No, they’re not. Quit watering down what terrorism means.
Terrorism is someone who specifically is trying to kill, maim, destroy, or significantly hurt people due to very narrow ideologies which are usually VERY political now.
Running people over because you can’t get to work isn’t one of them. That is attempted manslaughter if you hurt them bad enough, not a fucking terrorist.
Either you guys know way more about the incident than I do since you’re close to the police and already know it’s a Trumper who hates strikes and thought they were all gay black democrats, who potentially showed up specifically to hurt these people, or it was some asshole trying to get to work and got so manic he decided it’s better to maim or kill people than to get to work.
Lol, what? Terrorism has a very broad definition and for good reason.
The main way to identify terrorism is if the terrorist’s goal is to instill fear into the populace. That’s why it’s called, terrorism after all. It’s an asymmetrical warfare tactic that people use when fighting directly isn’t viable.
Sad seeing people live in their fantasy worlds and then get their panties in a bunch when met with reality.
Who are they? Op meant you. They’re referencing your validation of terrorizing striking workers from exercising their constitutional rights. You’re validating it by minimizing its importance.
Yep, and yet the article says nothing close to it, and is described the same way every frustrated person dealing with blocked roads does when they panic and flee and eventually get hit with significant battery or accidental manslaughter charges. Unless their car started to get beat on and they tried breaking in, in which case, it ends up being self defense. Isn’t that how the charges against the dude who ran down a bunch of motorcyclicsts got free? He had his whole family with him too though iirc. I think it was this? but I swear it was denser and more in a city.
I get frustrated by average things, like the kids not closing cupboard doors or leaving their stuff everywhere. I have yet to run over anyone due to these average frustrations.
The person at the UAW picket was not dealing with average frustrations, they were a terrorist.
I dunno, the OED definition is: “a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.” The Unlawful violence was the act of running people over, they’re car factory workers, so non military, ergo civilians, and they did it to against people expressing their opinion, which could be argued to be political as it regards the politics of CEOs compensation and the growing inequality of the world.
Can’t touch grass, too busy breaking down doors and bear spraying cops at my peaceful protest over election integrity concerns. Maybe next week after I’m done trying to kidnap the governor of Michigan, but it might conflict with Yet Another Lone Wolf Mass Shooting so I can’t commit to anything.
After all, like conservatives loudly and proudly said at CPAC, “We are all domestic terrorists.”
At least it’s your average frustrated person trying to get though and not a terrorist?
If you think that running people over is a valid response to a minor inconvenience, you might be a terrorist.
No, they’re not. Quit watering down what terrorism means.
Terrorism is someone who specifically is trying to kill, maim, destroy, or significantly hurt people due to very narrow ideologies which are usually VERY political now.
Running people over because you can’t get to work isn’t one of them. That is attempted manslaughter if you hurt them bad enough, not a fucking terrorist.
Either you guys know way more about the incident than I do since you’re close to the police and already know it’s a Trumper who hates strikes and thought they were all gay black democrats, who potentially showed up specifically to hurt these people, or it was some asshole trying to get to work and got so manic he decided it’s better to maim or kill people than to get to work.
THEY, ARE NOT, THE SAME.
Lol, what? Terrorism has a very broad definition and for good reason.
The main way to identify terrorism is if the terrorist’s goal is to instill fear into the populace. That’s why it’s called, terrorism after all. It’s an asymmetrical warfare tactic that people use when fighting directly isn’t viable.
Sad seeing people live in their fantasy worlds and then get their panties in a bunch when met with reality.
Crossing a picket line is an inherently political act. Terrorism is the use of violence for political ends. Connect the fucking dots.
Terrorism doesn’t have to be political.
Your goal just needs to be to instill fear in a population.
Even if that’s true, it only expands the definition, which doesn’t refute my point.
The comment you responded to was backing you up, correct.
Who are they? Op meant you. They’re referencing your validation of terrorizing striking workers from exercising their constitutional rights. You’re validating it by minimizing its importance.
I mean, this is entirely plausible.
Yep, and yet the article says nothing close to it, and is described the same way every frustrated person dealing with blocked roads does when they panic and flee and eventually get hit with significant battery or accidental manslaughter charges. Unless their car started to get beat on and they tried breaking in, in which case, it ends up being self defense. Isn’t that how the charges against the dude who ran down a bunch of motorcyclicsts got free? He had his whole family with him too though iirc. I think it was this? but I swear it was denser and more in a city.
I had no point other than the actual words I wrote, FYI.
Where are you getting your definition? I would like to be able to compare them.
I get frustrated by average things, like the kids not closing cupboard doors or leaving their stuff everywhere. I have yet to run over anyone due to these average frustrations.
The person at the UAW picket was not dealing with average frustrations, they were a terrorist.
https://kbin.social/m/[email protected]/t/492456/Several-injured-after-UAW-strikers-hit-by-vehicle#entry-comment-2620907
Terrorist? Really? That word has just lost all meaning huh
I dunno, the OED definition is: “a person who uses unlawful violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.” The Unlawful violence was the act of running people over, they’re car factory workers, so non military, ergo civilians, and they did it to against people expressing their opinion, which could be argued to be political as it regards the politics of CEOs compensation and the growing inequality of the world.
So yeah, terrorist.
He’s talking about the secret meaning where conservative politics aren’t politics so conservative terrorists can’t be terrorists.
Touch grass
deleted by creator
Can’t touch grass, too busy breaking down doors and bear spraying cops at my peaceful protest over election integrity concerns. Maybe next week after I’m done trying to kidnap the governor of Michigan, but it might conflict with Yet Another Lone Wolf Mass Shooting so I can’t commit to anything.
After all, like conservatives loudly and proudly said at CPAC, “We are all domestic terrorists.”
Jesus Christ. I often wonder why I’m still on Lemmy when I hear nonsense like this.
It’s not an airport, you don’t need to announce your departure
They’re just kids. Kids are stupid sometimes.
Lol don’t hurt yourself with that stretch
deleted by creator
Which is not even close to “one driver was incredibly frustrated at the people blocking him from going home”