WWTBAM Bored

I know some will discount this, but whatever. It's long

https://www.nationalaffairs.com/publica ... -shootings

That was a good read, thank you. You might like to check out The Sunday Long Read, an emailed list each week of this kind of longform journalism.

I have two comments on this piece.

One, I am grateful that they said "half-staff" and not "half-mast," which is rarely appropriate unless there is a boat under your cemetery or parking lot. There actually is one situation like this at Arlington, a boat underground, but anyway.

Two, I was curious about the distinction some folks make about whether an attack is or is not terrorism. Aren't they all terrorist, in that the perpetrator is trying to gain power through fear? Or does "terrorism" imply (for some people) that the bad person is a particular color, because for me, the bastard that shot up the church in Charleston is a fucking terrorist, end of argument. Not saying his name.

Oh, and observation #3 - I liked the way they talked about how some presidents and administrations, as long as they could, tried to draw attention to the heroes or would-be heroes in the shootings, rather than saying the names of the bad guys. The cop who did our talk on workplace shootings went two hours, describing several of the bigger-known events, and never said any of their names. It was fantastic.

I, personally, think terrorism has nothing to do with color, ethnicity. It is just terrorism.

Ritterskoop wrote:Two, I was curious about the distinction some folks make about whether an attack is or is not terrorism. Aren't they all terrorist, in that the perpetrator is trying to gain power through fear? Or does "terrorism" imply (for some people) that the bad person is a particular color, because for me, the bastard that shot up the church in Charleston is a fucking terrorist, end of argument. Not saying his name.

For me, what makes it terrorism is whether the attacker is using terror in an effort to accomplish a political goal. I don't think the crazy who shot up Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was a terrorist. I just think he was sick. --Bob

Bob78164 wrote:

Ritterskoop wrote:Two, I was curious about the distinction some folks make about whether an attack is or is not terrorism. Aren't they all terrorist, in that the perpetrator is trying to gain power through fear? Or does "terrorism" imply (for some people) that the bad person is a particular color, because for me, the bastard that shot up the church in Charleston is a fucking terrorist, end of argument. Not saying his name.

For me, what makes it terrorism is whether the attacker is using terror in an effort to accomplish a political goal. I don't think the crazy who shot up Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School was a terrorist. I just think he was sick. --Bob

Don't forget social, religious and criminal terrorism.