« war polling | Main | syzygy »

striking fear

striking fear

There's been another shooting in Maryland, this time a 13 year old boy who was shot while being dropped off at school. He remains in critical condition.

Terrorism? I've been thinking about since the first reports of these shootings. Think about it; one of the main goals of terrorism is to strike fear into the hearts of people. What better way to spread that fear than to shoot random, ordinary citizens in sleepy American suburbs, to make them feel unsafe no matter where they go, to make them feel as if their children are at risk?

The fact that the police have no clue who is doing this, that there has been no description of the assailant(s) at all, leads me to believe that there is more going on than they are telling us. Per usual.

It's been my greatest fear since last September 11 that terrorism would soon invade our schools. I look forward to being proved wrong on this one. Not that a crazed sniper on a killing spree is a good thing, but there is a sharp shooter with a deranged soul running around, and if this is any way related to terrorism, you can be sure he's not the only one, and we haven't heard the end of it yet.

update: the shooting has been linked to the others.

For more on this, read here.

Posted by on October 7, 2002 11:37 AM |

Comments

Let's hope not. Here at Hopkins all the televisions play news of speculation of this whole mess. let's hope it's resolved soon...

Posted by: d.tang | October 7, 2002 11:43 AM

The Fredericksburg shooting was about a mile from my house. My wife was a that Michaels the day before the shooting.

Posted by: Chris | October 7, 2002 11:51 AM

Terrorism? Give me a break. There have been shootings across this nation just like this one, but in the past they haven't made national news. Ever since Columbine they are now important. That combined with a local news crews ability to get there means national news.

Posted by: Edgar | October 7, 2002 12:03 PM

Yes it is "Terrorism"..but not in the terms that the general public thinks in here during these times. My feeling on this is that it's nothing with any sort of political motivation...nothing so understandable...it's just the fact that this world has gone completely insane and there are lots of people out there thinking about doing just what this person is doing now. This crazed individual just decided to go out and DO IT...shoot up people at random just because he wanted to and watch it unfold on the news. The scariest thing about it is there is probably no reason...no motive..no organized terrorism..it's just the manifestation of random sickness and total disregard for life on this planet. This is the world we live in today. And even more terrifying...the other rotting minds out there that see this and get motivated to go out and do it too..thus it can become a "Trend".

Posted by: Anne | October 7, 2002 12:27 PM

whimper i wish i hadn't read that. it didn't even occur to me.

Posted by: tanya | October 7, 2002 12:46 PM

(i was just thinking son of sam - not a lot better, but at least it was only one loony person)

Posted by: tanya | October 7, 2002 12:48 PM

If we were suddenly seeing suicide bombers instead of a sniper, I might be inclined to believe we're looking at terrorism. But no, I don't really buy that this is the case here.

I think this is probably just a lone wacko. A wacko who may well be buying into our national (and somewhat justified, for that matter) paranoia in order to continue to go undetected, for that matter. While a bunch of us are out there looking for some angry Middle Easterner, waging his Jihad, it's probably some pasty-white, gangly dipshit who's been unlucky in love and wants to take it out on the world.

I refuse to see terrorists lurking in every corner when a more mundane explanation is probably more likely.

Posted by: Jen | October 7, 2002 02:29 PM

If it is a terrorist (or terrorists) working to unsettle suburbia with random violence, I'll have to say that's a bizarre twist. When terrorists start to take cues from Chuck Norris films like Invasion USA, we are all in deep trouble.

Posted by: James | October 7, 2002 03:35 PM

It's definitely terrifying, but I'm not sure about it being a terrorist. I'll admit the thought did cross my mind, though.

Posted by: Kim | October 7, 2002 04:19 PM

these shootings are a from of terrorism. they are meant to strike fear into the people. whether he is a lone wacko or a member of a much larger group , the idea is still the same, strike fear into the people. i knew this morning when the police said that the schools were going to go about the daily rituals and let the kids have recess etc, that some kid was going to get shot today. it was just a gut feeling but it turned out to be right.

Posted by: kat | October 7, 2002 05:06 PM

that should say form not from. oops.

Posted by: kat | October 7, 2002 05:07 PM

Terrorism. Survey says... ding that's the number one answer!

My friend Laura hit it right on the head this morning, I think. It's not a terrorist on the same level as those assholes who flew planes into buildings on September 11, 2001, but this person is a terrorist, plain and simple. People are terrified to leave their kids in school or to go about their daily business.

DC isn't exactly a very comfortable place to be at the moment.

Posted by: Fredo | October 7, 2002 05:08 PM

Person(s) shooting at random is not a terrorist. A terrorist's motive and targets are political and or religious. Reality check here people. Not every act of violence is terrorist activity I'm really getting sick of all this BS.

Posted by: ds | October 7, 2002 06:12 PM

Terrorism comes in many forms. I never said this was a religious or political jihad; nonetheless it is an act of terrorism.

Posted by: michele | October 7, 2002 06:14 PM

I live less than 2 miles from Pentagon, and I did the whole Amerithrax what-post-office-does-my-mail-go-through thing, but now I've got to worry about my head suddenly exploding as I walk down the street. Really, WTF, I don't give a shit about Mr Snipe's motives. It sure tastes like terror to me.

Anyway, 90% chance its going to end up being some backwoods militia wackjob knocking off people who don't look American enough to him. The whole racial aspect of this is being downplayed something fierce.

Posted by: jude | October 7, 2002 08:28 PM

One dictionary's definition:
"the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion"

(added emphasis mine)

Instilling terror in the public's mind and the systematic use of terror for a specific purpose are different, and I think it's too easy to bandy about the term "terrorism" any time now that a series of violent events might occur.

Do these crimes generate terror and panic? Indeed so, but I think it's a bit of a leap to assert that this is terrorism. Terrorism by its definition is political and has some goal. Not every serial act of violence is inherently terroristic, even if terror is a result of the acts.

"Pundit" bloggers sometimes remind me of a guy with a new hammer -- everything looks like a nail.

Posted by: Brian | October 7, 2002 10:49 PM

This may be insensitive, but I think this is all the fault of people raised in the 60's. If they hadn't smoked so much opium the terrorists couldn't afford the sniper rifle and we wouldn't be in this whole mess.

Ok, enough sarcasm. I agree with Brian, I don't think that this should be a terrorist act.

I don't think that people should flip out either. Is this a horrible thing and should you be concerned? Yes. Should you pull your children out of school and run for the mountains. Well, maybe but then they have won haven't they?

Posted by: Edgar | October 8, 2002 12:36 AM

I think it is a Timothy McVeigh type terroist, not a bin laden brand one. They are definitely achieving what they set out to do, no matter who they are or what their point is. On a related note, what was the name of that abortion bomber that disappearred in the southeast? Did they ever find him?

Posted by: domino | October 8, 2002 09:24 AM