• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Religious/Extremist Terrorism: Non-Muslim edition

Really weird, but I’ve actually been to that Wal Mart. February 2008, we did workup training in Ft Bliss, and got an afternoon out in town after the exercise wrapped. A buddy and I bought some beers there to fire back in the parking lot and then sneak the rest into the adjacent movie theatre. I even remember commenting on how bizarre it was that inside the store was a ‘no firearms in the liquor section’ sign. Pretty messed up looking back…

I remember the signs displayed at the doors and above the bar of any licensed establishment when I was in Texas. They've made some changes over the years as "constitutional carry" was adopted by Texas. While once a sign was needed at all places that sold liquor, now it's only at places that need a 51% sign.

Red Handgun Warning Sign​

Alcoholic beverage retailers that derive 51% or more of its income from the sale of alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption must post the red sign. The red sign has 51% in large red letters superimposed over a warning that says possession of a handgun on the premises is unlawful. The sign is displayed by establishments licensed to sell alcoholic beverages for on-premises consumption but without a Food and Beverage Certificate (FB) and whose alcohol sales constitute more than 50% of gross receipts.

Blue signs are no longer required under state law.

Red Sign

51% sign.jpg

Blue sign (no longer required)

blue sign.jpg
 
From the police service's info machine ....

Text also attached in case the link doesn't work for you.
Some of the latest from the trial - as always, Charter says "Any person charged with an offence has the right ... to be presumed innocent until proven guilty according to law in a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal."
 
From the FBI: how to distinguish LARP'ing from anti-government violent extremism/militias
Archive link here in case previous link doesn't work -- LARP vs. Violent Extremism table shown in article also attached.
 

Attachments

Guilty of 4 x first-degree murder ...
Back in court 1-2 Dec 2023 to figure out a sentencing date.
 
Guilty of 4 x first-degree murder ...
Back in court 1-2 Dec 2023 to figure out a sentencing date.
That's a mandatory 25 years before he can apply for parole.
 
2020 incel attack on spa = terrorism, sentence = life (w/no parole before 10 years)
 
If events like this are terrorism and bouncy castles constitute a national emergency what will we call an IRA/HAMAS style spectacular? Or will we call it anything and ignore it as if it were an Air India event?
 
If events like this are terrorism and bouncy castles constitute a national emergency what will we call an IRA/HAMAS style spectacular? Or will we call it anything and ignore it as if it were an Air India event?
We will curl up in the fetal position and beg for mercy, which we will not receive.
 
If events like this are terrorism and bouncy castles constitute a national emergency what will we call an IRA/HAMAS style spectacular? Or will we call it anything and ignore it as if it were an Air India event?

Terrorism is a term with legal meaning; it doesn’t mean an attack has to be spectacular, it’s more concerned with the motive, and mostly serves to enhance sentences, or to open the door to offences proximate to the terrorist activity (or to extend the reach of our criminal law extraterritorially.

Arguably we don’t use the ‘terrorism’ designation enough in our criminal prosecutions, even when the fact set clearly justifies it based on demonstrable ideological motive. It makes a prosecution more complex, and crown may elect not to complicate a relative clean and easy to prosecute murder charge.

What Canada would do in the face of a major/complex attack is more. Readiness and tactics question, and less so one of what labels the law applies.
 
If events like this are terrorism and bouncy castles constitute a national emergency what will we call an IRA/HAMAS style spectacular? Or will we call it anything and ignore it as if it were an Air India event?

You cheapen any logical argument you may have when you define the totality of what happened in Ottawa "bouncy castles".
 
and bouncy castles constitute a national emergency

Readers can yuck it up about bouncy castles.

The really hilarious part will be how much the class action lawsuit payoff will be for the locals.
 
You cheapen any logical argument you may have when you define the totality of what happened in Ottawa "bouncy castles".

Cheapening logical arguments is my concern. I am afraid that I cannot compare October 7th 2024 to January 2022 and conclude that the constitute similar events.

What happened in Ottawa was a civil disturbance. It was an anti-social event. It created mass inconvenience and disruption - as all civil disobedience events do. I will even stipulate it was illegal.

But for the life of me I cannot compare it to rapes, murder, slaughter and kidnapping. Or bombs in subways. Or even the brawling at Concordia. I find it a lesser event than the Toronto or Quebec summit riots; Gustafsen Lake, Ipperwash and Oka or even the counter-logging and pipeline disruptions on the West Coast.

If we are to use one word to define that full spectrum of events then I think that that one word would be less than helpful in defining the situation and describing a course of action.

....

The citizens of Ottawa may be entitled to compensation for their inconvenience but unless I missed something the physical violence normally associated with what I would consider a terrorist event, especially one that required suspending the laws of the country, is lacking.
 
Who has made any comparison between those things? other than the convoy supporters who keeping linking and comparing any protest legitimate or not to that event?
 
The citizens of Ottawa may be entitled to compensation for their inconvenience but unless I missed something the physical violence normally associated with what I would consider a terrorist event, especially one that required suspending the laws of the country, is lacking.

That’s probably why nobody here did so at any point recently. It feels like you tried to force that tangent back into the thread. There’s already a (largely dormant now) convoy thread if you want to revive that. We were talking about the ideologically inspired murder in Toronto that just caught the ‘terrorism’ label as a sentencing consideration- note that this was an enhancement at the sentencing phase; he was not charged with one of the explicit terrorism offences found in the Criminal Code.

I think ‘the system’ is keeping these matters straight enough.
 
The trucker protests only accomplished one thing. It showed the over reaction and hubris of the authoritarian liberal government and the one sided violence on the part of that government. Led by our own version of King Joffrey, having a pissing contest with his dad's ghost. It exposed them for who they really are and laid it bare in front of the world. People should find it ironic that the only two times, other than the two world wars, the War Measures Act/ Emergency Act was used, was by the same family.
 
. . . I am afraid that I cannot compare October 7th 2024 to January 2022 and conclude that the constitute similar events. . . .

I also have difficulty comparing the future to the past. I could wait until that date arrives, but then it's no longer the future but also the past.
 
Back
Top