• David J. Shourabi Porcel@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    12 days ago

    If I understand your quotation correctly, unlawful gathering warrants the charge of terrorism only when “intended to […] (a) influence the policies of a unit of government by intimidation or coercion and (b) affect the conduct of a unit of government by murder, assassination or kidnapping”. Then again, (a) and (b) seem redundant and the law and the judiciary might see intimidation or coercion where we do not.

    • cybervseas@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      12 days ago

      Given how frequently and readily police officers fear for their lives, I think you have a point.

      NYPD Officer: “Your honor the protestors made me fear for my life. Their signs said mean things.”

      Judge: “Yep, they’re terrorists.” gavel

      • David J. Shourabi Porcel@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        12 days ago

        To be fair, fearing for one’s life is understandable in a society where gun ownership, social injustice and mental illness are not only relatively widespread, but correlated, and the chances of being hurt in even simple altercations correspondingly high. The solution, though, is not allowing police to resort to violence routinely, disproportionately and indiscriminately, but to address the root causes of the danger with socioeconomic justice and safeguards, proper universal healthcare and at least some restrictions in gun ownership. Those who either aren’t willing to solve these underlying issues or deny their existence outright often resort to the charge of terrorism as both a convenient deflection and an instrument of suppression and oppression. It is in our interest to push back against such misuse and keep the public discourse centered on the origins of conflict.