Not a terrorist attack?

[FireIceTalon]

Trump is already calling this guy "sick and demented"......No surprise there. If this guy was a non-white (and especially if he were Muslim), he would be called for what he ACTUALLY is, a terrorist, in a heartbeat.

Now, there is no evidence either way of (yet) of this guys motive, but until any evidence of him having some sort of mental illness comes out, I'm calling this as it should be - a terrorist attack.

*EDIT*

Authorities found ammonium nitrate, a material used to make explosives, in his car, in addition to more firearms, ammunition, explosives and electronic devices at his home - and they suspect he was planning something else in addition to this.

I don't think this guy was sick or demented at all. I think he knew FULL WELL what he was doing, based on this.

As Kandrathe said terrorism has (for the attacker) a goal, usually political or ideological.

This doesn't seem to be terrorism. This guy is single handedly responsible for about 0.5% of yearly gun victims in the US.

I don't want to discuss gun laws in the US. Even though in don't agree with them I understand the rational of people who are pro-gun. And they have a point.

So sticking to the facts. We all know that a percentage of the people (anywhere) has psychological problems and would consider doing these things so this attack (a part from the fact that it was in the highest spectrum in terms of amount of victims) is normal and we shouldn't waste too much time on it.

Whenever there will be a war, total anarchy, dictatorial government or a zombie attack at least people in the US will be able to defend themselves.

If that's the case, then it's probably time for us, as a society, to re-examine how we perceive and define terrorism. This concerns me much more than gun laws, to be honest.

I don't agree that terrorism necessarily has to have a political motive or be ideological in nature. This is a common theme intrinsic to many narratives in discourse regarding terrorism that has led to this warped and very narrow perception, but it is in error - and dangerously so.

If you are using a modified automatic weapon to kill a bunch of people at a concert, whatever your reasons (OR lack thereof), you are in fact inciting terror. To me (and any rational person that doesn't go by strict abstract definitions), that absolutely qualifies as terrorism. It doesn't even have to be a modified automatic weapon. If I walk down the street with a baseball bat and start bashing peoples heads in at random, I am indeed committing an act of terrorism, am I not?

This guy was a terrorist. Any act that spews terror, is a terrorist act. This guy, in a most BLATANT fashion, spewed terrorism. As far as I'm concerned, any news source claiming this guy not to be a terrorist or that what he did isn't an act of terrorism, lacks the ability to be an objective and factual news source and therefore should not be taken seriously. Period.

Not only that, but the fact he had planned to do something else like this, also points to him being a terrorist. Additionally, he is probably one of the most dangerous types of terrorists for a multitude of reasons - far more dangerous than the likes of Isis or other reactionary Muslim terrorist organizations. Living in America, you are far more likely to be killed by a white terrorist than you are a Muslim one, despite the ever popular (but incorrect) narrative that white people cannot be terrorists.

I will not let people sit back and label groups like Antifa or BLM as terrorist organizations, or people from those groups as terrorists, but give this motherfucker a free pass from the label. NO. Just....NO. This guy was an out and out terrorist.