211
Luigi charged with terrorism in NY (apnews.com)
submitted 2 years ago* by to c/news@hexbear.net
84 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

do me proud nyc jury pool

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 113 points 2 years ago (24 children)

Okay lemme understand it.

"Terrorism" is defined as using violent means to scare or suppress the population.

But what he did made the population happy.

So... shouldn't it be considered that he provided a public service?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 24 child comments
    •
  • [–] 43 points 2 years ago (17 children)

    That is not the definition of terrorism.

    Violent, criminal acts committed by individuals and/or groups to further ideological goals stemming from domestic influences, such as those of a political, religious, social, racial, or environmental nature

    Source: https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/terrorism

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 17 child comments
    •
  • [–] 121 points 2 years ago (9 children)

    By that definition the entire federal government are terrorists lol

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 9 child comments
    •
  • [–] 88 points 2 years ago (3 children)

    astronaut-1

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 54 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Park rangers are terrorists for telling me not to share my picnic baskets with the bears

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 33 points 2 years ago (2 children)

    Yeah to be accurate the definition should probably spell out that this violent action comes from agents operating outside of a majority-backed monopoly on violence. Terrorist vs freedom fighter n all that.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 22 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    Unfortunately implied by the "criminal" part of the definition

    Violent, criminal acts

    As the violence enacted by the state is supposedly supported by the laws they legislate, they get to skirt out of terrorism designation by being definitionally unable to commit "criminal" acts when they commit violent ones

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 14 points 2 years ago

    They made sure to make sure that it doesn't apply to state actors. After 9/11, they felt they needed to come up with a definition of terrorism. They had a VERY hard time coming up with a definition that didn't apply to themselves.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 40 points 2 years ago (1 child)

    I am a jaywalker, and this is my manifesto. We will not obey the little green man. The red hand will not contain us.

    Every step we take is a middle finger to your order, a crack in your illusion of control. We disrupt your flow, we shatter your calm, and we dare your machines to stop us. Your brakes screech, your tempers flare, and your systems falter—all because we walked.

    You call it unsafe. We call it liberation. You call it reckless. We call it revolution.

    We are the chaos in your commute, the stress in your steering wheel, and the violence in your precious order.

    We are jaywalkers. Your streets will never be safe again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 2 years ago* (5 children)

    This is the definition of terrorism in the state of new yorks penal law

    From this terrible overdesigned website https://criminaldefense.1800nynylaw.com/ny-penal-law-490-25-crime-of-terrorism.html

    I suspect the prosecutor will try to argue that Luigi attempted to effect a societal change in some way and therefore it's terrorism.

    edit: what if they charged him with treason? thinking-about-it

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, ...

    1.- Does he owe allegiance to the United States? How is that even defined? I don't see how "adoctrinating children to the pledge of alliance" counts, since it's, well, indoctrination, not allegiance.

    2.- Did he levy war against them? To my understatement, he is not a sovereign representative and even if such he has not filed a declaration of war.

    3.- If not, what enemy of the US did he adhere to? The only reasonable interpretarion I can see here is that he adhered to The People, and thus legally the US State considers The People of the US an enemy.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago

    1.- Does he owe allegiance to the United States? How is that even defined? I don't see how "adoctrinating children to the pledge of alliance" counts, since it's, well, indoctrination, not allegiance.

    spongebob-wait Selective Service Act (which he probably did sign up with given men are supposed to when they turn 18, for FASFA and whatnot)

    I mean also not to mention the fact he's a citizen - and if a citizen can be (and has been in the past) charged with treason which also uses that language, the argument that 'I don't owe allegiance to the US' kinda falls apart:

    Whoever, owing allegiance to the United States, levies war against them or adheres to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort within the United States or elsewhere, is guilty of treason and shall suffer death, or shall be imprisoned not less than five years and fined under this title but not less than $10,000; and shall be incapable of holding any office under the United States.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent