Explosions At Boston Marathon

[Themius]

So, it is Themius pulling definitions out of his arse?

P.S. Thanks for the source.

I had no idea Princeton was in my ass. I didn't notice any ivy growing out of there.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

This is very true. The hysteria seems to be on the "OMG THEY DIDNT READ HIS MIRANDA RIGHTS TO HIM ZOMG!!!!" crowd. They don't have to read your Miranda rights to you. If they don't, they can't use any information you give them against you. Obviously in this case they don't need the suspect to incriminate himself as they have more than enough evidence on him.

Be that as it may, stranger things have happened. It would be wise to not make mistakes in a case like this.

[N-7]

I had no idea Princeton was in my ass. I didn't notice any ivy growing out of there.

But that Princeton isn't the government now, is it? So, yeah it is more or less your arse.

Going by how we define terrorism since you know... it's our country... those two incidents weren't really considered terrorism. Now if the goal of this bombing wasn't to do with religious or political issues and simply just to kill people, then it may not be considered terrorism.

[lockedout]

I love how they are saying he used "weapons of mass destruction" since when is a pipe bomb or home made bomb considered this?
When we went into Iraq looking for WMD's we found none. So are you telling me Iraq had not one bomb?

---------- Post added 2013-04-21 at 07:21 PM ----------

They don't have to read your Miranda rights to you. If they don't, they can't use any information you give them against you.

Except they can in this circumstance. Thats how this special law works. You have no rights, like the right to remain silent etc.

[Themius]

But that Princeton isn't the government now, is it? So, yeah it is more or less your arse.

Title 22, Chapter 38 of the United States Code (regarding the Department of State) contains a definition of terrorism in its requirement that annual country reports on terrorism be submitted by the Secretary of State to Congress every year. It reads:

"Definitions ... the term 'terrorism' means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;

Unless Aurora and and Shady were politically motivated they don't count.

Now what was that about a lack of a Government stance? By the way same source as the person who posted about a lack of definition.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2656f

As used in this section—
(1) the term “international terrorism” means terrorism involving citizens or the territory of more than 1 country;
(2) the term “terrorism” means premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents;
(3) the term “terrorist group” means any group practicing, or which has significant subgroups which practice, international terrorism;

[lockedout]

Our government loves blanket terms that hold no real definition.

Terrorist or terrorism and Assault Weapon are 2 of my favorite.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

It's not the whole government. It's just dumb people being dumb.

[ringpriest]

Just to add some clarity - the US legal definition doesn't include the requirement that the incident have "the hope of attaining political or religious aims":

US legal definitions also considers a potato gun a weapon of mass destruction. Seriously. (At least, if you shoot someone with it.)

[Dispersedshadow]

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2656f

That's the definition of terrorism insofar as annual reports on terrorism compiled the State Dept. is concerned. Since they are specifically compiled as:

(A) detailed assessments with respect to each foreign country

– I don't believe that definition is a valid one when considering acts of terrorism on U.S. soil.

I would suggest the definition I supplied above from Title 18, regarding Crimes and Criminal Procedure, is more appropriate.

[Belize]

US legal definitions also considers a potato gun a weapon of mass destruction. Seriously. (At least, if you shoot someone with it.)

Dude. Potato guns are freaking brutal. If North Korean said they had armed most of their soldiers with one, I'd petition the government to surrender right away.

[N-7]

Unless Aurora and and Shady were politically motivated they don't count.

Incorrect.

(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.

That is Sandy, Aurora shootings and Boston bombing.

(1) the term “international terrorism” means activities that—
(A) involve violent acts or acts dangerous to human life that are a violation of the criminal laws of the United States or of any State, or that would be a criminal violation if committed within the jurisdiction 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 outside the territorial jurisdiction of the United States, or transcend national boundaries in terms of the means by which they are accomplished, the persons they appear intended to intimidate or coerce, or the locale in which their perpetrators operate or seek asylum;

These are international acts of terrorism such as in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Now what was that about a lack of a Government stance? By the way same source as the person who posted about a lack of definition.

http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/22/2656f

When did anyone speak about the lack of government stance? These definitions I stated above DO NOT say anything about it being politically motivated or not. Now, I don't know why your government has two conflicting definitions.

[Themius]

That's the definition of terrorism insofar as annual reports on terrorism compiled the State Dept. is concerned. Since they are specifically compiled as: – I don't believe that definition is a valid one when considering acts of terrorism on U.S. soil.

I would suggest the definition I supplied above from Title 18, regarding Crimes and Criminal Procedure, is more appropriate.

Code of Federal Regulations definition says there is no universal accepted definition but...

There is no single, universally accepted, definition of terrorism. Terrorism is
defined in the Code of Federal Regulations as “...the unlawful use of force and vio-
lence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian
population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
(28 C.F.R. Section 0.85)

The FBI further describes terrorism as either domestic or international, depending
on the origin, base, and objectives of the terrorist organization. For the purpose of
this report, the FBI will use the following definitions:

https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...X4Zwx6VuZ3LrZw

---------- Post added 2013-04-21 at 04:16 PM ----------

snip

We have 6-8 definition and most of them are close to what the FBI's definition is.

[Dispersedshadow]

Code of Federal Regulations definition says there is no universal accepted definition but...

As I understand it, the CFR appears to allow government agencies to enable enforcement policy in this case in regards to the Title 18 (Criminal and Penal Code) definition that I provided. I'll also point out that the definition contains terminology so vague that it makes the "in furtherance of" applicable to just about anything (unless there's a official government definition for the phrase bolded below):

...the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian
population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.

For example, under that definition – one could argue that an individual castrating (unlawful use of force/violence) another person (a segment of the civilian population) is an act of coercing them (by removing their ability to reproduce) in furtherance of the social objective of zero global population growth.

[Grummgug]

For those that don't know, the 19 year old kid has a twitter feed here:
https://twitter.com/J_tsar

Interesting tweets:

Jahar ‏@J_tsar 15 Apr
There are people that know the truth but stay silent & there are people that speak the truth but we don't hear them cuz they're the minority

Jahar ‏@J_tsar 15 Apr
@MelloChamp and they what "god hates dead people?" Or victims of tragedies? Lol those people are cooked

I couldn't find anything else of interest in his feed.

Two people he tweeted recently have gone private with their feed, @therealabdul_ and @MelloChamp

You can still read them at topsy tho

http://topsy.com/twitter/mellochamp
http://topsy.com/twitter/therealabdul_

There really isn't anything there tho.

[N-7]

We have 6-8 definition and most of them are close to what the FBI's definition is.

In that case I get to choose whatever I like right? Then Sandy and Aurora shootings are included.

[Grummgug]

I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh at this one guys twitter account. (he's a friend of jahar)

https://twitter.com/TroyCrossley

At the top it says:

I'm 20 and a Rapper trying to make my dream come into a realty.

trying to make my dream come into a realty.
into a realty.
realty.

REALTY?!

He's a rapper but he really wants to sell real estate??

[belfpala]

He's a rapper but he really wants to sell real estate??

How else you gonna be on MTV Cribs?

[Felya]

AP just reported that the suspect has been charged in hospital with 'conspiring to use weapons of mass destruction'. Also AP, Obama stated he will not be treated as an enemy combatant.

[Deleted]

I'm sorry but I can't help but laugh at this one guys twitter account. (he's a friend of jahar)

https://twitter.com/TroyCrossley

At the top it says:

I'm 20 and a Rapper trying to make my dream come into a realty.

trying to make my dream come into a realty.
into a realty.
realty.

REALTY?!

He's a rapper but he really wants to sell real estate??

Reminds me of a youtube video I saw once of some young black kid that claimed he is going to be the worlds best raper.

[Deleted]

A weapon of mass destruction?

Seriously?

I know there's no 'Official' definition of WMD's, but the US Military definition is:

Chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear weapons capable of a high order of destruction or causing mass casualties and exclude the means of transporting or propelling the weapon where such means is a separable and divisible part from the weapon. Also called WMD.

Just seems to be an odd choice of sentence. Further more I hear he possibly faces the death penalty. I don't agree with the Death Penalty in the slightest for anyone, but hell, it's almost bound to happen, the bloodlust following this event guarantees it.