Example B: Imagine a world where each time a mass killing happens you arent told whether its done by someone who hates your way of life or if its just simply a psycho who wants to kill people. (Ill let you in on a secret theyre the exact same thing)

Imagine if the Aurora movie theater attack was by someone with mental illness and not deemed terror. Would mentally ill people be denied guns?

Imagine if the San Bermadino killings were just some psychos. Would that even make headlines?

Imagine if we lived in a world where reactionary responses were exacty what the evil ppl want

As for the thread Topic:

The problem with the alcohol v terrorism situation, is alcohol is something that can be responsibly managed, in a way that harms nobody. terrorism even in small doses is fairly dangerous. with that having been said, it matters less for the victims. whether the person who died was because the man purposefully drove his car into him because of ideological extremism, or if he simply had been an alcoholic due to circumstances in his life, the victim is a constant in the situation, and the tragedy remains the same.

As for your Post:

"Example A: A man shoots a bunch of people, like 40-50 people and immediatley the media races to find out if its terror. If its a terror Plot, Fox News will be all over it. If its a mass shooting CNN will be all over it. And as soon as the truth is learned the political activism shows up. "we must ban guns" or "we must ban muslims"."

well i think this is a great example of the extreme reactions on each side.

"lets be real, terrorism is just murder with a spooky name to make people afraid. it is motivated by the intent to make people think your kingdom, your way of life is in danger. But why is this any different than a gun wielding maniac who wants the same? why is this any different than a drunk guy who wants to run from the cops and take a ton of people with him on a spree of death?"


Because terrorism is spawn from ideology or world view, whereas the "gun wielding maniac" - can stem from many other things. terrorism itself is the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims. while there are many lone wolf attacks, with absolute isolation from other radicals, these attacks don't generally predict future violence.

so whenever we hear there's been a mass murder of 50 people, most want to know if the person responsible is working alone, or if there is some systemic force which can make others act in the same way.

systemic forces can be:
group based: ideology, religion, political allegiance
individual based: mental health, personal retribution
causation based: promoted extremist values, 3rd party reactionaries

so the reason why people fear Terrorism in specific, is because ideologies aren't always contained to a single person. if there's a terrorist attack, that means there is a direct causal link that guarantees, without intervention, more action will be taken in the future.

"In my humble opinion, terrorism as a word is more an excuse to create a society that complies with the fear evildoers hope you will do. Terrorists crave people caving in to their own decency and turning on people with a different appearance, accent, or way of life. "

This certainly CAN be the case, and is a prominent tactic used in false flag attacks. however, you're missing a logical step if you think ISIS is executing westerners, BECAUSE they want us to hate all Muslims. if anything, the conqueror-attitude of them would want a submissive response, rather than any kind of belligerence.

in fact banning all muslims, as an extremist stance, would if anything incite ISIS to commit more violence.

Thank you for the responses Yanik. But there is actually a very very debate worthy topic here.

Drunk driving vs Terrorism which is harder to defeat?
Which is more dangerous to Americans?
Which is more likely to endanger you or someone you know in your lifetime?

All answers are Alcholism/Drunk Driving.

Terrorism can be defeated by deeming its fearmongering power irrelevant and simply accepting it as an inevitability.

Drunkeness and death is a societal dice roll. With a wide variety of victims. And a very difficult evil to begin to fix. We have had cars over 100 years and alcohol even longer. Jihad has been around what... 30 years? 40?

Why is society more afraid of Jihad?

"Example B: Imagine a world where each time a mass killing happens you arent told whether its done by someone who hates your way of life or if its just simply a psycho who wants to kill people. (Ill let you in on a secret theyre the exact same thing)"

no, terrorism has political motivations, whereas psychopaths come in all shapes and sizes. for psychopathic killers, many are simply motivated by self-preservation. the lust for killing is not intrinsic to all psychopaths, rather the intrinsic trait in psychopaths is an indifference. psychopathic killing sprees generally are triggered from past traumas, that accumulate in a completely irrational set of actions.

this is entirely different form terrorism, which has root causes than generally have hierarchal structure, meaning future attacks will likely occur.


"Imagine if the Aurora movie theater attack was by someone with mental illness and not deemed terror. Would mentally ill people be denied guns?"

you're confusing morals and reactions. whether or not mentally ill people should be denied guns, is something to be determined in a vacuum to all events surrounding it. whether or not it were a terrorist or mentally ill person, the argument for restricting their access to guns is a constant."


"Imagine if the San Bermadino killings were just some psychos. Would that even make headlines?"

yes, because it was a massive shooting. what Accelerated the story's attention was the fact they had pledged their allegiance to ISIS the day earlier online. this fact made people worried that more and more radicals would come forward in the United States, and so inquiries were made as to whether or not this was direct ISIS recruitments, or reactionaries. in this case, it was a combination of the two.

"Imagine if we lived in a world where reactionary responses were exacty what the evil ppl want"

except psychos generally do not care about reactionary responses, for EITHER the traumatically driven or the self-preservation driven offenders. furthermore, terrorists have stated political goals, so reactionary responses ONLY matter, if they obtain such goals. once again, i don't think ISIS enjoys reactionaries saying "close all borders" in fact i think they hate that

Id also argue that the Lone Wolf killer has evolved based on access to advanced weapons to being able to rival even the most coordinated of Terror attacks. It no longer takes a team of people when one maniac can attack a club in Orlando. It is no longer that hard to attack a school full of kids with weapons and at the end of that incident tons of kids die but sadly theres no oil rich or lithium rich nations to invade to avenge the loss of life

On the contrary Yanik from Columbine to Waco to 9/11 : Psychos, Murderers, Religious Extremists, Jihadists alike all want one thing: Their moment in the spotlight.

"Thank you for the responses Yanik. But there is actually a very very debate worthy topic here.

Drunk driving vs Terrorism which is harder to defeat?"

this definitely depends, drunk driving is a constant, while terrorism is exceedingly variable. if you have a tolerant culture, decent control of your borders, and a strong force of law and order, then terrorism is not exceedingly difficult to quell. in some places of the world, this is not the case.


"Which is more dangerous to Americans?
Which is more likely to endanger you or someone you know in your lifetime?

All answers are Alcholism/Drunk Driving."

in my lifetime? not if we have another world war, which could very easily occur if radical factions get their hands on high quality ballistics missiles.


"Terrorism can be defeated by deeming its fearmongering power irrelevant and simply accepting it as an inevitability."

i entirely disagree with this. its "fearmongering power" is NOT irrelevant, when dozens of homosexuals are drowned in metal cages underwater, for some ideology. where people are slaughtered for having a slightly different interpretation of who was the rightful successor to religious empire built and demolished centuries ago. their power, is POWER. power through guns, missiles, gas... this is not something we can simply dismiss.

furthermore, the day we accept radical ideology as inevitable, is a dark day indeed. the day we say that there is no hope for mankind recognizing some kind of higher truth, and that we are doomed to blow each other up in petty squabbles, is the day we deserve such a fate. simply saying that such barbarism in inevitable is not something i'm comfortable with. even with alcoholism, i believe it is a problem societies and communities can fix. i'm in no way saying any of this would be easy, but it i will never brush the matter aside and call it "inevitable"


"Drunkeness and death is a societal dice roll. With a wide variety of victims. And a very difficult evil to begin to fix. We have had cars over 100 years and alcohol even longer. Jihad has been around what... 30 years? 40?"

Jihad? try 1400

"Why is society more afraid of Jihad?"

because drunk driving is the result of individual actions, and we can hold individuals responsible. Jihad is the result of group and individual actions, in which a culture emerges that must be destroyed. drunk driving is something we fight through culture. Jihad we fight through the moderates in the youth generation, and in bullets for the radicals

drunk driving didn't mandate that all Jews in Israel must die.

Be that as it may Alcohol has killed more americans this decade than ISIS/Al Quaeda combined. Yet the fear over Radical Extremism eclipses fear over our own societal ills.

Also unless we plan to literally obliterate the middle east and anywhere that may have terrorists (alot of places) then yea man terrorists will be inevitable and will always prey on weaker minds who give in to racism/hatred and inevitably bomb the wrong house or kill the wrong person and BOOM you just turned another non terrorist against you

"Id also argue that the Lone Wolf killer has evolved based on access to advanced weapons to being able to rival even the most coordinated of Terror attacks. It no longer takes a team of people when one maniac can attack a club in Orlando. It is no longer that hard to attack a school full of kids with weapons and at the end of that incident tons of kids die but sadly theres no oil rich or lithium rich nations to invade to avenge the loss of life"

actually, coordinated terror attacks are heavily regulated by government agencies. we put everything forward to stop them. the more coordination, the more likely we'll spot it.

however with lone wolf attacks, there's not way to spot it before hand... or at least very little time to do so.

either the lone wold is motivated by the coordinated terror attacks, in which case our destruction of that will solve the other, or the lone wolf attacks are truly thought up of in isolation, in which case there is nothing we CAN do. either way, the more fear and more reaction, is rightfully given to the coordinated attacks.


"On the contrary Yanik from Columbine to Waco to 9/11 : Psychos, Murderers, Religious Extremists, Jihadists alike all want one thing: Their moment in the spotlight."

i'm not sure how Waco made it on that list... ATF messed up that one.

but for Columbine the kids were definitely looking for some sort of recognition. turns out they weren't the common bull victims, but actually kind of dicks. one passive, the other aggressive, and together a terrible combination.

but jihadists? i disagree with them purely wanting a moment in the spotlight. i think many of them want 72 virgins in the promised land.

Sam Harris addressed this, when he said that many on the left has the unfortunate tendency to not believe radical islamic terrorists, when they say they do something for allah. they don't ACTUALLY BELIEVE that some could possible kill for Allah, it must be some other motivation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVl3BJoEoAU

it's a 3 hour debate, and it changed my entire view on the problems with Jihadists

You sound like you think that sheer military capability will someday erase radicalism cause by "haves" and "have nots". Unless the US Military plans to create a world where poverty ceases to exist and envy as well - jihad/radical hate of the west is inevitable

"Be that as it may Alcohol has killed more americans this decade than ISIS/Al Quaeda combined. Yet the fear over Radical Extremism eclipses fear over our own societal ills."

perhaps in fear, but many more people take direct action to address alcoholism. think about all the AA support groups and church groups that are devoted to helping alcoholics. most people only address terrorism through taxes through the military, a passive action on their part. the fear is the one that's more foreign to them.


"Also unless we plan to literally obliterate the middle east and anywhere that may have terrorists (alot of places) then yea man terrorists will be inevitable and will always prey on weaker minds who give in to racism/hatred and inevitably bomb the wrong house or kill the wrong person and BOOM you just turned another non terrorist against you"

once again, i do not believe terrorists antagonize, in this case the USA, in order for us to bomb more of their people, so they can hate us more.

the standard model is generally a radical faction within a state, that either opposes or is supported by said state.

foreign powers generally get involved when either a state sponsored terrorist group attacks them or an ally, or when a state opposition radical group attacks that state in order to achieve political goals.

i'd like you to cite a specific verified example of when a terrorist group intentionally agonized the USA, in order for us to attack them harder.

terrorist groups want submission, or world recognition of their political sovereignty and power. even with 9/11 that was in response to one of our bombings on terrorists. not an attack that wanted to make us more racist, but a reaction to an already violent conflict with Palestine (i believe it was them).

Actually Yanik theres plenty of ways to catch lone wolf killers. We just dont care. A guy can fill his abilify perscription the same day he buys 8000 rounds an SKS and goes home to make a bunch of pipe bombs. Theres some common sense red flags that people on anti psychotics probably ought to at least answer a questionaire on things. But thats too much of an encroachment on liberty.

So 20-50 ppl have to die for that dudes liberty.

"You sound like you think that sheer military capability will someday erase radicalism cause by "haves" and "have nots". Unless the US Military plans to create a world where poverty ceases to exist and envy as well - jihad/radical hate of the west is inevitable"

you think that radicals are motivated in the middle east because of POVERTY? that alone is what has caused so much violence? then why do we see doctors and people even in the upper echelon of society joining with ISIS? why do we see massive support for suicide bombings from Pew polls across the world? this is not a socioeconomic problem, it's a cultural one.

the moderates fight the culture war, the military fights the war of arms

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WVl3BJoEoAU

i implore you to watch this debate. it addresses basically everything we've said here so far, better than i ever can. please find time to do it

@yanik Palestinians burned US flags on 9/11 and cheered as did Iranians. As did Iraqis. Were not loved man. Not there especially.

Yanik hold on. Weve been meddling in the Middle East for decades. Yes its poverty and yea the envy of the west is not a new talking point. In fact Sean Hannity himself describes Radical Islam as being jealous of us. Im not justifying killing us by being jealous on the contrary im saying we cant prevent that.

@brainbomb i support regulation for the mentally ill, preventing them from owning firearms. furthermore, ammunition limits are a thing, and as someone who has made smoke and pipe bombs before, you are only legally allowed to buy the material in very small quantities.

for the serious lone wolf attack, who is NOT mentally ill, there's not stopping him. if you obtain the materials slowly and over time, from various retailers without an immediately obvious pattern, you could make a bomb, drive it in a van, park it in a parking garage, and walk off as it blows up ten minutes later.

for the mentally ill, where it's a 24 hour spree, there ARE ways to detect it. but for the lone wold ideologue, it's law enforcement's worst nightmare. they simply do not possess the resources to prevent this. culture is the reason we are a healthy country, and much of the middle east is in shambles.

and also our shitty foreign policy which has aggravate the situation. that too

the reason why there is terrorism on US soil is because of our foreign policy.

the reason why there is terrorism within those countries, is due to culture.

if you only think of poverty as a reason for **political** violence, then we should be seeing a lot more terrorism in parts of africa. while there are some murderous regimes in Africa, the primary problem there is crime cartels.

so why does most of Africa have a different reaction in the middle east to fascism and poverty? culture.

1:09:36

https://youtu.be/WVl3BJoEoAU

up until about 1:20:00 or so, is what we're talking about

Im not sure if you are trying to say Africa is poverty stricken and therefore shoukd be envious of us or if you are trying to claim terrorism doesnt exist in africa or if you think im implying the only reason Jihad exists is about poverty its not.

Obviously theres a lot of reasons.

However to go point by point showing you every detail "the arab spring", Boko Haram, Somolia, Kony, rwanda, Darfur. And showing you why in each case anti american terror factions did or did not spring up is frankly a job for a CIA director not a cook from Nebraska. I do know much of the hatred of us relates to support for Israel and the fact we have bombed probably a million islamic citizens into the dust.

Respond to OP: I think it's a bit of a stretch to suggest we only have visceral responses to terrorism. I think in a local news way we experience daily doses of bad news that hits us hard the issue is that terrorism usually affects the global stage. This leads to a swelling of emotions. Your small town may be hit with a double homicide that really scares the community but your community may only be a few hundred. When terrorists strike they are striking much larger communities. The response ends up feeling larger because the affected population is larger. The same goes for sandyhook elementary which if the shooter had simply killed his mom and committed suicide it would've been local news, but because he killed a large number of people in a way that made America as a whole question its security it became a national story, if he had done it in the name of allah and Islamic extremism than it would have become international news. Do I make sense? I'm half asleep.

I think what I am trying to say is that certain things affect greater populations and thus feel like there's a media bias against smaller events. Example: murder-suicide = community tradegy and a week of coverage on the local channels. Mass shooting = national tradegy and a week of coverage on national channels. Terrorism = international tragedy and a week of coverage on national and foreign channels.

You can break this down for the economy as well:
Local ice cream place is shut down = local news
National ice cream chain closes 200 stores = national news
International ice cream producer goes bankrupt = international news.

According to a few on this site, the reason why Africa likes us is that Robert E Lee was such a good guy who cared alot if making sure Africans were better off here than in Africa. Our constituents here are a confusing lot Yanik. But hang in there I have faith that we will one day defeat all anti american terror.

We will become so perfect a nation we will even make the star wars prequels good

if you're wondering why the average american fears terrorism more than they fear alcoholism, then i guess it's a case of pure exposure.

either you have an alcoholic parent or not, maximum or minimum exposure. with terrorism, we see all sorts of news programs, and stuff on tv about it.

the reason why we fear terrorism more, is because the news media is too full of shit to talk to us about our cultural problems. the only cultural problems that gets addressed is one that is minority/marginalized community specific: rape, racist shootings, etc.

the cultural problems like alcoholism, bad parenting, child abuse, mental illness, doesn't get NEARLY as much coverage. to that i would agree with you though.

the second reason why we fear terrorism more, is that we have ways of addressing it fairly directly. recently, this has been through various levels of control on immigration.

take Britain, labour has been shit for a while and need to clean house, but the conservatives are proposing internet regulation to a MASSIVE extent! but because they campaign on Brexit, they win. when there is a direct way to address a problem (immigration) laid down in front of us, we begin to care more about that problem, than the one we have no control over (millions of individuals consuming alcohol in excess)

Byron the visceral response on social media when a local ice cream shop shurs down and 15 ppl are upset is not even close to the visceral response when 17099 ppl take to social media terrified of terrorism and muslims after 29 ppl die. Surely you see the visceral response I mean

@brainbomb

i've never claimed that people like us... most people don't. read what i've said, but what African countries with majority christian populations are much more accepting of America that African countries with majority muslim populations.

they don't like us because of culture.

we don't help out anymore, when we also have a shitty foreign policy record, but frankly i think you're being a bit presumptuous thinking that anti-american terror is a big deal right now.

we've had a few lone wolf attacks.

compare that to France attacks. compare that to Britain now recently (and tonight). compare that to Turkey, to Israel. Most jihadists aren't targeting us, until we get involved. no they don't enjoy our existence, but they're going to focus to those who affect them the most.

i think that direct and passive exposure to the problem, and our current ability to solve the problem, and the future capacities of the problem are the three things that affect us most, to address the OP again.

while exposure may be a constant on many issues, it is much easier to solve the future harm of terrorism with policy than to address a cultural problem, and the future harm of terrorism can be war, whereas cultural problems such as alcoholism generally have a ceiling.

of course our priorities in fear go to terrorism

Terrorism is a never ending posdibility in Europe and in the world in general. But lets be real - its still about getting attention.

Its an inevitability. Its only defeat is to treat them like any other killer/psycho. If you start blaming extremism on just being a symptom of their faith thats when we start justifying a great deal of atrocities.