from known. Agreed. > toomuchtodo is trying to make the most accurate assessment possible based from apparent facts. No, he's trying to reclass a murder as an incident of roadrage. When you drive a car into a crowd at high speed that transcends mere anger, that's murder and in this particular case the perpetrator is someone who deliberately came to a protest of a lot of people who are on the record as wanting to engage in acts of violence. So when they then do engage in those acts it is no longer simple anger. Simple anger would be if a visitor to a bar would do something like this after being thrown out of a bar. Trying to recast this whole thing as a simple case of an angry protestor at some otherwise peaceful protest is significantly changing the story.
      - toomuchtodo 9y ago
        > No, he's trying to reclass a murder as an incident of roadrage. Do not put words in my mouth. I never said it wasn't murder. I said it was not an act of terrorism. Road rage can end in murder. It does not become a terrorist act.
        jacquesm 9y ago
        > Do not put words in my mouth. I never said it wasn't murder. Here is your comment from upthread: > Are we going to call every road rage incident (1200/year in the US) a terrorist attack now? From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032455 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032455 Which has your name affixed to it. So you are trying to equate this murder to one similar to roadrage, and they have absolutely nothing to do with each other. This person meant to do bodily harm to many others and/or to kill them outright because they were counter protesting his happy family friendly outing with his Neo Nazi buddies. To try to equate this to roadrage is ridiculous. > Road rage can end in murder. Yes it can, but this wasn't roadrage. > It does not become a terrorist act. Indeed, roadrage does not become a terrorist act. But again, this wasn't roadrage. Here is the definition of roadrage for you: "sudden violent anger provoked in a motorist by the actions of another driver." It does not include protesters in groups advocating violence against others going to their cars and subsequently purposefully ramming those cars into crowds of defenseless pedestrians.
        toomuchtodo 9y ago
        I've made my position clear. It was murder. It was not a terrorist act.
      - KirinDave 9y ago
        I apologize for background chatter, but do be careful of this character. He has a nasty habit of trying to intimidate people by approaching their public identity and suggesting you'd be "better off" and "more productive" if you stopped talking about things he doesn't like. He's done it to me, for sure.
  - stickfigure 9y ago
    In all fairness, somebody has to split that hair in order to charge him with murder. Looks like prosecutors have decided on second degree for now.
    - jacquesm 9y ago
      Sure. Note that in many countries acts of terrorism are also simply classed as murder or whatever the end result of the act of terrorism was, there is no specific 'terrorism' section in many bodies of law. And I personally prefer it that way.
      - toomuchtodo 9y ago
        The Barcelona van attack that just happened an hour ago is an example of a vehicular terrorist attack: https://www.reddit.com/live/zgbfbqqsl4h4 https://www.reddit.com/live/zgbfbqqsl4h4
- cmurf 9y ago
  What evidence are you using to infer the motive?

by abiox 9y ago

> Its a hate crime, not terrorism. I'm not sure that it's any more or less 'terrorism' than the vehicular attacks by Islamists in Europe. How would you describe those?

toomuchtodo 9y ago

> How would you describe those? Premeditated violent acts designed to strike fear into the local populace. Far different then an angry protestor getting in his car to hit other protestors. I would even go so far as to say that most people will continue to think they're safe as long as they're not at a protest (whereas Islamic terrorists in Europe want everyone to feel unsafe everywhere, all the time). The act in question was rage plain and simple, not an act designed to spread fear. Terrorism, by definition, is a violent act designed to express and spread terror in a populace, therefore I don't believe it warrants that definition.

jacquesm 9y ago
If you really insist on continuing to want to split this hair consider the possibility that the act of driving that car into a crowd of protestors was to send a message of what could happen to people that take part in counter protests to Neo Nazis. There, that fits your description of terrorism. Now of course we can't know if that's true but at the same time your 'roadrage' argument is ridiculous. Roadrage had less to do with this than it has to do with terrorism.
- pharrington 9y ago
  That is possible, but far from known. toomuchtodo is trying to make the most accurate assessment possible based from apparent facts.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    > That is possible, but far from known. Agreed. > toomuchtodo is trying to make the most accurate assessment possible based from apparent facts. No, he's trying to reclass a murder as an incident of roadrage. When you drive a car into a crowd at high speed that transcends mere anger, that's murder and in this particular case the perpetrator is someone who deliberately came to a protest of a lot of people who are on the record as wanting to engage in acts of violence. So when they then do engage in those acts it is no longer simple anger. Simple anger would be if a visitor to a bar would do something like this after being thrown out of a bar. Trying to recast this whole thing as a simple case of an angry protestor at some otherwise peaceful protest is significantly changing the story.
    - toomuchtodo 9y ago
      > No, he's trying to reclass a murder as an incident of roadrage. Do not put words in my mouth. I never said it wasn't murder. I said it was not an act of terrorism. Road rage can end in murder. It does not become a terrorist act.
      - jacquesm 9y ago
        > Do not put words in my mouth. I never said it wasn't murder. Here is your comment from upthread: > Are we going to call every road rage incident (1200/year in the US) a terrorist attack now? From: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032455 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15032455 Which has your name affixed to it. So you are trying to equate this murder to one similar to roadrage, and they have absolutely nothing to do with each other. This person meant to do bodily harm to many others and/or to kill them outright because they were counter protesting his happy family friendly outing with his Neo Nazi buddies. To try to equate this to roadrage is ridiculous. > Road rage can end in murder. Yes it can, but this wasn't roadrage. > It does not become a terrorist act. Indeed, roadrage does not become a terrorist act. But again, this wasn't roadrage. Here is the definition of roadrage for you: "sudden violent anger provoked in a motorist by the actions of another driver." It does not include protesters in groups advocating violence against others going to their cars and subsequently purposefully ramming those cars into crowds of defenseless pedestrians.
        toomuchtodo 9y ago
        I've made my position clear. It was murder. It was not a terrorist act.
    - KirinDave 9y ago
      I apologize for background chatter, but do be careful of this character. He has a nasty habit of trying to intimidate people by approaching their public identity and suggesting you'd be "better off" and "more productive" if you stopped talking about things he doesn't like. He's done it to me, for sure.
- stickfigure 9y ago
  In all fairness, somebody has to split that hair in order to charge him with murder. Looks like prosecutors have decided on second degree for now.
  - jacquesm 9y ago
    Sure. Note that in many countries acts of terrorism are also simply classed as murder or whatever the end result of the act of terrorism was, there is no specific 'terrorism' section in many bodies of law. And I personally prefer it that way.
    - toomuchtodo 9y ago
      The Barcelona van attack that just happened an hour ago is an example of a vehicular terrorist attack: https://www.reddit.com/live/zgbfbqqsl4h4 https://www.reddit.com/live/zgbfbqqsl4h4
cmurf 9y ago
What evidence are you using to infer the motive?