• WhyYesZoidberg@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    80
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Wow the US is going soft on terrorists. 18years is nothing.

    I wonder how many years an Arab man would get for the same crime.

    • yesman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      63
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      He threw two Molotov cocktails at a an empty church. Causing “damage” with no injuries. He got a plea deal, admitting to two felonies:

      committing a church arson hate crime and using fire and explosives to commit a felony.

      So this was elevated because of the bigoted and terroristic nature of the crime. 18 years is a significant and appropriate sentence.

    • ZeroCool@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      37
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      It wasn’t always this way. Eric Rudolph got 4 consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole. Timothy McVeigh got the death penalty. Ted Kaczynski got 8 consecutive life sentences without the possibility of parole.

      Unfortunately after 9/11 we seem to have decided only brown people can be terrorists despite the fact that the FBI’s own data suggests right wing domestic terrorism has always posed a greater threat to us than that of foreign actors.

      Edit: Attention apologists, I have zero interest in your attempts to downplay this person’s act of terrorism. You’re just going to be blocked.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        11
        ·
        10 months ago

        Eric Rudolph

        Killed two people in multiple bombings, injured many more.

        Timothy McVeigh

        Killed 168 people. The OKC bombing was the 9/11 before 9/11.

        Ted Kaczynski

        Killed 3 people, and injured many more across multiple bombings.

        The guy in the article threw a couple of fire bombs at an empty church in an attempt to stop something from happening there in the future.

        Unfortunately after 9/11 we seem to have decided only brown people can be terrorists despite the fact that the FBI’s own data suggests right wing domestic terrorism has always posed a greater threat to us than that of foreign actors.

        Now I’m not saying your conclusion is wrong, but the argument you made, based on the comparison to people who were intentionally trying to kill people (and successfully did so) to someone who apparently was not trying to kill anyone makes, is incredibly weak.

        • GilgameshCatBeard@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          You’re getting downvoted, but you’re absolutely correct. People love to make false equivalence arguments to stir the pot because outrage is what it all about nowadays.

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            I’m not sure it’s outrage here, it’s more that people have already come to the conclusion that we were once strong against fascism, but now weak and this is an example. . .so pointing out that the evidence offered does not actually support the claim must be buried.

            The funny thing, as someone else alluded to elsewhere in this thread, this is actually probably a stronger response than we would have seen 20 or certainly 50 years ago. The guy was nailed with a hate crime, which almost certainly upped the punishment. Additionally, as that other poster said, the KKK used to fire bomb churches and lynch black people and get off scot-free.

            • GilgameshCatBeard@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              Weak? Really? I’m not sure I agree.

              I don’t think comparing the punishment of murderers and serial killers to that of an arsonist is a good argument to make. All it is- is a bad faith attempt to outrage people by comparing apples to oranges for the sake of further promoting ignorance via sensationalism.

      • GilgameshCatBeard@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        10 months ago

        I mean, you’re comparing serial killers/murderers to an arsonist that killed no one so that you can have an argument that we’re going lax on these people?

        Come on man.

    • andrew@lemmy.stuart.fun
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      10 months ago

      He wouldn’t get anything, officially. He’d be off the books in some offshore military prison.

    • EatATaco@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      “I wonder” is the term one uses right before they say to themselves “let me go research it to make sure my assumptions are correct.”