Terror is historically the name of a form of draconic government. Your definition is prescriptive and the way I understand it you changed a perceived thread int

Terror is historically the name of a form of draconic government. Your definition is prescriptive and the way I understand it you changed a perceived thread into an intended thread. I'd argue that an act of desperation is rather aimless, frustation rather apolitical and anger not even well defined and well unintentional. You'd have to assume that a riot is concerted or agitated and that rioters were used, by a government against civilians. That's a real possibility, but it would also include kinda civil wars. The current understanding as formed by extensive definitions does not capture mass hysteria though. It's simply terrible, a real riot.