Discussion in 'Clean Debate Zone' started by Esmeralda, Jun 11, 2017.
Though there is overlap in the nature of terrorist acts and mass shootings, one secerns between them not by considering the performance modality and fatality outcome of the acts but rather by evaluating the intentions of the actor(s) who perform the violent act(s). At the most basic level, a terrorist event may or may not kill multiple individuals; killing one person can be a terrorist act. Most importantly, however, a terrorist action, as should be apparent from the term "terrorist" has as a primary goal the incitement of fear, foreboding, etc. among the populace (the leaders and the led) that in turn serves (however in-/effectively) to catalyze instability, waste of resources and irrationality within the culture where the terrorist act occurred.
A "mere" mass shooting, which is essentially an indiscriminate (other than choosing a place to perform the shooting) act of violence, is thus different from a terrorist shooting or other action in that it doesn't have an objective the shooter intends to endure beyond her/his expression of anger and dissatisfaction. One might think of the difference as being conceptually similar to that of one's wanting to speak (mass shooter) as compared with one's wanting to be heard (terrorist) and responded to.
a mass shooting is an act of extreme anger. A terrorist act is AN ACT OF WAR
Separate names with a comma.