Is the shooting in Dallas going to be considered terrorism?

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 08:46:33 -0400

like to know your thoughts... The Dallas Police Chief stated the gunman stated that he wanted to kill White people and White Police Officers because he was anger with the recent shootings. This is the use of violence to make a political statement....which could be interpreted as Terrorism.

Response by LTJG Robert M. made Jul 8 at 2016 8:48 AM

LTJG Robert M. — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 08:48:06 -0400

Knowing our present administration, my guess is that it will be called "workplace violence"

Response by PO1 William "Chip" Nagel made Jul 8 at 2016 8:48 AM

PO1 William "Chip" Nagel — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 08:48:54 -0400

Radicalism, Most Definitely and since they caught them alive and got the shooters perspective sounds like they wanted to put fear and terror into Law Enforcement, I would say that is Terrorism.

Response by Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2016 8:54 AM

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 08:54:12 -0400

"We will not let a coward change our democracy" "We will defend our freedoms with our lives". Remember these words from the Dallas Police chief as the conversation shifts from killing to gun control on the political stage.

Response by SrA Edward Vong made Jul 8 at 2016 8:57 AM

SrA Edward Vong — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 08:57:28 -0400

I do consider it an act of terrorism as it was a to create fear and mass hysteria while making a violent political statement.

Response by Cpl Jeff N. made Jul 8 at 2016 8:57 AM

Cpl Jeff N. — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 08:57:35 -0400

No doubt he (and the others) are criminals and motivated by perceived injustice or poor treatment by law enforcement of others. The shooter the DPD talked to wanted to kill white people and white cops and was sympathetic with the BLM group (don't know if he was a member assuming they have membership).

If he was a member of BLM and we call this terrorism we are by extension calling BLM a terrorist organization. For that reason alone it will likely not be called terrorism but criminal activity.

The hate crime moniker might get attached to it but that will likely be it. Hate crimes are a mentally weak concept created by a lame society that tries to make some crimes worse that others because of motivation. We should punish the crime regardless of motivation. The crime is no worse because of his hatred. The dead cops are no more or less dead and his crime is no worse because of his motivation.

Response by SFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2016 9:05 AM

SFC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 09:05:53 -0400

Possibly but then they kinda brought that situation on them selves. lets remember that All lives matter.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2016 9:08 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 09:08:58 -0400

Terrorism or not he's going to fry.

Response by SGT Bryon Sergent made Jul 8 at 2016 9:14 AM

SGT Bryon Sergent — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 09:14:38 -0400

I live in the Dallas area! We have had 12 Police officers shot and 2 Civilians. Out of the 12 Police officers 5 are deceased. 1 DART (Dallas Area Rapid Transit) Officer and 4 DPD officers. It isn't Blue lives or Black lives it is ALL lives that matter. This isn't the answer to respond to in kind. There are bad police like there are bad people. I know at one time they were reporting automatic Gun fire but it was Rapid fire. They have arrested 2, looking for another and the one that was holed up took his own life. That was the one that was cornered in the 2 floor parking garage.

Doesn't matter your beliefs, pray for the families of the fallen and the officers that are still serving this great city.

Response by SSG Eddye Royal made Jul 8 at 2016 9:38 AM

SSG Eddye Royal — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 09:38:39 -0400

I live in Dallas, Tx.

I put this on my FACEBOOK with both military, civilian, and my DPD family that work for the city.

This is sad; because something happens in part of this COUNTRY YOU CANT TAKE THE LIFE OR LIVES IN ANOTHER PART that has not done anything to YOU!! I have friends and FAMILY IN ON DPD!!

I can also be called to perform that same DUTIES; and I WOULD NOT WANT MY FAMILY TO BE Grieving Like these in Dallas, Tx; because of the Killer. That took the LIVES because of what happened in another state. Even though the POLICE WHERE #WRONG in my OPINION IN BOTH STATES!!

I will pray for all the all the families.

Response by Cpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2016 9:48 AM

Cpl Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 09:48:40 -0400

It should be. BP (Black Power) group is a domestic terror organization who is advocating more assassinations. I live in the DFW area and the actions of these terrorists disgust me.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/world-news/dallas-police-shooting-black-power-8378177

'Black Power group' claims to be behind police killings and warns more to come

"More Will Be Assassinated In The Coming Days! Do You Like The Work Of Our Assassins? Get Your Own Sniper" read a post on the Black Power Political Organisation Facebook account

Response by MCPO Roger Collins made Jul 8 at 2016 9:50 AM

MCPO Roger Collins — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 09:50:18 -0400

Terrorism is a strategy to achieve a political goal. What was the goal? The people of Dallas have been terrorized, but only law enforcement was attacked. No, our nation has been divided due to poor leadership at the top. Crime is increasing in large cities because our LEOs are concerned about being prosecuted for doing their jobs. Guess who loses with this dynamic when they back off?

Response by SGT Jason Latham made Jul 8 at 2016 9:50 AM

SGT Jason Latham — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 09:50:26 -0400

It is simply hate in General. And the gunman is stupid.

Response by MSG Stan Hutchison made Jul 8 at 2016 10:01 AM

MSG Stan Hutchison — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 10:01:42 -0400

This is a violent and tragic reminder that we, as a civilized society must take a long hard look at problems we would rather ignore or place blame based on our own biased opinions.
"It is the black community's fault"
"It is the white community's fault."
"It is the police departments' fault."

No! It is our society's fault. It is time we addressed that.

Response by Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin made Jul 8 at 2016 10:10 AM

Maj Kevin "Mac" McLaughlin — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 10:10:20 -0400

Yes... FBI defines Terrorism as “The unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Jul 8 at 2016 10:12 AM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 10:12:47 -0400

I have not looked up the definition. And I'm getting ready to take my Homestay family to there Bus. But if you but the terrorism label for everything just like Democrats use the word Racist. Aren't you diminishing it. I read ine post saying Right Wing terrorist.

Response by Cpl Mark A. Morris made Jul 8 at 2016 10:18 AM

Cpl Mark A. Morris — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 10:18:24 -0400

Good morning Maj.,

There is not enough information to answer your question at this time. I suspect, withholding of information is due to rounding up support. It will be interesting when the perps are known to the public.

My respects to the fallen and to their families at this terrible time.

Mark A. Morris BS, RDMS, RVT

Response by PO3 Ricky Foster made Jul 8 at 2016 10:36 AM

PO3 Ricky Foster — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 10:36:25 -0400

Good point. Terrorism is defined by any action that instill fears in the general public or specific groups. In this case, it can be argues that both whites in general and cops specific are targets. So yes this is an act of terrorism and should be handled as such.

Response by PO1 Stephen McDermott made Jul 8 at 2016 10:41 AM

PO1 Stephen McDermott — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 10:41:41 -0400

No. He was not trying to make a political statement or affect political change. He was trying to kill whites/cops/bonus points for both. Terrorism, at it's crux, attempts to force political change through violence. He was just killing with no end game, aim, or manifesto to express it.

The shooter was just a violent, vengeful, deranged person. The shooter was pissed at recent events and was either off his meds or did not seek medical treatment. This person was, to use the military term, batshit insane.
We continue to look at race, guns, and anything else we possibly can while ignoring the mentally unstable and immature in our society. Liberals scream about institutional racism, the President and other collectivists/statists think it's about guns, apologists think it's the police (though that MN cop was unstable and that woman has a video to prove it!). Until we do something about protecting society from the mentally ill and unstable, this will continue to happen. But that is a double-edged sword - in that you or I could be labelled unstable and have our rights taken from us without recourse.

Response by CW4 Guy Butler made Jul 8 at 2016 11:06 AM

CW4 Guy Butler — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 11:06:41 -0400

Dallas police apparently have three suspects in custody; I'd expect them to be able to make an informed determination later on today. I'm willing to wait for that.

Response by SSG Stephan Pendarvis made Jul 8 at 2016 11:16 AM

SSG Stephan Pendarvis — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 11:16:35 -0400

To me it's all terrorism. On the police and the civilians acts...WE ARE ALL AT FAULT AND WE WILL NOT BE ABLE TO STOP THIS AT ALL IF WE DO NOT STOP JUDGING AND HATING EACH OTHER ON THIS PLANET!

Response by 1LT William Clardy made Jul 8 at 2016 11:22 AM

1LT William Clardy — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 11:22:47 -0400

Lt Col Private RallyPoint Member, if you want to kill someone based on their skin color or ethnicity, you're not trying to terrorize them, you're trying to kill them.

Wouldn't a more pertinent question be whether or not the suspects with be charged with hate crimes, given the race-based motivation?

Response by PO1 John Miller made Jul 8 at 2016 11:24 AM

PO1 John Miller — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 11:24:44 -0400

Terrorism? Yes. It's also a hate crime.

Response by Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen made Jul 8 at 2016 11:51 AM

Lt Col John (Jack) Christensen — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 11:51:05 -0400

Yes, domestic terrorism as opposed to international. Anytime you use violence against a group of people to express your opinion you are committing a terrorist act.

Response by 1SG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2016 11:51 AM

1SG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 11:51:15 -0400

This was a planned and coordinated attack from elevated positions with an escape plan. That is a level of sophistication that is both unprecedented for a spontaneous demonstration (word choice purposeful) and marks a departure from previous incidents at community demonstrations against police-involved shootings.
I don't think it is wise to give these turds the legitimacy of calling them terrorists, as it risks making them a cause celebre among other angry people.
Rather, the full force and fury if the Justice System to bring these guys to justice and hang them out to dry.
The administration needs to show that they are not friendly nor sympathetic to those who act lawlessly and use "I am angry" as an excuse.

Response by SrA Chris "Shadow" McGee made Jul 8 at 2016 12:00 PM

SrA Chris "Shadow" McGee — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 12:00:48 -0400

I have a feeling it will eventually be seen as some form of terrorism. It fits the description, people are just not used to this particular form of it anymore.

Response by SPC Kirk Gilles made Jul 8 at 2016 12:15 PM

SPC Kirk Gilles — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 12:15:50 -0400

No sir, I think we will see every kind of excuse being presented to soften this up. It may have already started. Even though he claimed BLM membership right up to the end, the focus, at the moment, is that he was Army.
The word Terror is reserved for those guys far far away. Next focus will be Trump. Rev Jackson has already said that Trump caused this (source UK Mail today).

Response by SGT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2016 12:43 PM

SGT Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 12:43:47 -0400

Let's see. What is terrorism? Terrorism is the unofficial or unauthorized use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims. Was it a political aim? That's up for argument.

Response by MSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2016 12:50 PM

MSG Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 12:50:44 -0400

Do the actions meet any of the following elements?

Definitions of Terrorism in the U.S. Code

18 U.S.C. § 2331 defines "international terrorism" and "domestic terrorism" for purposes of Chapter 113B of the Code, entitled "Terrorism”:

"International terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:

Involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
Appear to be intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and
Occur primarily outside the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S., or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum.*
"Domestic terrorism" means activities with the following three characteristics:

Involve acts dangerous to human life that violate federal or state law;
Appear intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping; and
Occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S.
18 U.S.C. § 2332b defines the term "federal crime of terrorism" as an offense that:

Is calculated to influence or affect the conduct of government by intimidation or coercion, or to retaliate against government conduct; and
Is a violation of one of several listed statutes, including § 930(c) (relating to killing or attempted killing during an attack on a federal facility with a dangerous weapon); and § 1114 (relating to killing or attempted killing of officers and employees of the U.S.).
* FISA defines "international terrorism" in a nearly identical way, replacing "primarily" outside the U.S. with "totally" outside the U.S. 50 U.S.C. § 1801(c).

Source: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/investigate/terrorism/terrorism-definition

Terrorism Definition

Definition of terrorism, definition of terrorism FBI, domestic terrorism, define terrorism, domestic terrorism definition, terrorism defined, FBI definition of domestic terrorism, definition terrorism, what is the definition of terrorism, definition of domestic terrorism, define domestic terrorism, the definition of terrorism, FBI’s definition of terrorism, “terrorism”, FBI domestic terrorism definition, U.S. definition of terrorism, “domestic...

Response by SSG Stephan Pendarvis made Jul 8 at 2016 12:56 PM

SSG Stephan Pendarvis — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 12:56:33 -0400

It seems to be terrorism on both sides. A white officer with a badge and hates black people is a racist. A black man with hate for white people is also a racist.

Racism + badge + targeting black people = Terrorism.
Racism + legal weapon + targeting white people = Terrorism.

Response by MSgt James Mullis made Jul 8 at 2016 1:31 PM

MSgt James Mullis — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 13:31:38 -0400

At this time, we don't have enough information to list the shooters as "home grown" terrorists. So, I would call the attack in Dallas a criminal act and criminal conspiracy. However, I do get the feeling that the shooters may turn out to be "useful idiots" who were riled up then goaded into action by as yet unknown (or at least unnamed) bad actors.

The fact that the police were able to take some of the conspirators and shooters into custody, without their committing suicide, shows that they are not in the same fanatical league as radical Muslim terrorists.

I wonder if in 20 years one or more of the shooters and conspirators will become celebrated College professor(s). For those of you under 30, this is an allusion to the anti-government bombers of the late 60's and early 70's., many of whom ended up as college professors and one later became a former neighbor and possible friend of President Obama.

Response by 1LT Susan Bailey made Jul 8 at 2016 1:34 PM

1LT Susan Bailey — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 13:34:58 -0400

I don't know. What I do know is this is simply an act of hate and cowardice.

We are not living in the Wild West of yesteryear, and people should behave like this country has a system of laws. A supposed civilized society does not condone the murder of people just because you happen to disagree with events relayed in a newspaper, or because you don't like the color of a person's skin. Based on the hidden and not so hidden agendas of the various media outlets in this country, it's amazing to me that we actually hear anything resembling any degree of truth these days.

I realize that people of color in this country have experienced and continue to experience the butt end of prejudice and bias due to their skin color and that in itself is not right. When I've seen it, I've said something about it. I personally don't understand why skin color is such a big deal. I prefer to look at the content of someone's character than their skin. Maybe it's because I'm a nurse, although I've met those who are also prejudiced. Either way, this event was an evil thing. It seemed to be planned, and if the gunman was quoted correctly about his reasons for doing this, than it was racist in motivation, and furthering the degradation of their issues.

Someone will probably make the argument somewhere that these shootings were the desperate plea of a marginalized group of people who felt they had no option but to take these actions. But, in doing so I submit that they have become no better than the thing they hate the most. So what is the point?

If people are tired of seeing bad shootings, or police action, get involved in your community. Work with the system or work to change it. This takes energy, motivation, and time. It's not a quick fix, it's not always as satisfying as a quick resolution. But, over time things can get better. Problem areas can be identified and addressed. But for many, this kind of involvement in solving the problem is quickly dismissed because the results aren't proven or worse yet they assume nothing will change. And take actions that may be well-intentioned but never produce the overall intended result without inflicting harm on others. This doesn't solve anything. If you want change, it has to be worked for, not just shouted around at demonstrations. No just by fomenting more hate and violence or adopting this as your strategy.

I was in MD at the time of the Baltimore riots after the Freddie Gray incident. No one wins in those situations. No one. Businesses owned by black members of the community were torched and destroyed. A building that took years of fundraising to build for homeless and underserved elderly members of the community, was razed just as it was poised to open. People were hurt, business looted. And I personally believe that the investigations were rushed and this has resulted in two acquittals thus far vs. allowing the facts to be found and investigated properly in order to build the appropriate case if there was one. I simply do not understand how this makes a positive solution for the original anger surrounding the injuries Freddie Gray died from.

I don't want to hear about how people are angry over long term abuse. I get angry too. Living in MD I have experienced prejudice as a white person who is actually in the minority in that area on a regular basis (no question- my experience was mild compared to some). It's terrible for anyone to experience. But that doesn't mean I automatically hate people of color because some people of color treated me poorly. I don't generalize that experience to all people of that ethnic background. Why should I? And I certainly don't go about planning the mass murder of people who happen to have a darker shade of skin than my own as a result. This is simply and act of cowardice and hate. Face your enemy. Take the time and energy to work towards a positive resolution of the problems. Don't cross the line and become what you hate, just to make a point. It's a crappy way to represent yourself and your issues.

Response by MAJ Alvin B. made Jul 8 at 2016 2:06 PM

MAJ Alvin B. — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 14:06:23 -0400

At this point in time it is a criminal act, and it will be treated as such. We (USA) have been reluctant to treat domestic acts of violence as terrorism unless confronted with (IMHO) tremendous evidence to force us to reconsider the act as such. The truth of the situation will become clear in due course. We should not rush to judgement and allow the investigation to take its natural course. Again (IMHO), it is the rush to make a snap judgement in the heat of the moment, with incomplete information, based on emotion not intellect (over the course of several events) that at the very least served as the pretext, if not primary motivation for the events in Dallas. We will know the facts in time if the investigations are allowed to proceed unencumbered.

Response by CPT Ahmed Faried made Jul 8 at 2016 2:16 PM

CPT Ahmed Faried — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 14:16:06 -0400

I predict this will quickly devolve into folks moving to their political camps and the majority here finding a way to blame POTUS for this....because apparently when he speaks out against police targeting of minorities he must hate them.

Response by SGT Brian Wall made Jul 8 at 2016 2:42 PM

SGT Brian Wall — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 14:42:10 -0400

Based off statements the gunman made to negotiators im going to say yes and it was also a hate crime.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 8 at 2016 3:00 PM

SCPO Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 15:00:08 -0400

It should be considered exactly what it is - an incredibly irrational, criminal activity by black thugs against white police officers resulting in premeditated murder and aggravated assault. Terrorism is a highly overused term, just like racism and transparency.

Response by Capt Michael Greene made Jul 8 at 2016 4:18 PM

Capt Michael Greene — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 16:18:35 -0400

The relevant part of the definition of terrorism at the FBI is that the act:
"appears intended (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population; (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination. or kidnapping;"

So I'd say no. Unless the prosecutor wants to make the case that the "conduct of government" or the "policy of government" is to shoot unarmed young black men. Since no prosecutor is going to say that the government is "conducting" killings of YBM, that prosecutor should not charge the suspects with terrorism.

Of course, no matter what this guy is charged with, a jury will certainly find him guilty of it.

Response by CPT Pedro Meza made Jul 8 at 2016 5:31 PM

CPT Pedro Meza — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 17:31:17 -0400

Let us address it as another individual and possible ARMY reservist with mental health issues and an assault weapon, which is the same thing I have said about Orlando, Sandy Hook, Colorado, etc...

Response by Col Dona Marie Iversen made Jul 8 at 2016 8:35 PM

Col Dona Marie Iversen — Fri, 08 Jul 2016 20:35:46 -0400

Not terrorism ! Ignorance! Sadly the killer was in the military, had to have mental illness to commit such an act. ALL LIVE MATTER!

Response by CW2 Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 9 at 2016 12:24 AM

CW2 Private RallyPoint Member — Sat, 09 Jul 2016 00:24:24 -0400

The word Terrorism is thrown around wayyyyy to much. Call it what it is, a bad guy with some serious head issues who was hacked off, had a big chip on his shoulder and picked up a gun aimed it, pulled the trigger and took his anger out on innocent people. The gun did not kill those people they were murdered.

Response by Mimi Chapman made Jul 9 at 2016 8:55 AM

Mimi Chapman — Sat, 09 Jul 2016 08:55:20 -0400

Response by PO1 Jack Howell made Jul 10 at 2016 9:09 AM

PO1 Jack Howell — Sun, 10 Jul 2016 09:09:15 -0400

I disagree. This guy stated that he hated white people and, specifically, white police officers. At most this would be classified as a hate crime. Investigators would have to uncover strong evidence indication that would change the classification of the crime. Also, your definition is a little off. If people use your statement, then the L.A. riots in 1965 and 1992, the riots in Ferguson, and the riots in Baltimore have to be classified the same way.

Response by SPC Edward Robinson made Jul 11 at 2016 7:48 AM

SPC Edward Robinson — Mon, 11 Jul 2016 07:48:39 -0400

I usually rise every day around 3 AM and read the news around the world. I came across this article by a Black American Police Officer from Florida. Read the article the Man hits the nail on the head in the first swing of the hammer. He knows what he is talking about. I pray that he and his family are safe when he goes to work to protect and serve the people of his community.
http://www.chicksontheright.com/black-cops-powerful-message-black-lives-matter-agitators-must-read/

Black Cop's POWERFUL Message To The Black Lives Matter Agitators Is A MUST Read

THIS.

Response by CSM James Winslow made Jul 12 at 2016 7:08 AM

CSM James Winslow — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 07:08:00 -0400

Depends on how you define "Terror". There is no one book definition of "Terrorism" as there are different motivations for committing such acts. There must be a qualifier attached to the term to narrow the definition if we are to try to determine the motivations of the perpetrator. "Religious Terror" classifies one, "Political Terror" another, and "Racial (or Cultural) Terror" another. In the broadest definition, Terror can be defined as "A public act of extreme and unexpected violence, targeting a particular element of society to positively or negatively sway the opinion or attitude of the whole of a culture or society in a specific manner". The Objective of a Terrorist act is to reduce society's confidence in their government to regulate and enforce the rule of law in the community. There are other definitions, each made according to the goals or mission of the organization (the FBI version being the most widely used), but that is about it.

Response by MAJ Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 12 at 2016 7:21 AM

MAJ Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 07:21:49 -0400

"This is the use of violence to make a political statement..."
Well, no, at least not clearly. By your own statement immediately prior, he did it out of anger. If that is in fact true, then this very likely is *not* terrorism as defined. If, however, even a small part of his actions can be cleanly linked to trying to make a political statement above and beyond his anger/resentment, then it is terrorism. One of the problems we now have is that the gunman is dead, which means we can only comb through his recent history to make a best-guess at motives rather than finding it out first-hand.

Response by MSgt Martin Okulski made Jul 12 at 2016 7:48 AM

MSgt Martin Okulski — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 07:48:09 -0400

Although any action that causes a person to feel terror is technically an act of terrorism. HOWEVER , if we use the term terrorism, the response is not longer the jurisdiction of local law enforcement, state troopers, or the Sheriff's department, it is then the jurisdiction of Homeland Security, the FBI and other government agencies. So I would hesitate to call any illegal action by a natural born citizen of the USA an act of terror unless the intended result was to further the cause of a foreign group or government, such as the actions of ISIS, ISIL or both, etc ......

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 12 at 2016 8:16 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 08:16:35 -0400

it should be ckassified as terrorism and the orginizor should be tried as a terrorist for directingthe hate speach sgainst the police

Response by FN Charlie Spivey made Jul 12 at 2016 9:14 AM

FN Charlie Spivey — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:14:13 -0400

At the very least, it should be considered a hate crime, but with the liberal justice dept. not likely.

Response by SCPO Don Baker made Jul 12 at 2016 9:17 AM

SCPO Don Baker — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:17:11 -0400

No, because wasn't white.

Response by SPC Anna Larson made Jul 12 at 2016 9:59 AM

SPC Anna Larson — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 09:59:25 -0400

My personal opinion is that EVERY mass shooting from Sandy Hook to Gabby Giffords to San Diego to Orlando to Dallas etc are all acts of terror no matter the motivation behind it. Once you open fire on a large group of people in a public venue, it's terrorisim.

Response by SSG Mike Simpson made Jul 12 at 2016 10:04 AM

SSG Mike Simpson — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 10:04:39 -0400

When a black shooter says he wants to kill white people and white police officers, then yes - that is domestic terrorism. What's really the greater shame is how the current POTUS and his AG have done nothing to calm the situation. They've done the exact opposite. Martin Luther King Sr must be spinning in his grave to see how this sitting President has unraveled the civil right movement of the 60's and 70's.

Response by TSgt David Camin made Jul 12 at 2016 11:09 AM

TSgt David Camin — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 11:09:52 -0400

I think it is but also are all the mass shooting and they seem to never get labeled as terrorist. Look at abortion clinics. They are always getting shot up but you never hear them say white christian terrorist which most of them are but they are entirely confused about what being a Christian requires. No matter what your belief is concerning abortion this is still wrong to do. I mean when employees have to report to a civilian job wearing bullet proof vests everyday then something is wrong. It just seems that as a society we love to always use labels so why not use them equally.

Response by COL Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 12 at 2016 11:28 AM

COL Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 11:28:04 -0400

I've been wondering why I haven't heard more of the "hate crime" narrative. Seems to fit that more so than terrorism, by the DHS definition anyway.

Response by LCpl Kareem Dixon made Jul 12 at 2016 12:06 PM

LCpl Kareem Dixon — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:06:04 -0400

Domestic terrorism!

Response by LCpl Jeffrey Labiak made Jul 12 at 2016 12:48 PM

LCpl Jeffrey Labiak — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:48:55 -0400

That is a tough call for me to judge on. It seems that it could be considered terrorism, or perhaps a hate crime. Hatred against the police, hatred against white people etc. etc. Seems like hatred itself is alive and well in America.

Response by SPC Byron Skinner made Jul 12 at 2016 12:51 PM

SPC Byron Skinner — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 12:51:30 -0400

Spec. 4 Byron Skinner…Major Alvin B. Makes some good points and its to early to place a definitive label on this act. The US Code. Is rafter broad of what it considers a terrorist act and the shooting event in Dallas certainly fill many of the boxes…Another consideration and a very important one is was any conspiracy involved. Did the shooter convey to any person or group what he was planning…The Purchase on any ammunition or weapons on the internet and that product was moved by common carrier across state borders gives the Federal Government jurisdiction inters in this case. Also the discovery of bomb making materials in the shooters home brings in the BATFE. It is likely the Dallas or Texas Law Enforcement will have little involvement in this event…The bad thing for soldiers and especially the US Army is the connection of the shooter to the Army it is a confirmation of historical evidence that war veterans are prone to violence from Shay's Rebellion to Dallas … This belief hurts all Veterans, I will not be surprised that PTSD doesn't enter into the equation especially in any legal action against the VA for none treatment…I think if the Army would have separated the shooter with a BCD things might be a bit easier on the legal end of this mess.

Response by CPT Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 12 at 2016 1:13 PM

CPT Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 13:13:56 -0400

Depends on whether or not the group he was loosely affiliated with (New Black Panther Party) is classified as a domestic terrorist group...

Response by CAPT Hiram Patterson made Jul 12 at 2016 2:00 PM

CAPT Hiram Patterson — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:00:38 -0400

I'm from Dallas and yes it is! The gunman certainly terrified the civilians.

Response by LCpl Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 12 at 2016 2:38 PM

LCpl Private RallyPoint Member — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:38:29 -0400

no, why should it be? Unfortunately Domestic Terror is this administrations way of lumping in a multitude of violent acts that otherwise should be properly classified, such as the Orlando and San Bernardino which are blatant Islamic Terrorist violence. By including all races, all religions, Domestic Terror clouds the Muslim factor. The Dallas shooting is a racist hate crime committed by a man who wanted to kill white cops. Again, if tagged as "Domestic Terrorism" it will cloud the black racist aspect. The deaths of the two black men, in my opinion after watching the video's, deserve a murder charge and Grand Jury. TRhe police officers need to defend their killings in court and let a jury decide if their justifications are BS or not.

Response by SFC J Fullerton made Jul 12 at 2016 2:40 PM

SFC J Fullerton — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 14:40:36 -0400

Domestic terrorism, no question. The motive was racially and politically driven.

Response by TSgt James Carson made Jul 12 at 2016 4:04 PM

TSgt James Carson — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 16:04:24 -0400

It was a hate crime. The person who did the shooting in Dallas said he wanted to kill police officers, especially white. He couldn't have the law his way as most criminals.

Response by SSG Richard Hackwith made Jul 12 at 2016 6:26 PM

SSG Richard Hackwith — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 18:26:05 -0400

It is domestic terrorism, exactly like Timothy McVeigh in Oklahoma City. No connection to any organization, just an unstable individual taking out his frustrations on a world that has somehow wronged him or cheated out of whatever he thought he was entitled to.

Response by CW4 Angel C. made Jul 12 at 2016 6:39 PM

CW4 Angel C. — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 18:39:33 -0400

Yes! Domestic terrorism.

Response by PO2 David Allender made Jul 12 at 2016 6:44 PM

PO2 David Allender — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 18:44:40 -0400

It appears to me that hate crimes are rising swiftly in our country, and nobody is willing to try to make any changes to curb it. Yes, the black communities across America do have an issue. We all se videos where white officers shoot while 4 other officers hold a guy down; We see a man responding to orders of a white officer, and when he is told to raise his hands, the officer shoots him. There are many other incidences, but you get the pictures. Unfortunately we do have rogue cops that are not fit to be in uniform. I'd like to see the police Dept. start giving Psychological test to help weed out these folks, before we have another civil war. I'd like to see equal justice for all, but today it just won't happen. Politicians won't respond, afraid of losing votes. Police Chiefs won't respond because their force is too small after cuts. I do not see any other alternative except Psychological testing. i still love my country, and I do not like to see it fall apart because the ones who need to get something started, will not. GOD bless the United States of America.

Response by LCpl Stephen Sharp made Jul 12 at 2016 9:23 PM

LCpl Stephen Sharp — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 21:23:02 -0400

I think it should be considered "TERRORISM". However I'll bet the "FIX" is already in and considering our present administrations record I wouldn't be surprised if the ATTORNEY GENERAL has already reduced it JAY WALKING.

Response by CPL Deanna Green (Parkinson) made Jul 12 at 2016 11:55 PM

CPL Deanna Green (Parkinson) — Tue, 12 Jul 2016 23:55:08 -0400

I understand the rationale, but I believe the statutes still support capital murder based on a hate crime. I could be wrong on this of course. Unfortunately the suspect, and officers are dead so no court involvement per se.' It will be left to the court of public opinion, leaving the families and communities to deal with the aftermath.

Response by Cpl George Goodwin made Jul 13 at 2016 1:52 AM

Cpl George Goodwin — Wed, 13 Jul 2016 01:52:42 -0400

This was both terrorism and a racially biased crime.

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 13 at 2016 7:43 AM

SSG Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 13 Jul 2016 07:43:41 -0400

The shooting in Dallas will not be considered terrorism for the mere fact, his sole intent was only to target a specific race of people, just like the kid from Carolina done. People tend to forget that true terrorist don't care about what color you are or your nationality, all they see is that you are western which is basically anyone or any country with ties to the U.S. 9/11 is a good example of terrorism along with London, Paris, Brussels, and Turkey. What do those 4 places have in common? They all have ties to the U.S................

Response by MAJ Glenn Lasater made Jul 13 at 2016 12:43 PM

MAJ Glenn Lasater — Wed, 13 Jul 2016 12:43:19 -0400

If not, it should be. Evidence exists that the primary perp had ties to radical Islam.

Response by SSgt Don Prosser made Jul 13 at 2016 2:14 PM

SSgt Don Prosser — Wed, 13 Jul 2016 14:14:16 -0400

In all honesty, I do not see it happening under the current administration. Although the person responsible for the murders of the 5 officers is affiliated with a Black extremest group. The group itself is not listed as a domestic terrorist organization. They should be, as well as the New Black Panther Party and the BLM movement. Unfortunately, it does not fit this current administrations talking points and agenda. Very sad, at what has happened to race relations in the last 8 years.

Response by Capt Robert Jakubowski made Jul 13 at 2016 3:47 PM

Capt Robert Jakubowski — Wed, 13 Jul 2016 15:47:33 -0400

I feel BLM is a terrorist organisation.

Response by SSG Robert Spina made Jul 13 at 2016 5:17 PM

SSG Robert Spina — Wed, 13 Jul 2016 17:17:42 -0400

I DONT KNOW WHAT THE GOVERNMENT IS CALLING IT BUT I AM CALLING IT TERRORISM

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 15 at 2016 3:55 PM

SPC Private RallyPoint Member — Fri, 15 Jul 2016 15:55:30 -0400

No. Is it terrorism for the people who swore to serve and protect our cities and states (cops) can kill unarmed people for "resisting arrest?"

Response by TSgt Kenneth Ellis made Jul 17 at 2016 1:15 AM

TSgt Kenneth Ellis — Sun, 17 Jul 2016 01:15:32 -0400

No they are going to chalk it up to ptsd.

Response by SPC Jeff Payne made Jul 17 at 2016 5:10 AM

SPC Jeff Payne — Sun, 17 Jul 2016 05:10:44 -0400

WEll it should be ???

Response by LCpl Hilton Hoskins made Jul 17 at 2016 11:37 PM

LCpl Hilton Hoskins — Sun, 17 Jul 2016 23:37:13 -0400

Yes it's an act of terrorism, just like it was an act of terrorism when Dylann Roof shot those 9 Black people in the church, just like the guy who shot up the movie theater in Louisiana, just like the guy who shot up the movie theater in Arizona, just like the guys who shot up the college campuses in California, Virginia, and Oregon. These are acts of terrorism against the American people, just like police brutality is an act of terrorism.

Response by PFC Private RallyPoint Member made Jul 20 at 2016 1:47 AM

PFC Private RallyPoint Member — Wed, 20 Jul 2016 01:47:53 -0400

It definitely fits the definition of terrorism, however I don't like the definition of terrorism. I think in the public mind, "terrorism" and "terrorist" means someone who kills or destroys to create fear without a legitimate political objective. This connotation is different than the definition on the books. I would like to see this act called terrorism, but is the definition of terrorism legitimate? The definition excludes violence by the State, so if we are to take the definition as it stands, the violence by the British against American colonists could not be called terrorism. However, could the American Revolution be considered terrorism? The skirmish at Lexington and may or may not have been provoked by the British, but if we assume it was, then were the colonists merely defending themselves? It is clear anti-British sentiments abounded before this confrontation, and the colonists took shots at the British ranks all the way to Concord. Does that make the colonists terrorists? My question is, what is the difference between a rebel and a terrorist? It would seem that history is only written by the victors, who vindicate themselves after the strong have triumphed. Even so, the rebels consider their cause just in the end, but consider any future revolutions as rebellions.
Don't misunderstand me. I am a police officer, and I was shocked and saddened and frightened by the murdering of police officers in Dallas, and the motives of the murderer are clear. I believe he is a terrorist, because he shot and killed good men who's objective in their occupation was to serve and protect their communities, and that is what they were doing at the moment they were murdered. But what if those police officers were corrupt, and the shooter had pre-identified them as such, and believed himself a vigilante who was bringing justice? These are bigger questions that I think need answering. The current definition of terrorism could be expanded to include other actions besides violence, and could be applied to any American citizen at the will of a political elite who increasingly fail to hold themselves accountable to the American people. I think we need a clearer definition for the term "terrorism". We need to ask ourselves as a society, is it wrong to rebel against a government? Is it wrong to rebel if the government is good? Is it wrong to rebel if the government is corrupt? Is any rebellion that utilizes violence an act of terrorism, or is it only an indication of the resolve of a people to bring about change for their own good? Or is it the resolve of a corrupt population determined to overthrow a benevolent government that evil may increase? It is hard to pin these things down, and I fear we never will.

Response by SFC Bill Snyder made Jul 23 at 2016 12:54 PM

SFC Bill Snyder — Sat, 23 Jul 2016 12:54:37 -0400

Not by the Chief Terrorist an Loretta (all they need is some love) Lynch.

Response by SPC Byron Skinner made Jul 28 at 2016 2:58 PM

SPC Byron Skinner — Thu, 28 Jul 2016 14:58:45 -0400

Sp4 Byron Skinner…To answer the Terrorism, yes (under US Code) it meets the definition of a "Terrorist Act", the shooter was not after a specific individual but a class, "White Law Enforcement Officers", it also qualifies as a "Hate Crime" in that he was targeting a specific race…The method that Law Enforcement used to bring down the shooter is in question.