Ad: This forum contains affiliate links to products on Amazon and eBay. More information in Terms and rules
It was reported here that the first victim was individually targeted, and the others shot when they went to help. So, its not being pushed as a terrorist act.Its being reported here as being a likely act of terrorism, but still uncertain
In UK it is reported as definitely not terrorism, absolutely not and could not be even considered terrorism. As soon as the perpetrator was reprted to be from Turkey the whole story was dropped like the hottest of hot potatoes.
In 2018, the FBI released a report on A Study of the Pre-Attack Behaviors of Active Shooters in the United States Between 2008 and 2013. The authors selected 63 cases on which records were more complete among the 160 total active shooter cases. The authors restricted their study to verified information in the FBI records; thus, there was much missing mental health information. They reported that 16 of the 40 (40%) on which such information was available had received a psychiatric diagnosis; 44 of the 63 (70%) had "mental health stressors" and/or "mental health concerning behaviors" prior to the attack; and 30 of the 35 (86%) on which such information was available had suicidal ideation or had made suicide attempts prior to the attack.So many incidents have happened here that could of been prevented(police,FBI,etc knew about it or it slipped thru the cracks). Everyone is quick to blame everything but the criminal himself
It was dropped as soon as it was reported that the first victim was related to the shooter...Reported the same in Australia. Reporting policy seems to be if it is a right wing white it is automatically a terrorist attack but if by a middle eastern then not a terrorist attack
Except she wasn't.It was dropped as soon as it was reported that the first victim was related to the shooter...
Michael IMHO it most definitely is and again IMHO because of the instantaneous international coverage that the social media sites provide these animals (apologies to the actual animals of the world). There cannot be any doubt that the New Zealand attack was literally produced and directed for the internet.It is very difficult to quantify whether terrorism is on the rise or not.
In UK various reports said he targeted the woman and that he was on a rape charge, then I think it all became so confused they decided to move on.Except she wasn't.
While a percentage have mental illness, there are also a number with personality disorders.In 2018, the FBI released a report on A Study of the Pre-Attack Behaviors of Active Shooters in the United States Between 2008 and 2013. The authors selected 63 cases on which records were more complete among the 160 total active shooter cases. The authors restricted their study to verified information in the FBI records; thus, there was much missing mental health information. They reported that 16 of the 40 (40%) on which such information was available had received a psychiatric diagnosis; 44 of the 63 (70%) had "mental health stressors" and/or "mental health concerning behaviors" prior to the attack; and 30 of the 35 (86%) on which such information was available had suicidal ideation or had made suicide attempts prior to the attack.
From what I remember reading, it is on the decline. The reason we're made to believe all hell is alway breaking lose is that it can be cynically used.parsifal said:It is very difficult to quantify whether terrorism is on the rise or not. The media would have us believe that we are at the dire edge of destruction from it, but the majority of statistical studies suggest the opposite.
Of course, there's clearly no dispute on that.There cannot be any doubt that the New Zealand attack was literally produced and directed for the internet.
I honestly don't like such algorithms. I do actually liked the diversity online that you would see in the past. Sure, at times I would find like-minded people for certain issues (civil liberties), but you don't want to just see what you want to (Think of it like a cult: If you spend all your time with the cult, and not spend time outside the cult, eventually you'll fall for your own nonsense. If you want to see a good example of this, look at the USAFTheir recommendation algorithms often steer users toward edgier content, a loop that results in more time spent on the app
Gab.ai was a social media platform that didn't censor -- sure there were probably a number of right-wing extremists there, but there were also people who simply didn't want to be censored (a number of people I know joined, and none of us were right-wing extremists)It is also pretty obvious that many recent acts of offline violence bear the internet's imprint. Robert Bowers, the man charged with killing 11 people and wounding six others at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh, was a frequent user of Gab, a social media platform beloved by extremists.
That woman was not involved in the shooting. I think the media was confused indeed.In UK various reports said he targeted the woman and that he was on a rape charge, then I think it all became so confused they decided to move on.
US law does not recognize the existence of domestic terrorists,
That's part of the problem that NZ now has, apparently our terrorism laws are all focussed on international terrorism, nothing about domestic. So he's likely to get 50 counts of murder, and various firearms charges. Hopefully they're to be served consecutively...I sometimes wonder if some media and, possibly more critically, law enforcement are leaping to the conclusion that all violent crimes committed by Muslims are terrorist acts.
As an aside, a political scientist I know (he's emeritus, but is consulted by the US State Department) has told me that US law does not recognize the existence of domestic terrorists, so the OK City bomber could not have been a terrorist in the legal sense; neither could the church bombers of the 1960s or the people who murdered people attending church or temple on the 2010s. In other words, if those heavily armed alt-right "protesters" opened fire in Charlotteville while chanting their political slogans, it would not have been an act of terror as far as the US government is concerned.
Is there really a difference between targeting somebody because of their religion vs the color of their hair (like a number of serial killers)?
That's because the root causes are very difficult, time consuming and expensive to deal with and require much more than just passing a simple law.drill down to the root cause of it all.