Everyone seems shocked at this. I personally felt a lot less shocked and more like I’d been waiting for this shoe to drop for 20 years. I’ve been waiting for people to notice the tools of the Iraq War being turned against American citizens for over a decade now.
I spent the better part of 2001 and on arguing against the PATRIOT Act and its codification of terrorism as a crime. Lots of people were against it (we were in the minority, obviously), pointing out how the PATRIOT Act would consider the Founding Fathers terrorists. They committed violence to achieve political ends.
Did everyone just forget that at one point there was actually a nascent conversation on why this was a bad idea, especially considering people warning that they would soon use these laws against their own citizens?
Why did these conversations stop? More importantly, now that Mangione is being charged with terrorism, why aren’t the conversations beginning anew?
did everyone just forget
Yes. The American populace has very low political IQ, a short memory, and is very emotional. 2001 was 23 years ago, entire people were conceived, raised, and voted in that time. You have to understand that the majority of control of this country is decided on whims, opinions, and gas prices
Why aren’t the conversations beginning anew?
America doesn’t know how to discuss politics. We understand sports and can talk about politics as if they were sports, but we won’t learn a lesson until there are opposing troops on our doorstep (and honestly, I don’t think we will then)
I think it’s important to break down what he’s actually being charged with, and note he’s not being charged with any federal offense under any federal anti-terrorism laws. The PATRIOT Act does not apply here.
What he’s been charged with are first degree murder and second degree murder under the laws of New York State. First degree murder in New York only applies to several very specific circumstances, and the only one of those even remotely related to what Luigi Mangione did is:
the victim was killed in furtherance of an act of terrorism, as defined in paragraph (b) of subdivision one of section 490.05 of this chapter
Which is defined as:
(b) for purposes of subparagraph (xiii) of paragraph (a) of subdivision one of section 125.27 of this chapter means activities that involve a violent act or acts dangerous to human life that are in violation of the criminal laws of this state and are intended to:
(i) intimidate or coerce a civilian population;
(ii) influence the policy of a unit of government by intimidation or coercion; or
(iii) affect the conduct of a unit of government by murder, assassination or kidnapping.
The reality is the prosecutors want to be able to get him with first degree murder, but the likelihood of that sticking, I believe, is really low. I think they believe that too, which is why he’s also charged with second degree murder. Second degree murder in this case seems like a slam dunk, whereas “charged him with terrorism” makes for flashy headlines but is just not likely to go anywhere based on what’s publicly known in this case.
Second degree murder would be a slam dunk if Luigi was the shooter and they didn’t plant the gun and manifesto on him
I admire your spirit
Because a large portion of people are struggling and just don’t have the energy, time, or spirit to really devote to something that doesn’t affect their day-to-day rn. It’s not an excuse for them, it’s just a reality. It’s hard to stay informed when you have to constantly worry about how you balance work, sleep, bills, and food
I think, it’s because this case is so big, that the amount of people talking about can’t really increase, but also there’s so much more to the case than this aspect. Which makes it difficult to focus conversation on this.
I also wanna say that it makes sense for him to get charged, even though a lot of people don’t like it. Killing another human is an issue no matter what it is. And just because we think this crime stands for something bigger, that doesn’t justify the killing in the first place. It’s just shades of immorality.
That said, healthcare is a huge issue and I hope this changes things finally. I also don’t agree with the charging of terrorism, as it says “terrorism” in it, and even though there’s a small chance it fulfills the requirements, I have no angle to personally view this as terrorism.
Does it instill terror? Everyone gets scared when someone is killed, but this does not exceed it to the point that there is now a present danger. There’s no furtherance to the terror, only vigilance in the crime.
Some lawyers even argue this is a pile-on to the charges, which might be the case, although I’m not an expert.
But I do think it’s gonna be hard to prove the terrorism as opposed to everything else. Truly, the only threat to the prosecution of the other counts is jury nullification, which poses completely different risks.
But that’s a story for another day.
