Question for the hivemind: how broadly can we realistically define "ideology" as a motive for terrorism under Canadian law? The more I'm reading about these incel assholes, the more I feel like they meet the threshold. But ... is there a reasonably well-defined threshold at all?
-
Show this thread
-
Replying to @mattgurney
With the caveat that we still don't know a lot, this would meet the definition IMO.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
-
Replying to @mattgurney
There is, it's just nuanced. You need to show motivation and that is not easy to do hours after an attack.
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @jengerson
I don't think the problem is defining motivation. It's defining ideology.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mattgurney @jengerson
Do you need a guru of some kind? A manifesto? Underground publishing?
4 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @mattgurney
You have shared launguage, jargon, outlook. They do have a saint already.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @jengerson @mattgurney
4Chan et al is the underground publishing.
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
The definition: "the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims" Is the "Incel rebellion" a political movement? It could be. Either way, this is a terrorist style of an act done by a person that is extremely disturbed
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.