Why do we not count rioters as domestic terrorists?

2015-04-28T08:29:42-04:00

With the state of the country as it is, and the civil unrest that we are facing. Why do we put up with being walked over as a country? This is a free country, if you don't like it leave. If you are comiting acts of terror then you need to start to put them down! Or am I off point?

Response by Col Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 28 at 2015 8:32 AM

2015-04-28T08:32:23-04:00

Exactly! IMHO that's what they are. I am literally disgusted as I watch what is happening In Baltimore where I work and go to school!

Response by Lt Col Fred Marheine, PMP made Apr 28 at 2015 8:38 AM

2015-04-28T08:38:25-04:00

Not to split hairs, but generally terrorism is defined as organized violence against innocents/non-combatants to affect political change. I think the missing elements in most riots is the lack of organization towards a political objective - it's essentially pure lawlessness for the sake of either perverse pleasure in destruction or personal gain in looting. I do think we need to resist applying "terrorist" to violent activities to those situations where it applies or it loses it's descriptive value - much like "war on poverty" or "war on drugs."

Response by SSG Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 28 at 2015 8:57 AM

2015-04-28T08:57:05-04:00

Constitution. Bill of Rights.

What was our country founded on? You might remember the Boston Tea Party was a political protest by the Sons of Liberty.

Response by Sgt Aaron Kennedy, MS made Apr 28 at 2015 9:05 AM

2015-04-28T09:05:30-04:00

Because rioters are not necessarily committing acts of Terrorism, which is what makes someone as a Terrorist.

Response by Maj Chris Nelson made Apr 28 at 2015 10:57 AM

2015-04-28T10:57:36-04:00

I can see both sides of the fence on this....call it terrorism, can't call it terrorism. The people living in the area of impact I am sure feel fear, intimidation, and terrorized to even come out of their house. THEY will say this is a form of terrorism. Those that say that it does not meet the definition of terrorism because of a lack of coordinated political objective, I can see this also...up to a point. While there is no coordination as such, I think there are 2-3 different "objectives".....
1. Civil disobedience to highlight perceived injustice (white vs. black, cops vs. 'innocent victims', legal system type issues). If they remain peaceful, they are well within their rights.
2. Looting/rioting: MUCH less organized. I think it can be broken down into 2 catagories: A. self gratification (I am doing this to get my new TV/shoes/stuff under the cover of everything else going on). B. Violence: pure frustration, often coupled with poverty, lack of education, false sense of entitlement, and a perceived wronging to their "group".

SOME of the looting/rioting can probably be linked to civil disobedience, which can be linked to a political objective, which in turn makes it a type of terrorism. Some of it is just opportunity to "stick it to someone other then myself and maybe get something free in the deal". I think that at the very least, ALL that are committing crimes should be charged to the fullest. Those that were participating in PEACEFUL civil disobedience should accept that they did their part and vacate the area as quickly as possible or could get roped into the illegal arena and charged (right or wrong).

Response by SPC Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 28 at 2015 11:12 AM

2015-04-28T11:12:48-04:00

Because terrorism is the use of terror for a defined end state. Rioters... what end state do they want? Dead cops? Anarchy? What?

I look at this and realize how thin the wall of law and order protect civilization.

Response by SFC Stephen King made Apr 28 at 2015 1:32 PM

2015-04-28T13:32:30-04:00

I agree ^

I do agree with the right to protest. However this is and has become a problem.

This was planned with intent to harm. Domestic terrorism in words, and action

Picture: The #FDL (which stands for “f*ck da law)” and #purge hashtags were used liberally all day yesterday for offensive and disturbing tweets dedicated to the riots in Baltimore:

Response by PO1 Private RallyPoint Member made Apr 29 at 2015 12:11 PM

2015-04-29T12:11:34-04:00

2 words.... Al Sharpton

Response by MAJ Ken Landgren made Apr 29 at 2015 12:22 PM

2015-04-29T12:22:51-04:00

The impetus for the riots can be anything to include a sports team winning a national championship.

Response by SCPO Private RallyPoint Member made Sep 18 at 2016 9:50 AM

2016-09-18T09:50:39-04:00

Because, then, the people using the term would be called racists, for obvious reasons. Would that be right? No, absolutely not. But, American society being what it is and how it is manipulated by the Media, that's what would result, calling people who used that term racists. I've been using it for years myself, but that's why I'm not in charge!!!