• TheFriar@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    ….so? How many killers before him have written a manifesto? Are all these school shooters, attacking actual public schools, being charged with terrorism? They’re actually striking out at “the system.” How many white supremacists mass shootings have written manifestos and not been charged with terrorism?

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      3 days ago

      Are all these school shooters, attacking actual public schools, being charged with terrorism?

      There’s little need to up-charge school shooters. Many of them are killed on sight. Those that are captured (Dylan Roof, for instance) get life without parole or the death sentence.

      But in NYC, a single murder without a terrorist motive only gets you to 2nd Degree Murder. That means you’ll be out in 15 years. The “terrorism” addendum is necessary for life without parole sentencing.

        • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 days ago

          There is no objective measure of criminal conduct. It’s all malleable. Prosecutors and judges and juries ultimately make these decisions case-by-case. And the results can be heavily weighted by wealthy, socially influential private interests who want to see an example made of a particularly offensive or terrifying individual.

          • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            3 days ago

            There is no objective measure of criminal conduct

            I mean that’s what the law is supposed to do, maybe it doesn’t work like that in the US.

            • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 days ago

              “The Law” is a complex often contradictory abstract rubric that has to be applied to individual circumstances based on incomplete information by imperfect people. That’s the whole reason we have both a prosecutor and defense, plus an (ostensibly) impartial judge to adjudicate procedure and a jury to determine guilt/innocence and sentence.

              If you could just put data into a computer and have it spit out perfect verdicts, the entire judicial system would be unnecessary.