• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Was the South Carolina chuch shootings an act of terrorism

was he South Carolina Churc shooting an act of terrorism

  • It was aTerroist act.

    Votes: 26 53.1%
  • It was a hate crime only

    Votes: 4 8.2%
  • It was a crazy Guy

    Votes: 6 12.2%
  • terrorist 1st hate 2nd nut job 3rd in that order

    Votes: 13 26.5%

  • Total voters
    49
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

I think it is, yes.
Targeting civilians who've had nothing to do with him? Check.
Doing it so to advance an ideological/political goal? Check.
Attempting to spread terror among the members of the targeted group? Check.
Thus it is terrorism.

That the victims were picked based on their race simply makes it a hate crime along with being an act of terrorism, sort of like how Hezbollah will target Jews from outside Israel to advance its agenda against Israel or how the Islamic State targets non-Sunnis from all around the world.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

What do we gain by labeling it "terrorism"?
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

Another dig against the NSA.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

Whatever it was, the guy worked alone, was nuts and is now in custody and there is no way he will ever be released.

What difference does it make whether it was a terrorist act or not?
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

What do we gain by labeling it "terrorism"?

Is being honest about this enough gain, it seems like it would be to me. If we cannot be honest about what happened then why bother with discussion?
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

He killed in order to achieve a sociopolitical end. If that isn't terrorism, what is?

I'm going to agree with you on this. Although not the typical terrorist act like the Muslim extremists we've come to get used to. By definition it was political though. Apparently he was trying to start a civil war.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

I'm going to agree with you on this. Although not the typical terrorist act like the Muslim extremists we've come to get used to. By definition it was political though. Apparently he was trying to start a civil war.

Then I think we are close to being done here, his intentions seem to indicate terrorism for the purpose of starting a racial driven conflict. To up end society by fright and shock, I think the term fits.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

Whatever it was, the guy worked alone, was nuts and is now in custody and there is no way he will ever be released.

What difference does it make whether it was a terrorist act or not?

What difference does it make if it is a bee or a tomahawk missile?

After all, they both fly through the air and deliver a sting.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

Then I think we are close to being done here, his intentions seem to indicate terrorism for the purpose of starting a racial driven conflict. To up end society by fright and shock, I think the term fits.

Yes, I think so because he didn't know any of the people personally. So I don't think it was a personal vendetta, but racially driven to change politics.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

Is being honest about this enough gain, it seems like it would be to me. If we cannot be honest about what happened then why bother with discussion?
Honesty is good. So is consistency. We should be careful to not overdo it, though, and apply the label to things that aren't really terrorism... as we* are wont to do when emotion kicks in. Hence, the discussion is ALWAYS appropriate.

For example, in this case (Charleston shootings) I would absolutely agree it's terrorism. He had a political agenda. In the case of a mass shooting directed against co-workers because the shooter felt slighted (personal vendetta) I would not categorize as terrorism, but many people would.

My question has another facet, too. Ok, we have a mass shooting. The guy is going down. We pretty much know that. In our trial and penalty, what will adding a definition of terrorism change from what he's already going to get?

*- Collective "we", as a society overall.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

What difference does it make if it is a bee or a tomahawk missile?

After all, they both fly through the air and deliver a sting.
That doesn't address his point. He's asking what does it matter after-the-fact when there is only one option.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

Certainly for the little 5 year old who played dead and escaped death, it was and will be an act of terror, perhaps forever in that little person's life. In that the group was purposely targeted because of their race it was a unquestionably a hate crime.

Roof's actions were intended to be terrorizing but he failed. The strong and good families and congregation of the church almost immediately refused to be terrorized. Even in their immense grief, even in the soul shattering early morning hours the next day family members, the congregation and black community of Charleston refused to be terrorized.

Roof certainly may have intended to terrorize but the families of the victims and the church congregation would not accept it. They are so much better and so much stronger than the hatred and the harm thrown in their path.

The strength of family and the power of character of their fine congregation is a testament to their religious faith. That is unquestionable. It is a shame that message isn't getting the media attention it deserves.
 
Last edited:
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

Since the 9-11 terrorist attack I believe USA have named acts of terrorism.. one I heard was that even if a gang threatens or hurt innocent people it is an act of terrorism ..if a Muslim kills an American it is an act of terrorism. radical Muslims hate Americans right? and if they kill a group of Americans like in Boston they were called terrorist well this boy hated blacks Americans and he killed a group of Americans does that make him a terrorist? or does the color make the difference between terrorism and a hate crime? what do you think. sorry for the miss spelling of the poll heading should read (Was the South Carolina church shooting an act of terrorism)

There is a distinction to be made between crime sufficiently horrible to illicit fear amongst a population, and terrorism.

I don't see lone wolves as terrorists. Hateful, destructive, and certainly installing fear and terror in many, but without an organization behind him that can benefit in some way from his act, it's just rage and hatred... Yet no less terrible.

To me, terrorism speaks to a larger agenda shared actively by several or many people. Goals and objectives (beyond killing to settle a score)

No coffee yet, not fleshing this out well
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

Certainly for the little 5 year old who played dead and escaped death, it was and will be an act of terror, perhaps forever in that little person's life. In that the group was purposely targeted because of their race it was a unquestionably a hate crime.

Roof's actions were intended to be terrorizing but he failed. The strong and good families and congregation of the church almost immediately refused to be terrorized. Even in their immense grief, even in the soul shattering early morning hours the next day family members, the congregation and black community of Charleston refused to be terrorized.

Roof certainly may have intended to terrorize but the families of the victims and the church congregation would not accept it. They are so much better and so much stronger than the hatred and the harm thrown in their path.

The strength of family and the power of character of their fine congregation is a testament to their religious faith. That is unquestionable. It is a shame that message isn't getting the media attention it deserves.
I'm going to guess that this was not his aim, overall. He wanted to terrorize society in general, and to shock people into (his desired) action. The victims and their families were just fodder for a means to his (hoped for) end.

In other words, nothing personal, just business.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

There is a distinction to be made between crime sufficiently horrible to illicit fear amongst a population, and terrorism.

I don't see lone wolves as terrorists. Hateful, destructive, and certainly installing fear and terror in many, but without an organization behind him that can benefit in some way from his act, it's just rage and hatred... Yet no less terrible.

To me, terrorism speaks to a larger agenda shared actively by several or many people. Goals and objectives (beyond killing to settle a score)

No coffee yet, not fleshing this out well

These are my initial thoughts ass well. I don't really think of a true "lone wolf's" actions as being terrorism, depending on their motive. But, even tough he was technically acting alone, he was also acting influenced by others and hoping he would affect action by others for a bigger cause than just himself.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

Certainly for the little 5 year old who played dead and escaped death, it was and will be an act of terror, perhaps forever in that little person's life.
In that the group was purposely targeted because of their race it was a unquestionably a hate crime.

Roof's actions were intended to be terrorizing but he failed. The strong and good families and congregation of the church almost immediately refused to be terrorized. Even in their immense grief, even in the soul shattering early morning hours the next day family members, the congregation and black community of Charleston refused to be terrorized.

Roof certainly may have intended to terrorize but the families of the victims and the church congregation would not accept it. They are so much better and so much stronger than the hatred and the harm thrown in their path.

The strength of family and the power of character of their fine congregation is a testament to their religious faith. That is unquestionable. It is a shame that message is getting the media attention it deserves.



I totally agree with your great post. Roof's horrible action will have a result exactly opposite to what he hoped for.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

Whatever it was, the guy worked alone, was nuts and is now in custody and there is no way he will ever be released.

What difference does it make whether it was a terrorist act or not?

That may or may not be accurate. He went in to the church alone, but does that really mean he worked alone? How much responsibility do those who taught him to hate bear? Or those who knew prior that he was going to do something who failed to take action?
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

There is a distinction to be made between crime sufficiently horrible to illicit fear amongst a population, and terrorism.

I don't see lone wolves as terrorists. Hateful, destructive, and certainly installing fear and terror in many, but without an organization behind him that can benefit in some way from his act, it's just rage and hatred... Yet no less terrible.

To me, terrorism speaks to a larger agenda shared actively by several or many people. Goals and objectives (beyond killing to settle a score)

No coffee yet, not fleshing this out well

He walked into the church alone but there are many that share his views.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

He walked into the church alone but there are many that share his views.

My opinion on this subject is evolving. I initially did not see this as terrorism. It was certainly a heinous act done by a mentally unstable person. After listening to discussion and hearing some definitions I accept the definition of terrorism prophered by some. I don't know why it matters though.

In addition, I don't know what a hate crime is. I understand the categories but it seems to me that a crime is a crime and adding the hate crime suffex does little to change that fact. Do we get to put criminals in jail and as the door closes tell them they suck as well as punishment for the hate crime?
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

My opinion on this subject is evolving. I initially did not see this as terrorism. It was certainly a heinous act done by a mentally unstable person. After listening to discussion and hearing some definitions I accept the definition of terrorism prophered by some. I don't know why it matters though.

In addition, I don't know what a hate crime is. I understand the categories but it seems to me that a crime is a crime and adding the hate crime suffex does little to change that fact. Do we get to put criminals in jail and as the door closes tell them they suck as well as punishment for the hate crime?

I agree with hate crime nonsense. Violent crimes are hate crimes regardless of why.

But with the terrorism I think we should start viewing these groups who teach hate, and spread this propaganda, and push others to act against Americans as terrorism groups. Start actively taking these groups, their websites, their hate down like we do with many external hate groups. Start arresting suspected members. And not just the white hate groups, all of them.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

That may or may not be accurate. He went in to the church alone, but does that really mean he worked alone? How much responsibility do those who taught him to hate bear? Or those who knew prior that he was going to do something who failed to take action?
I have no doubt he was heavily influenced by others. Possibly even to the point of them purposely teaching him their point-of-view.

I'm not so sure that just teaching repugnant attitudes equals them being part of the plot. Presuming they knew nothing of the plot and he planned it out on his own.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

So the media acting like useful idiots are giving the scumbag his 15 minutes of fame and thus spreading his message.
Don't you want people to discuss what caused the killer to do what he did?
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

I agree with hate crime nonsense. Violent crimes are hate crimes regardless of why.

But with the terrorism I think we should start viewing these groups who teach hate, and spread this propaganda, and push others to act against Americans as terrorism groups. Start actively taking these groups, their websites, their hate down like we do with many external hate groups. Start arresting suspected members. And not just the white hate groups, all of them.

What difference does it make if this Roof guy is a terrorist? When the state eventually kills him will he be sent to a special part of hell because of the designation? In addition, do hate groups commit hate crimes? We try to put everything in neat little boxes so we have names for everything. I almost feel like we are like Eskimos who have twenty six different words for snow.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

What difference does it make if this Roof guy is a terrorist? When the state eventually kills him will he be sent to a special part of hell because of the designation? In addition, do hate groups commit hate crimes? We try to put everything in neat little boxes so we have names for everything. I almost feel like we are like Eskimos who have twenty six different words for snow.
Because some people will use that classification to try to silence conservatives, and who knows, may even try to criminalize some aspects of conservative positions based on the terrorist label. There are already several threads and posts trying to blame conservative policies.
 
Re: Was the South Carolina church shootings an act of terrorism

What difference does it make if this Roof guy is a terrorist? When the state eventually kills him will he be sent to a special part of hell because of the designation? In addition, do hate groups commit hate crimes? We try to put everything in neat little boxes so we have names for everything. I almost feel like we are like Eskimos who have twenty six different words for snow.

Classifying can serve a much bigger purpose which can help fight the groups that are driving alot of these attacks. Kind of like RICO and organized crime. These racist groups or hate groups should be combated the same way the Mafia/Al Queda/ ISIS are.

I dont really care if Roof is labeled a terrorist. I want the Council of Conservative Citizens, the KKK, the New Black Panthers and many others treated as terrorist organizations.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom