Active Now

Element 99
Discussion » Statements » Rosie's Corner » There is no FEDERAL CRIME law that punishes DOMESTIC TERRORISM? Why? Is that a freeby?
RosieG

There is no FEDERAL CRIME law that punishes DOMESTIC TERRORISM? Why? Is that a freeby?

Posted - August 7, 2019
Tags : None

Responses


  • 6023
    I just don't see any "freeby" where domestic terrorism can't be punished under existing laws.

    https://www.aclu.org/other/how-usa-patriot-act-redefines-domestic-terrorism

    https://uscode.house.gov/view.xhtml?path=/prelim@title18/part1/chapter113B&edition=prelim

    (5) the term "domestic terrorism" means activities that—

         (A) involve acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State;

         (B) appear to be intended—

              (i) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

              (ii) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

              (iii) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, or kidnapping; and

         (C) occur primarily within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States

      August 7, 2019 10:49 AM MDT
    2

  • 6023

    (c) Penalties.—

    (1) Penalties.—Whoever violates this section shall be punished—

    (A) for a killing, or if death results to any person from any other conduct prohibited by this section, by death, or by imprisonment for any term of years or for life;

    (B) for kidnapping, by imprisonment for any term of years or for life;

    (C) for maiming, by imprisonment for not more than 35 years;

    (D) for assault with a dangerous weapon or assault resulting in serious bodily injury, by imprisonment for not more than 30 years;

    (E) for destroying or damaging any structure, conveyance, or other real or personal property, by imprisonment for not more than 25 years;

    (F) for attempting or conspiring to commit an offense, for any term of years up to the maximum punishment that would have applied had the offense been completed; and

    (G) for threatening to commit an offense under this section, by imprisonment for not more than 10 years.

      August 7, 2019 10:50 AM MDT
    2

  • 34873
    Looks like a crime to me. 
      August 7, 2019 11:58 AM MDT
    0

  • 6023
    If the terms are served consecutively ... you could shoot ONE person, wound (not kill) them, and damage the wall behind them with a "through and through" ... and (C) + (D) + (E) = 35 + 30 + 25 years = serve up to 90 years in prison.
      August 7, 2019 12:05 PM MDT
    1

  • 46117
    Freebie
      August 7, 2019 10:56 AM MDT
    0

  • 46117
    Well, we have not realized that we HAVE domestic terrorism.  We didn't care.  We didn't care if the slaves thought we were terrorists.  What did we care?  The blackies couldn't do a thing.  

    Then there was the Mafia taking over in the 20's through 50's.  They did nothing then either because we didn't even know the meaning of the word.

    We had a lot graft, crime and murder in the process of building our country.  We have never had to define domestic terrorism until now because it is now overwhelming.  

    We had THE GANGS OF NEW YORK movie.  That depicted the growing of a city which is practically a nation unto itself today.  So, the past is rife with the behaviors we now see so clearly today.

    We had the ANTI-WAR marches and the shootings on campuses in the 60's.  

    IT NEEDS TO END.  OR IT WILL END US. This post was edited by WM BARR . =ABSOLUTE TRASH at August 8, 2019 3:20 AM MDT
      August 7, 2019 10:52 AM MDT
    1

  • 13277
    See my response to the question and stop your hysterics.
      August 7, 2019 10:57 AM MDT
    0

  • 46117
    See this?  

    Perhaps it may help.

      August 7, 2019 11:02 AM MDT
    0

  • 113301
    If the crime is committed by a WHITE AMERICAN CITIZEN hater of all people of color it is ascribed to mental illness. The stoopid dumbs refuse to admit that our terrorist problem is hugely due to WHITE NATIONALIST RACIST TERRORISTS. Tiptoeing around it proves the duplicity going on. WHITE CITIZEN is the key here. That has been no more shown betterly than by the dumbunnyjacka** racist "prez". THEY ARE HIS PEEPS. So what do you expect him to do? Admit it? You are joking if you think he has the capacity to do so. He doesn't. He is a defective homo sap who just got lucky. SH** happens. Thank you for your reply Sharon and Happy Thursday! :)
      August 8, 2019 3:25 AM MDT
    0

  • 13277
    Of course not. That's one of the reasons we have laws and police. Stop being so hysterical about nothing.
      August 7, 2019 10:56 AM MDT
    1

  • 46117
    No one is being hysterical about you or your comments.  Why are you thinking that?  And don't be so hard on yourself.  
      August 7, 2019 10:58 AM MDT
    0

  • 13277
    You missed my point, which spoke to the hysterical tone of Rosie's question.
      August 7, 2019 12:48 PM MDT
    0

  • 34873
    Terrorism is a crime. Domestic or foreign....it is a crime. No freebie anywhere. 
      August 7, 2019 11:57 AM MDT
    2

  • 3719
    The quotes Walt O'Reagun gives form an admirably concise and clear description of crimes committed for political / social ends,  and that purpose.

    Writing from a country where gratuitous non-political massacres are extremely rare (4 in 40 years, killing a total of about 50) but has suffered from terrorism-motivated attacks in the 1970s-80 (in the Northern Ireland "Troubles") and more recently from Islamic jihadists, I have sometimes wondered if we'd have more to gain by simply describing the offence itself without the "terrorist" label.

    Obviously, if the attacker survives and is brought to trial, his motives will be revealed then, but might exclaiming  "Terrorist" at the time, when feelings are running at their highest and sometimes most vitriolic, actually give the attacker's peers a lot of encouragement and pleasure?

    Yes, it seems a strange way to look at it, and as very non-violent person who have never owned or used a firearm in his life, it is hard to think as the gun-men do; but I have seen enough news reports and analysis from home and abroad to gain some idea of their twisted drives. 

    These people rely very much on two things.
    One is publicity that helps spread the fear that is one of their weapons, but also perhaps give them some sense of personal significance or of "belonging", in their minds, to some sort of beleaguered community.
    The other is peer-approval by that "community", usually now by web-sites of their own - the major social-media sites do try to exclude them.
    So if instead of treating an incident as one of "domestic terrorism" - or usually, just "terrorism" in Britain - we describe it straightforwardly as murders without the label but show the motives in court, it just might take some of the gloss off the atrocity for the perpetrator and his supporters. 
      August 7, 2019 4:55 PM MDT
    1

  • 113301
    Thank you for your reply Durdle. Here are the facts. Since the dumbunnyjacka** racist "prez" took over HATE CRIMES have increased. It is not a coincidence. It is the result of his inflammatory hatespeech and his pandering to his base of racists. All the wondrous explanations are irrelevant and meaningless. They do not apply while he has our country in a chokehold. His protectors defenders apologists don't care about the reality of his existence. They only care about making him innocent of all charges. Now if you are lucid coherent cogent and can comprehend you KNOW he is a RACIST HATESPEECH proponent and exemplary at that. His apologists do what he tells them to do and say what he tells them to say, e.g. "Don't believe what you see or what you hear. That is not what is happening". What kind of idiot believes that? Well his apologist supporter worshipping adorers believe that. They say he is not a racist. Do you believe that? It is bullsh** but that is what his apologists are used to flinging daily. The gullibles buy it. I'm not a gullible. Different strokes.
      August 8, 2019 3:33 AM MDT
    0

  • 3719

    I see.

    Actually I know those accusations have been made very publicly in America already; and a lot of people in Texas and Ohio did not want him anywhere near these places.

    It has been reported here that he refuses to acknowledge the problems include the easy accessibility of powerful rifles, and he keeps using the "mentally ill" excuse.

      August 8, 2019 7:24 AM MDT
    0