Pedestrians mown down by van Leicester not terrorist
Discussion
How come if pedestrians are mown down by a van in Leicester it's not a terrorist incident?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-leicesters...
The same offence under terrorism laws would attract ......?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-leicesters...
beeb said:
Van driver Lugman Aslam, 26, of Warren View, Leicester, was jailed for five years after pleading guilty to dangerous driving and attempting to commit grievous bodily harm with intent.
Lucky no-one was killedThe same offence under terrorism laws would attract ......?
saaby93 said:
Lucky no-one was killed
The same offence under terrorism laws would attract ......?
Same reason as if a non-muslim does something because they're a violent knob it isn't automatically terrorism I guess?The same offence under terrorism laws would attract ......?
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/muslim-driver...
Puts a bit more context around it.
Well, he had a previous altercation with the guys he knocked down, and his motivation appears to have been personal. In which case it is by definition not terrorism.
.
In case anyone is interested the definition as used by Pool Re (UK government sponsored terrorism reinsurer) is:
an Act of Terrorism (Terrorism) means:-
Acts of persons acting on behalf of, or in connection with, any organisation which carries out activities directed towards the overthrowing or influencing, by force or violence, of Her Majesty’s government in the United Kingdom or any other government de jure or de facto
Other definitions are around, obviously.
.
In case anyone is interested the definition as used by Pool Re (UK government sponsored terrorism reinsurer) is:
an Act of Terrorism (Terrorism) means:-
Acts of persons acting on behalf of, or in connection with, any organisation which carries out activities directed towards the overthrowing or influencing, by force or violence, of Her Majesty’s government in the United Kingdom or any other government de jure or de facto
Other definitions are around, obviously.
Edited by mac96 on Thursday 15th June 20:38
saaby93 said:
mac96 said:
Well, he had a previous altercation with the guys he knocked down, and his motivation appears to have been personal. In which case it is by definition not terrorism.
There was something about a religious festival?Still not looking like terrorism to me. If someone calls me a fat bd in the street at Easter, and I run them down in a car, does that make me a terrorist? And I guarantee the newspaper headline would not be: "Christian driver mounted pavement and ploughed into ..."'
Robertj21a said:
saaby93 said:
Lucky no-one was killed
The same offence under terrorism laws would attract ......?
Not sure why you would think he was a terrorist ?The same offence under terrorism laws would attract ......?
So, when another incident reaches the news of a person with a Muslim sounding name running down people in a van, people make the mental leap to link the 2 in some way; terrorism.
This is the problem with judging based on headlines. Unfortunately we don't all have the where with all or time to be able to objectively understand the circumstances and see through the media prejudices.
saaby93 said:
How come if pedestrians are mown down by a van in Leicester it's not a terrorist incident?
Because the purpose wasn't designed to influence the government or to intimidate the public or a section of the public, and wasn't intended to advance a political, religious or ideological cause.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff