Is flying a plane into an IRS building an 'act of terror'? Should a militia member that threatens online to 'level Washington DC' be Mirandized, or turned over to the military?
It's high time that America defines terrorism. After all, in attempting to defeat this 'terrorism', we're spending billions, sacrificing soldiers and innocent civilians, and potentially allowing military rule over certain offenses.
Semantics it may be, but the meaning of 'terrorism' has enormous implications for how we debate and rule our 'war or terror'. Amazingly, there's little debate or consensus on what 'terrorism' actually means. In that vacuum, fear dominates legal principle.
Merriam Webster generically defines terrorism as "the systematic use of terror as a means of coercion". But is a serial bank robber a terrorist? Obviously, we need more specifics.
In criminal law, it's not the end that always identifies the crime, but also the means to an end. This logic is what separates first degree (premeditated 'cold blood') murder from 'lesser forms' of the taking of human life (crimes of passion, vehicular manslaughter, etc).
In the case of terrorism, identifying the crime requires similar analysis of the means and the end - what separates it from attempted and actual murder?
Read More