What's The Difference Between Terrorism & Crime?

[editec]

Why?

A simple criminal has a motive to profit by. Correct? Financially.

A terrorist wishes to inflict damage physically as humanely possible by their actions.

It's a no brainer. Well to sane individuals.

Perhaps you don't understand the question. Why does it make a difference. If a man kills a child because he likes it or he kills a child to make a political point, is the child less dead? Did the child suffer less? What difference does motive make?

Nobody suggested it made anyu difference to the victims, Prat.

The question was "What's The Difference Between Terrorism & Crime?"

The answer to THAT question is MOTIVE.

Now seriously, does that really confuse you?

Really?

 

[PratchettFan]

You need a motive in order to try someone in court. Simple. Without it a criminal can go free.

Again. Not the issue. The title of the thread is the difference between terrorism and crime. There is no difference. Terrorism is a crime. The motive does not make is something other than a crime. There is no difference between a terrorist and a "simple criminal". A terrorist is a criminal.

Maybe it's a bit nitpicking but from a logic standpoint there is a difference between terrorism and crime. Terrorism is a type of crime. The two are not the same just as apples are not the same as fruit.

Motive is very important in the definition of terrorism as it is with most crime. If a bomb is planted in a bank and explodes killing everyone in the bank and the motive was to steal the money, the crime is robbery and murder but not terrorism. However, it the motive in setting off the bomb was to intimidate the public so they would not use the banks and bring about a change in the banking laws then it's terrorism.

And robbery is not murder, drug trafficing is not robbery, murder is not embezlement. All you are doing is differentiating one type of crime from another, but they are all crimes. Terrorism is a crime so there is no logic in saying they are different. If I call an apple a piece of fruit, am I wrong?

 

[Flopper]

Again. Not the issue. The title of the thread is the difference between terrorism and crime. There is no difference. Terrorism is a crime. The motive does not make is something other than a crime. There is no difference between a terrorist and a "simple criminal". A terrorist is a criminal.

Maybe it's a bit nitpicking but from a logic standpoint there is a difference between terrorism and crime. Terrorism is a type of crime. The two are not the same just as apples are not the same as fruit.

Motive is very important in the definition of terrorism as it is with most crime. If a bomb is planted in a bank and explodes killing everyone in the bank and the motive was to steal the money, the crime is robbery and murder but not terrorism. However, it the motive in setting off the bomb was to intimidate the public so they would not use the banks and bring about a change in the banking laws then it's terrorism.

And robbery is not murder, drug trafficing is not robbery, murder is not embezlement. All you are doing is differentiating one type of crime from another, but they are all crimes. Terrorism is a crime so there is no logic in saying they are different. If I call an apple a piece of fruit, am I wrong?

No, you are not wrong when you call an apple a piece of fruit. But when you said, "The title of the thread is the difference between terrorism and crime. There is no difference.", you were wrong because there is a difference between terrorism and crime just as there is a difference between an apple and a piece of fruit. Just as the definition of the word apple is not the same as the definition of the world fruit, the meaning of terrorism is not the same as the meaning of the word crime. This is a minor point and isn't worth the argument.

 

[PratchettFan]

A simple criminal has a motive to profit by. Correct? Financially.

A terrorist wishes to inflict damage physically as humanely possible by their actions.

It's a no brainer. Well to sane individuals.

Perhaps you don't understand the question. Why does it make a difference. If a man kills a child because he likes it or he kills a child to make a political point, is the child less dead? Did the child suffer less? What difference does motive make?

Nobody suggested it made anyu difference to the victims, Prat.

The question was "What's The Difference Between Terrorism & Crime?"

The answer to THAT question is MOTIVE.

Confuse me? No. Just because I see how the question is absurd does not mean I am confused. It is like asking the difference between murder and robbery. They are different types of crimes, but they are both crimes. Terrorism is a crime. So it cannot be different from crime.
Now seriously, does that really confuse you?

 

[PratchettFan]

Maybe it's a bit nitpicking but from a logic standpoint there is a difference between terrorism and crime. Terrorism is a type of crime. The two are not the same just as apples are not the same as fruit.

Motive is very important in the definition of terrorism as it is with most crime. If a bomb is planted in a bank and explodes killing everyone in the bank and the motive was to steal the money, the crime is robbery and murder but not terrorism. However, it the motive in setting off the bomb was to intimidate the public so they would not use the banks and bring about a change in the banking laws then it's terrorism.

And robbery is not murder, drug trafficing is not robbery, murder is not embezlement. All you are doing is differentiating one type of crime from another, but they are all crimes. Terrorism is a crime so there is no logic in saying they are different. If I call an apple a piece of fruit, am I wrong?

No, you are not wrong when you call an apple a piece of fruit. But when you said, "The title of the thread is the difference between terrorism and crime. There is no difference.", you were wrong because there is a difference between terrorism and crime just as there is a difference between an apple and a piece of fruit. Just as the definition of the word apple is not the same as the definition of the world fruit, the meaning of terrorism is not the same as the meaning of the word crime. This is a minor point and isn't worth the argument.

No. "Fruit" is a word we use to describe a class of plants - which happens to include apples. "Crime" is a word we use to describe the violation of laws - which happens to include terrorism.

Now, if you are arguing that the only difference between terrorism and crime is that they are different words, then I guess we have no disagreement. However, I doubt that was the intent of the initial question.