Guns are still America’s religion

[SuperMatt]

The shooter apparently wrote in his diary that in response to a feral cat fighting with his pet cat, he violently killed the feral cat. He also included grotesque pictures along with the following entry.

Spoiler: Reader discretion advised.

When I came home at ~10:30 I was eating pizza bites when I hard my cat Paige scream from the garage.

I quickly enter and the gray cat was attacking her. I then spent the next hour and a half chasing the cat around the garage and stabbing it with my knife (the camo one).

It bled from the mouth at about 11:00 and at about 11:45 I was able to grab the cats tail and wind up and smack the cats head on the concrete ground. I did that a few times and when it went limp I grabber [sic] a hatchet and swung at its neck ~20 times until it came off.

Honestly right now I don’t feel anything about killing that cat. I thought I would be in pain but I literally just feel blank.

He also reportedly has many entries debating whether or not to carry out his plan. He repeatedly states he either needs to kill people or commit suicide. That’s not considered a healthy state of mind.

He also seems to be highly specific and obsessive- like documenting his food intake, often listing time events occurred for no significant reason, researching zip codes with the highest black populations, documenting the number of black people in stores, etc- not to mention the obvious, that this idea of “the great replacement” seemingly occupied his mind for months.

He also at one point claims never to have been diagnosed with a mental health disorder and believed himself to be sane, but at other points questions his sanity.

The cat story is indicative of a serious issue. I’d be curious to know what age this occurred. Defending your pet from another animal is one thing… torturing and dismembering it- not normal. Neither is graphically recounting it in a diary with accompanying photographs- including one of blood splatter on his face. Recording such an event suggests some sort of delight, curiosity, appreciation, etc with the experience. This event would be consistent with antisocial personality disorder.

Some of the other behaviors could be related to OCD. He did wear a hazmat suit to school during COVID, though that could be narcissistic or histrionic behavior- these are “cluster b” traits that often occur with ASPD.

The perpetrator is apparently refusing a psych evaluation by the court which is something I see routinely with narcissists in my field.

A lot of these characteristics, along with his lack of social skills and friends, could also consistent with high functioning autism, but is less likely IMO for a number of reasons.

I really don’t understand where these proclamations come from that “he is not mentally ill”. It’s important to note someone can be seriously mentally ill, the mental illness may be a factor in their crime, and yet they can still be 100% responsible for their crime. A psychopathic murder is well aware killing people is considered morally wrong and is illegal, he just has zero regard for other people.

In this case mental may have made him more likely to hurting others or dwell on his deranged notions but killing people is a choice- he appears to have been very much able to control his behavior, deciding when and where and who to kill. It’s possible/debatable if mental illness made him more susceptible to being radicalized by white supremacists, but ultimately racism is a choice too.

Neither you nor I are psychiatrists nor psychologists as far as I know. And even if one of us was, we can’t diagnose the person without meeting with them.

So you can believe he’s mentally ill if you want, and I can believe he’s not. In the end, it’s just our opinions.

But here is where I’m coming from on this: I’m sick of gun lovers saying “It’s not a gun problem; it’s a mental health problem.” I’m also sick of far-right ideologues pushing racist theories saying “Not my problem; this guy is just mentally ill.“

So yeah, I’m going to push back when, once again, both the gun nuts and the purveyors of “replacement theory” try to use the “mental health” nonsense to defend their indefensible actions, yet again.

And I don’t know where you grew up, but I don’t think what he did to a feral cat is that weird compared to stuff kids did in my area (grew up in Buffalo’s suburbs).

 

[AG_PhamD]

Neither you nor I are psychiatrists nor psychologists as far as I know. And even if one of us was, we can’t diagnose the person without meeting with them.

So you can believe he’s mentally ill if you want, and I can believe he’s not. In the end, it’s just our opinions.

But here is where I’m coming from on this: I’m sick of gun lovers saying “It’s not a gun problem; it’s a mental health problem.” I’m also sick of far-right ideologues pushing racist theories saying “Not my problem; this guy is just mentally ill.“

So yeah, I’m going to push back when, once again, both the gun nuts and the purveyors of “replacement theory” try to use the “mental health” nonsense to defend their indefensible actions, yet again.

And I don’t know where you grew up, but I don’t think what he did to a feral cat is that weird compared to stuff kids did in my area (grew up in Buffalo’s suburbs).

I am board certified in psychopharmacology and prescribe psych patients on a daily basis, spent the past 10 years working in one the top psychiatric hospitals in the country, regularly discuss events like these with other psych professionals who specialize in very niche diagnoses, own/operate now 2 private residential psych treatment facilities. So perhaps have some experience in this field to speculate possibilities, which anyone can do.

I never claimed to make a diagnosis (thus using indefinite terms like may, might, possibly, could, etc) and explicitly said 2 posts ago a diagnosis cannot be made without evaluation.

Perhaps I misunderstand but you’ve correctly said it’s not possible to make a diagnosis without evaluating the subject. Where I lose you is how it’s possible to rule out all diagnoses without any evaluation. Unless you’re suggesting mental health conditions only exist after they are diagnosed… if a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound?

You’re more than welcome to your opinion (as usual, I am not, apparently). But I gladly welcome the discussion.

I grew up in Connecticut in the. No, kids killing animals was not normal, certainly not a cat- let alone torturing them to death.

I think most people in the perps case would chase off the feral cat and tend to their injured pet- and let animal control handle the rest. But I understand some people in certain conditions might kill the cat- but in a far more humane manner.

That’s very different than stabbing the cat 10x with a knife, then decapitating it with a hatchet 20x, taking pictures of whatever mangled mess remained, photographing the blood spatter on your face, and then recounting the experience in disturbingly specific detail with the aforementioned pictures in your diary.

This is not a “kids will be kids” situation and should never be treated as such. In fact what he did is also more than likely a felony. But you’re suggesting there’s no possibility of a connection between torturing a cat to death and later murdering 10 people? It isn’t a possibility he learned in killing the cat he has no moral qualms of taking lives?

I’m not sure anyone is defending his actions (except some white nationalist extremists) and I’m not sure what mental illness has to do with it. Multiple things can be true at once- he can be mentally ill and responsible for his crimes and a racist scumbag all at the same time. Also, there can be a legitimate problem with how mental illnesses are handled while it can also be true the current gun laws are totally insufficient. These issues are not binary or mutually exclusive.

And I hope you’re not insinuating I am a member of the groups you mentioned. I will assume not.

 

[Joe]

I made the mistake of watching some of the footage he recorded on his helmet camera. I came across it on Twitter.

At one point he comes across a white man hiding behind a cash register, and APOLOGIZES to the white man before moving on to the next black person. WTF

When are people going to realize we have a white supremacist problem in this country? Tucker Carlson and Fox News are radicalizing people. We see it everyday. I have friends that do not even talk to some of their family members because they walk around like this dude who just killed people at a grocery store. It's beyond fucking crazy how brainwashed people have become over the last few years.

 

[Deleted member 215]

The problem is that this country's white supremacist problem never went away. It wasn't all that long ago that you had lynchings which were treated like a town event for the whole family by white people, police letting their dogs attack black protesters, and white people threatening mass violence over a black child attending public school. This racial madness might seem like it's something entirely of the past, but it's deeply embedded in American culture and in some places and among some people, it has not at all gone away. It is very much being encouraged by fringe and in some cases mainstream media. This country is sick, and unfortunately we don't seem to know how to cure it.

 

[SuperMatt]

I am board certified in psychopharmacology and prescribe psych patients on a daily basis, spent the past 10 years working in one the top psychiatric hospitals in the country, regularly discuss events like these with other psych professionals who specialize in very niche diagnoses, own/operate now 2 private residential psych treatment facilities. So perhaps have some experience in this field to speculate possibilities, which anyone can do.

I never claimed to make a diagnosis (thus using indefinite terms like may, might, possibly, could, etc) and explicitly said 2 posts ago a diagnosis cannot be made without evaluation.

Perhaps I misunderstand but you’ve correctly said it’s not possible to make a diagnosis without evaluating the subject. Where I lose you is how it’s possible to rule out all diagnoses without any evaluation. Unless you’re suggesting mental health conditions only exist after they are diagnosed… if a tree falls in the forest, does it make a sound?

You’re more than welcome to your opinion (as usual, I am not, apparently). But I gladly welcome the discussion.

I grew up in Connecticut in the. No, kids killing animals was not normal, certainly not a cat- let alone torturing them to death.

I think most people in the perps case would chase off the feral cat and tend to their injured pet- and let animal control handle the rest. But I understand some people in certain conditions might kill the cat- but in a far more humane manner.

That’s very different than stabbing the cat 10x with a knife, then decapitating it with a hatchet 20x, taking pictures of whatever mangled mess remained, photographing the blood spatter on your face, and then recounting the experience in disturbingly specific detail with the aforementioned pictures in your diary.

This is not a “kids will be kids” situation and should never be treated as such. In fact what he did is also more than likely a felony. But you’re suggesting there’s no possibility of a connection between torturing a cat to death and later murdering 10 people? It isn’t a possibility he learned in killing the cat he has no moral qualms of taking lives?

I’m not sure anyone is defending his actions (except some white nationalist extremists) and I’m not sure what mental illness has to do with it. Multiple things can be true at once- he can be mentally ill and responsible for his crimes and a racist scumbag all at the same time. Also, there can be a legitimate problem with how mental illnesses are handled while it can also be true the current gun laws are totally insufficient. These issues are not binary or mutually exclusive.

And I hope you’re not insinuating I am a member of the groups you mentioned. I will assume not.

I don’t know whether you are in any of the groups mentioned. I don’t assume that you are.

I will defer to your knowledge in the mental health arena on this. It was pretty normal in my experience for kids to pull the wings off a fly or cut a worm in half, or try to fry ants with a magnifying glass... or shoot animals if their family is into hunting. It certainly does seem that this terrorist went pretty far beyond that, torturing a mammal, not an insect, so maybe he does have some kind of mental problem. Or maybe he’s just a bad person.

So, I agree it’s quite possible he has some kind of mental problem. However, my concern is that we have the NRA and the far-right ideologues that try to blame this (and similar events) solely on mental health. Making weapons of war harder to obtain, and stopping the hate speech are just as important, if not more important than improving mental healthcare when it comes to these kind of incidents.

As for mental health treatment overall, our country’s efforts are woefully insufficient in my opinion. I think it should absolutely be a priority. But I don’t want people to think that improving mental healthcare without addressing extremist ideology and the easy access to weapons of war will solve the mass shooting problem. It’s part of the solution, and improving the care will solve a lot of other problems too, and I wish we did more for the mentally ill in America.

 

[SuperMatt]

Guns aren’t the problem…. Right?

Teen shoots dad in argument over bedtime​

https://www.sacbee.com/news/nation-world/national/article261533327.html

 

[AG_PhamD]

I don’t know whether you are in any of the groups mentioned. I don’t assume that you are.

I will defer to your knowledge in the mental health arena on this. It was pretty normal in my experience for kids to pull the wings off a fly or cut a worm in half, or try to fry ants with a magnifying glass... or shoot animals if their family is into hunting. It certainly does seem that this terrorist went pretty far beyond that, torturing a mammal, not an insect, so maybe he does have some kind of mental problem. Or maybe he’s just a bad person.

So, I agree it’s quite possible he has some kind of mental problem. However, my concern is that we have the NRA and the far-right ideologues that try to blame this (and similar events) solely on mental health. Making weapons of war harder to obtain, and stopping the hate speech are just as important, if not more important than improving mental healthcare when it comes to these kind of incidents.

As for mental health treatment overall, our country’s efforts are woefully insufficient in my opinion. I think it should absolutely be a priority. But I don’t want people to think that improving mental healthcare without addressing extremist ideology and the easy access to weapons of war will solve the mass shooting problem. It’s part of the solution, and improving the care will solve a lot of other problems too, and I wish we did more for the mentally ill in America.

It’s possible to have a mental health issue and be a bad person at the same time. Just because someone is mentally ill does not mean we cannot criticize or excuse their behavior.

I think it’s fair to say the NRA and right in general (not just the far right) refuse to look at the gun legislation. As a practical person I don’t think banning AR-15’s let alone most/all guns is remotely possible given the statistics and legal barriers. But I do think there is a middle ground of at least raising the minimum age for ownership given how many of these mass shootings are committed by people under 21 and crimes under 24. There’s many other things that could be done without banning guns entirely.

In this case you have to wonder why no one- parents, teachers, police, etc reported him for the red flag law. It makes you wonder if there is a bystander effect. This should happen automatically, probably by both the police and school. There should also be some sort of watch list for people who make threats like this. It seems like if someone had investigated his digital footprint, they would have recognized just how sick and radicalized this kid was.

As for general tracking of domestic terrorism, clearly the FBI could be doing more to track radical individuals, not just radical groups. Of course part of the problem is that hate speech alone isn’t illegal or enough to justify an investigation. Whether or not hate speech should be a crime of course is a controversial issue.

I agree, this is definitely something that requires a multi-pronged approach.

 

[SuperMatt]

It’s possible to have a mental health issue and be a bad person at the same time. Just because someone is mentally ill does not mean we cannot criticize or excuse their behavior.

I think it’s fair to say the NRA and right in general (not just the far right) refuse to look at the gun legislation. As a practical person I don’t think banning AR-15’s let alone most/all guns is remotely possible given the statistics and legal barriers. But I do think there is a middle ground of at least raising the minimum age for ownership given how many of these mass shootings are committed by people under 21 and crimes under 24. There’s many other things that could be done without banning guns entirely.

In this case you have to wonder why no one- parents, teachers, police, etc reported him for the red flag law. It makes you wonder if there is a bystander effect. This should happen automatically, probably by both the police and school. There should also be some sort of watch list for people who make threats like this. It seems like if someone had investigated his digital footprint, they would have recognized just how sick and radicalized this kid was.

As for general tracking of domestic terrorism, clearly the FBI could be doing more to track radical individuals, not just radical groups. Of course part of the problem is that hate speech alone isn’t illegal or enough to justify an investigation. Whether or not hate speech should be a crime of course is a controversial issue.

I agree, this is definitely something that requires a multi-pronged approach.

I agree the genie is out of the bottle when it comes to assault weapons. Raising the age to at least match the drinking age is a no-brainer you’d think. But the Supreme Court has already prevented that.

Regarding the “red flag” laws, hindsight is 20/20. This was a white kid in what looks like a “nice” neighborhood. He did something weird, but not weird enough for people to think he should be locked up or prevented from buying guns. And a lot of crazy stuff we know about now was previously hidden.

There is no way we can see things like this coming with every young white man influenced by far right propaganda. That’s why I believe gun control is a much more effective solution. But with the current Supreme Court makeup and the entire Republican Party beholden to an extreme NRA, I don’t see it happening.

So, if the LEAST anybody could do is get stronger “red flag” laws and have mandatory background checks, they should do it. But we’ve seen even mandatory background checks, and putting people on the no-fly list onto a no-gun list too, supported by 80-90% of Americans, will never pass with Republicans because their NRA bosses won’t let them.

 

[Huntn]

I don’t know whether you are in any of the groups mentioned. I don’t assume that you are.

I will defer to your knowledge in the mental health arena on this. It was pretty normal in my experience for kids to pull the wings off a fly or cut a worm in half, or try to fry ants with a magnifying glass... or shoot animals if their family is into hunting. It certainly does seem that this terrorist went pretty far beyond that, torturing a mammal, not an insect, so maybe he does have some kind of mental problem. Or maybe he’s just a bad person.

So, I agree it’s quite possible he has some kind of mental problem. However, my concern is that we have the NRA and the far-right ideologues that try to blame this (and similar events) solely on mental health. Making weapons of war harder to obtain, and stopping the hate speech are just as important, if not more important than improving mental healthcare when it comes to these kind of incidents.

As for mental health treatment overall, our country’s efforts are woefully insufficient in my opinion. I think it should absolutely be a priority. But I don’t want people to think that improving mental healthcare without addressing extremist ideology and the easy access to weapons of war will solve the mass shooting problem. It’s part of the solution, and improving the care will solve a lot of other problems too, and I wish we did more for the mentally ill in America.

Racism, Religion, Extremism, intolerance, Facism, Hate, Mental Ilness, STUPID, and the unwise idea that every adult asshole deserves to wield lethal force, that is my summary of our challenge, a challenge that could likely become our undoing if more people don’t start paying attention and become proactive.

Despite insistence that life is precious (anti-abortion), the reality is that it’s cheap (gun deaths), real cheap.

Already, Democracy is slipping though our fingers. We are spiraling down. Yeah, Biden won, and Dems barely hold Congress, but for 2 years Republikans have been working to “fix“ that. Watch what happens in 2022. In todays climate of Gun Worshiping, Koolaid drinkers, if not already, you’d better arm thyself for the very possible, coming National conflict. Don’t bring a knife to a gun fight.

Sure I could always be pleasantly surprised, but I prefer to be prepared. In the meantime the country bleeds daily for our gun freedoms, and the gun lobby looks you in the eye, sqeezes their wallets and proclaim it’s worth it.

 

[SuperMatt]

The Buffalo terrorist is from Broome County NY. After reading this account of an interview with the county’s District Attorney, it’s obvious that racist attitudes are pretty common around there.

To address domestic terrorism in the local community, Korchak said he will “have to follow up with the Governor”, following Hochul’s Wednesday announcement. But he didn’t definitely label the Buffalo massacre as domestic terrorism, saying in his own view, it’s just murder. “To me, terrorism is flying planes into buildings,” Korchak said.

“I don’t know as racial bias… it’s not limited to Broome County,” Korchak said. He explained that Broome County doesn’t have many racial bias cases, and it’s important to educate the community. But when it comes to this case and the suspect’s alleged manifesto being authored in Broome County, “That’s where you’re battling the First Amendment because everyone has the right to be stupid,” he said.

The “flying planes” BS shows that this guy, like many on the right, think it’s only “terrorism” if the person doing it is a Muslim.

If I was the terrorist‘s lawyer, I’d be BEGGING for a change of venue to Broome county for the trial. This DA seems like he has no problem with what happened.

This is not a “lone wolf” situation. It’s not a one-off. This kid is a product of racist attitudes in his community. Racist practices segregated black people into a region of Buffalo with only one decent grocery store. This terrorist had help from others and from society as a whole. And we’ve been over the extreme gun laws in America ad nauseum already…

‘Everyone has the right to be stupid’: Broome County DA Press Conference on Buffalo Shooting

The Broome County District Attorney, Michael Korchak will be holding a press conference at 1:30 PM today to discuss some of the previous history of the man that is charged in the Buffalo Tops mass …

www.wivb.com

After Buffalo Massacre, “Now Is the Time to Renew the Call for Reparations”

In one of this year’s deadliest mass shootings, a white supremacist opened fire Saturday on a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York, killing 10 and wounding three others. Eleven of the victims are Black. The 18-year-old suspect posted racist ideology online...

www.democracynow.org

 

[JayMysteri0]

Well...

 

[AG_PhamD]

The Buffalo terrorist is from Broome County NY. After reading this account of an interview with the county’s District Attorney, it’s obvious that racist attitudes are pretty common around there.



The “flying planes” BS shows that this guy, like many on the right, think it’s only “terrorism” if the person doing it is a Muslim.

If I was the terrorist‘s lawyer, I’d be BEGGING for a change of venue to Broome county for the trial. This DA seems like he has no problem with what happened.

This is not a “lone wolf” situation. It’s not a one-off. This kid is a product of racist attitudes in his community. Racist practices segregated black people into a region of Buffalo with only one decent grocery store. This terrorist had help from others and from society as a whole. And we’ve been over the extreme gun laws in America ad nauseum already…

‘Everyone has the right to be stupid’: Broome County DA Press Conference on Buffalo Shooting

The Broome County District Attorney, Michael Korchak will be holding a press conference at 1:30 PM today to discuss some of the previous history of the man that is charged in the Buffalo Tops mass …

www.wivb.com

After Buffalo Massacre, “Now Is the Time to Renew the Call for Reparations”

In one of this year’s deadliest mass shootings, a white supremacist opened fire Saturday on a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York, killing 10 and wounding three others. Eleven of the victims are Black. The 18-year-old suspect posted racist ideology online...

www.democracynow.org

I’m not sure what state law says, but apparently there is no penalty for domestic terrorism under federal law, which is quite shocking. Especially when the FBI says radical white nationalists are the biggest domestic threat.

The definitions of terrorism under federal law are rather interesting. They mostly apply to committing crimes against government officials or property, mass transportation systems, maritime vessels, using large scale weapons and WMDs, and aiding designated terrorist organizations. The only instance that involves harm against American civilians is if it happens abroad. https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?def_id=18-USC-763651625-782330727

It seems rather strange there is no application of the law for domestic politically motivated violence. Maybe there is concern about lesser forms of political violence (ie a protest that gets out of hand) being labeled as terrorism, but I think a distinction could easily be made if the perpetrator commits (OR plans to commit) violence intended to injure many people indiscriminately.

His actions are certainly a hate crime. I would say a terrorism as well given his manifesto and the fact he called himself a terrorist. The fact that had he set off a bomb or flew a plane into the store he could be charged with terrorism but shooting over a dozen people in a public space he cannot is strange. That said I doubt changing the law would dissuade anyone.

I suppose to some extent it’s irrelevant at this point. He will be charged with murder with the hate crime on top of it. He will never be seeing the light of day again. If the death penalty was legal in NY, it would certainly be on the table though the degree of mental illness (if any) may be taken into consideration but not necessarily.

 

[Cmaier]

I’m not sure what state law says, but apparently there is no penalty for domestic terrorism under federal law, which is quite shocking. Especially when the FBI says radical white nationalists are the biggest domestic threat.

The definitions of terrorism under federal law are rather interesting. They mostly apply to committing crimes against government officials or property, mass transportation systems, maritime vessels, using large scale weapons and WMDs, and aiding designated terrorist organizations. The only instance that involves harm against American civilians is if it happens abroad. https://www.law.cornell.edu/definitions/uscode.php?def_id=18-USC-763651625-782330727

It seems rather strange there is no application of the law for domestic politically motivated violence. Maybe there is concern about lesser forms of political violence (ie a protest that gets out of hand) being labeled as terrorism, but I think a distinction could easily be made if the perpetrator commits (OR plans to commit) violence intended to injure many people indiscriminately.

All of that is wrong.

18 USC §2331:

There are also 57 “federal crimes of terrorism” listed in 18 USC. That these don’t have “domestic” in their titles is immaterial - they apply to domestic terrorism, as per 18 USC 2331. And the “there is no penalty for domestic terrorism” is a fake argument made by people who point at 18 USC 2331, which doesn’t list penalties for ANY form of terrorism, because it is a definitions section.

 

[The-Real-Deal82]

There’s been some rather nasty shooting stories making the news in Europe from the States recently. They don’t really have much of an impact these days are they are so expected as the gun culture there is so ridiculous. Land of the free to get shot.

 

[AG_PhamD]

All of that is wrong.

18 USC §2331:

View attachment 14197


There are also 57 “federal crimes of terrorism” listed in 18 USC. That these don’t have “domestic” in their titles is immaterial - they apply to domestic terrorism, as per 18 USC 2331. And the “there is no penalty for domestic terrorism” is a fake argument made by people who point at 18 USC 2331, which doesn’t list penalties for ANY form of terrorism, because it is a definitions section.

No, it’s not a fake argument. Why would people try to defend this perpetrator from terrorism charges? The reality is the law is written in an inconvenient way to charge most mass shooters. To be clear, I have no problem calling this crime what it is- both a hate crime and domestic terrorism.

Honestly, you don’t think the Biden DOJ or FBI wouldn’t be prosecuting terrorism charges if they could? Especially when Biden specifically called the shooting “domestic terrorism”.

I suggest you look at all of Title 18 Chapter 113B. The federal law differentiates between “domestic terrorism” (basically the definition you gave) and “international terrorism” (basically what I listed).

If we want to be precise, there is no all-encompassing charge of “terrorism” or “domestic terrorism”, rather a people are charged with terrorism related offenses. For example, Dzhokar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon Bomber, was charged with “using a weapon of mass destruction”, “conspiracy to plant a bomb in public place, “bombing a place of public use” (amongst many other crimes). Nowhere is he charged with “terrorism”.

First 113B lists these penalties for terrorism-associated murder and manslaughter:

a) Homicide.—Whoever kills a national of the United States, while such national is outside the United States, shall—

(1) if the killing is murder (as defined in section 1111(a)), be fined under this title, punished by death or imprisonment for any term of years or for life, or both;

(2) if the killing is a voluntary manslaughter as defined in section 1112(a) of this title, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both; and

(3) if the killing is an involuntary manslaughter as defined in section 1112(a) of this title, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than three years, or both.


(b) Attempt or Conspiracy With Respect to Homicide.—Whoever outside the United States attempts to kill, or engages in a conspiracy to kill, a national of the United States shall—

(1) in the case of an attempt to commit a killing that is a murder as defined in this chapter, be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than 20 years, or both; and

(2) in the case of a conspiracy by two or more persons to commit a killing that is a murder as defined in section 1111(a) of this title, if one or more of such persons do any overt act to effect the object of the conspiracy, be fined under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life, or both so fined and so imprisoned.


(c) Other Conduct.—Whoever outside the United States engages in physical violence—

(1) with intent to cause serious bodily injury to a national of the United States; or

(2) with the result that serious bodily injury is caused to a national of the United States; shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than ten years, or both.

Next, there is a whole list of other terrorist-related offenses that include things like bombs, missiles, WMD’s, attacking mass transit, etc and specific penalties for these crimes- as well as various forms of aiding terrorists and their associated penalties. I would however point you to the exemption for such offenses:

(d) Exemptions to Jurisdiction.—This section does not apply to—

(1) the activities of armed forces during an armed conflict, as those terms are understood under the law of war, which are governed by that law,

(2) activities undertaken by military forces of a state in the exercise of their official duties; or

(3) offenses committed within the United States, where the alleged offender and the victims are United States citizens and the alleged offender is found in the United States, or where jurisdiction is predicated solely on the nationality of the victims or the alleged offender and the offense has no substantial effect on interstate or foreign commerce.

The law is written so that basically “terrorism” can only apply to to offenders committing crimes who are foreigners or are in someway tied/supporting a foreign entity or established terrorist organization.

So I’ll reiterate, they do define “domestic terrorism”, but there are no penalties written for domestic terrorism. Someone like the Buffalo shooter could not be charged and penalized with the other federal terrorism offenses that actually carry penalties. And that is why the Feds haven’t charged him or Ethan Crumbly or Nicholas Sandman, or Dylan Roof, or any of the synagogue shooters, etc.

I believe the law should change. This debate arises with basically every mass murder, especially those motivated by racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, or any other bigoted ideology.

In some sense, all hate crimes are a form of targeted terrorism. Hate crimes, especially unsolved ones, often instill fear in the community. Very often these crimes are not committed just out of hate, but also to intimidate, which can also be terrorism.

I’m entirely not sure what difference being able to charge such a crime would make in a case like this, but perhaps in a case of conspiracy to commit domestic terrorism it would serve as a sentencing enhancement beyond conspiracy to commit murder or whatever the charge would be. Or perhaps it would enable the authorities be better able investigate?

The state law however is a different story. For example, Ethan Crumbly was charged with terrorism in Michigan. I’m sure NY State has their own terrorism charges but we’d have to look to see if they’re applicable.

 

[Cmaier]

No, it’s not a fake argument. Why would people try to defend this perpetrator from terrorism charges? The reality is the law is written in an inconvenient way to charge most mass shooters. To be clear, I have no problem calling this crime what it is- both a hate crime and domestic terrorism.

Honestly, you don’t think the Biden DOJ or FBI wouldn’t be prosecuting terrorism charges if they could? Especially when Biden specifically called the shooting “domestic terrorism”.

I suggest you look at all of Title 18 Chapter 113B. The federal law differentiates between “domestic terrorism” (basically the definition you gave) and “international terrorism” (basically what I listed).

If we want to be precise, there is no all-encompassing charge of “terrorism” or “domestic terrorism”, rather a people are charged with terrorism related offenses. For example, Dzhokar Tsarnaev, the Boston Marathon Bomber, was charged with “using a weapon of mass destruction”, “conspiracy to plant a bomb in public place, “bombing a place of public use” (amongst many other crimes). Nowhere is he charged with “terrorism”.

First 113B lists these penalties for terrorism-associated murder and manslaughter:


Next, there is a whole list of other terrorist-related offenses that include things like bombs, missiles, WMD’s, attacking mass transit, etc and specific penalties for these crimes- as well as various forms of aiding terrorists and their associated penalties. I would however point you to the exemption for such offenses:


The law is written so that basically “terrorism” can only apply to to offenders committing crimes who are foreigners or are in someway tied/supporting a foreign entity or established terrorist organization.

So I’ll reiterate, they do define “domestic terrorism”, but there are no penalties written for domestic terrorism. Someone like the Buffalo shooter could not be charged and penalized with the other federal terrorism offenses that actually carry penalties. And that is why the Feds haven’t charged him or Ethan Crumbly or Nicholas Sandman, or Dylan Roof, or any of the synagogue shooters, etc.

I believe the law should change. This debate arises with basically every mass murder, especially those motivated by racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, or any other bigoted ideology.

In some sense, all hate crimes are a form of targeted terrorism. Hate crimes, especially unsolved ones, often instill fear in the community. Very often these crimes are not committed just out of hate, but also to intimidate, which can also be terrorism.

I’m entirely not sure what difference being able to charge such a crime would make in a case like this, but perhaps in a case of conspiracy to commit domestic terrorism it would serve as a sentencing enhancement beyond conspiracy to commit murder or whatever the charge would be. Or perhaps it would enable the authorities be better able investigate?

The state law however is a different story. For example, Ethan Crumbly was charged with terrorism in Michigan. I’m sure NY State has their own terrorism charges but we’d have to look to see if they’re applicable.

For someone who gets angry when people mansplain psychology to you, you sure do a lot of mansplaining to incorrectly rebut a lawyer.

Any act that meets the definition of domestic terrorism I provided can be charged under numerous existing federal statutes in title 18, each of which has a penalty associated with it.

”There are no penalties written for domestic terrorism“ is a meaningless thing to say. There are no penalties written for killing someone by drowning them in maple syrup, but you can still charge them with murder. That’s the way the law works. You don’t have to specify penalties for every kind of murder, every kind of assault, every kind of battery, every kind of manslaughter. Moreover, the way sentencing guidelines work at the federal level, killing someone as part of domestic terrorism will end up with a higher sentencing bracket than “regular” murder. (Though judges don’t have to follow guidelines).

Now, if you want to say ”domestic terrorism“ should be its own offense, separate from the underlying crimes, and that it should be treated like foreign terrorism, that’s fine. It would make little difference from the perspective of penalties - there are already complicated sentencing guideline formulas that would capture all of this, and federal judges don’t have to follow the guidelines anyway. It might make people feel better, and perhaps there is justice in labeling someone a convicted domestic terrorist, but that’d be the only difference.

A more important issue is that the FBI is limited in investigating domestic terrorism in ways that it is not limited with respect to foreign terrorism. But this has more to do with constitutional rights than with the fact that domestic terrorism is not a separate crime.

Here’s more, from someone even smarter than me

Why New Laws Aren’t Needed to Take Domestic Terrorism More Seriously

The government already has plenty of tools to address far-right violence, but not the right priorities.

www.brennancenter.org

 

[SuperMatt]

The past few posts about the legal definitions of terrorism are interesting. However…

The Broome County DA wasn’t making some legal argument about terrorism. He was speaking off-the-cuff. He showed a lack of sympathy for the victims, and had a very defensive attitude upon being questioned about why he didn’t flag the terrorist and prevent him from buying guns based on past incidents.

Of course, when he saw he was being lambasted in the press, the next day he pretended he was making some legal argument about domestic terrorism, insisting that’s what he meant in the first place. Yeah, right…

'It is domestic terrorism' Broome County DA clarifies comments on mass shooting in Buffalo

Broome County District Attorney Michael Korchak held a press conference Wednesday to discuss the mental evaluation the suspect in the mass shooting at Tops on Jefferson Avenue underwent last June.

www.wkbw.com

The elephant is still in the room: when a white American commits mass murder with the specific intent to terrorize a certain population, to many people, it doesn’t count as terrorism.

 

[SuperMatt]

So, when I reacted to @AG_PhamD concerning the mental health of the (alleged) terrorist in Buffalo, I want you to know a) it was not personal but b) here is why I reacted that way:

Tucker Carlson on his TV show:

After showing a clip of lawmakers decrying the proliferation of racially motivated domestic terrorism, Carlson offered his twisted take:
“So, they are continuing to tell you, in the face of all available evidence, that the mass murder you saw over the weekend in Buffalo was inspired by hateful right-wing rhetoric, when in fact that mass murder was committed by someone with diagnosed mental illness that the adults around him apparently ignored,” the prime time star said.

“So, you saw a shooting by a crazy person that has been hijacked by partisan forces to crush political dissent, to attack civil liberties in this country. You should care about that,” he continued.

Tucker Carlson Says Racism Was Not The Motive In Buffalo Supermarket Shooting

The Fox News host took right-wing denial to new lows to explain a self-professed white supremacist's targeting of people in a Black neighborhood.

www.huffpost.com

As you can see, for this man and his millions of followers, it is never about the harm their racist ideology causes. It’s just a random crazy person.

The mental health crisis in America should encourage people to use LESS inflammatory rhetoric, not more. This person can absolutely have a mental problem AND be a bad person AND a combo of that plus a diet of rhetoric from the likes of Tucker Carlson can lead to white power terrorism.

As long mental health isn’t be used as a get-out-of-jail-free-card by the terrorist or the likes of Tucker Carlson, I’m happy to have the discussion. But I knew for a fact, having seen this dance before, that both the gun fetishists and peddlers of racist ideology would deny any culpability and say “It’s all because of mental health!!!!” Tucker Carlson certainly lived up to my expectations.

 

[Huntn]

The Buffalo terrorist is from Broome County NY. After reading this account of an interview with the county’s District Attorney, it’s obvious that racist attitudes are pretty common around there.



The “flying planes” BS shows that this guy, like many on the right, think it’s only “terrorism” if the person doing it is a Muslim.

If I was the terrorist‘s lawyer, I’d be BEGGING for a change of venue to Broome county for the trial. This DA seems like he has no problem with what happened.

This is not a “lone wolf” situation. It’s not a one-off. This kid is a product of racist attitudes in his community. Racist practices segregated black people into a region of Buffalo with only one decent grocery store. This terrorist had help from others and from society as a whole. And we’ve been over the extreme gun laws in America ad nauseum already…

‘Everyone has the right to be stupid’: Broome County DA Press Conference on Buffalo Shooting

The Broome County District Attorney, Michael Korchak will be holding a press conference at 1:30 PM today to discuss some of the previous history of the man that is charged in the Buffalo Tops mass …

www.wivb.com

After Buffalo Massacre, “Now Is the Time to Renew the Call for Reparations”

In one of this year’s deadliest mass shootings, a white supremacist opened fire Saturday on a supermarket in a predominantly Black neighborhood in Buffalo, New York, killing 10 and wounding three others. Eleven of the victims are Black. The 18-year-old suspect posted racist ideology online...

www.democracynow.org

From the link, everyone has a right to be stupid? Actually STUPID is going to finish off the country.

 

[Cmaier]

From the link, everyone has a right to be stupid? Actually STUPID is going to finish off the country.

Reminds me of the Larry David “even the stupid ones” commercial.

Larry David shoots down crypto as the next big thing in Super Bowl ad: Watch

"Don't be like Larry. Don’t miss out on the next big thing," the commercial warns.

consequence.net