← Back to context

Comment by abiox

9 years 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?

15 comments

abiox

Reply
toomuchtodo  9 years 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  9 years 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.