Kay, I think they would both be charged with murder.  Targeting a particular business or person with a bomb likely wouldn't be terrorism.  Doing something to the public would be.  I'm a little hazy on where the line is drawn as to what is terrorism and what isn't, but I can pick out situations that are on either end of the grey area.

It may be a question of motive...? I don't know, I'm just guessing.

If the guy with the gun, after killing and injuring the innocent, then shoots up the premises causing property damage, what would that be?

Good question.

The thing about terrorism, for me anyway, is the unknown. Whenever we are faced with acts that accompany no explanation or unknown assailants it heightens a fear factor that literally strikes terror into our hearts and we are unable to respond from an informed position. Terrorism can include murder but it doesn't have to.

Murder always includes terror I would think.

It seems the only difference is when one of the murderers is from a foreign country.

one is muslim and the other is not.

Hi kaythecurler,

Both are acts of murder and if the younger Tsarnaev is chaged with anything it will most likely be multiple accounts of murder.

The designations appear to focus on the intent (or presumed intent) behind the action.

The mass murderer plans to kill as many as possible.  For the murderer then, murder is the goal.

The terrorist plans to instill fear.  For the terrorist then, murder is the means to a goal.

Grace and peace to you.

John

I have no way of telling what the intentions were of the brothers who planted bombs at the Boston marathon.  Did they plan to create fear, or to kill people, or to see if the plans for making bombs actually worked?  How will we ever know for sure anyway?

It does seem that the US is living with a lot of fear of terrorists - even though the vast majority will never be anywhere near one! 

kaythecurler,

legal definitions

now, taking a look at the MA legislature page, their definition of murder is

"Section 1. Murder committed with deliberately premeditated malice aforethought, or with extreme atrocity or cruelty, or in the commission or attempted commission of a crime punishable with death or imprisonment for life, is murder in the first degree. Murder which does not appear to be in the first degree is murder in the second degree. Petit treason shall be prosecuted and punished as murder. The degree of murder shall be found by the jury."

before 911 - murder, bomber etc...after 911, terorism..it is a U.S. industry now. They (we) have to justify the amount of money that "we" spend in to be safe.

Hi Kaythecurler,

Their method indicates that fear is the goal and the death of innocents is the path they have chosen to that goal.  One thing that is clear is that their behaviour after the bombing was more impromptu than the bombing itself.

Whether fear was their actual intent will not be known until the younger brother is interrogated and as soon as he recovers he will be interrogated.  His Miranda rights have been suspended (which I think is a miscarriage of justice) in favour of public safety.

The US may resort to torture in an attempt to get the information they want.  Though I suspect they don't know what they want at this point so torturing to get it would prove to be futile.  Information gathered during torture is unreliable at any rate, the government's own studies have shown that.  None of that presents meaningful roadblocks to vengeance.

Still it is too early to speculate how the interrogation will go.  It will happen.

The suspect in custody knows.  What remains to be seen is how easily and honestly he passes that knowledge on to others.  I suspect he will give that knowledge up and that his family will be instrumental in that.

Well, as true as that is they don't do much to take preventative measures.  The brothers had guns.  I suspect they had as much difficulty buying them as they did the pressure cookers.  And both the Senate and the House of Representatives showed just how much help they are in taking steps to minimize gun violence.

Try and get them to pass legislation limiting how many pressure cookers you can buy in any given span of time.

Of course they are afraid.  With leadership like that they have every right to be afraid.

Grace and peace to you.

John

I think we need to tread carefully in the aftermath of events.

I am not calling any recent suspect a terrorist.

According to profilers and others there are differences in psychology, motive, etc...
There are differences between mass murder that is a one time event, events that happen at various locations, and serial killers. There is also considered to be a diffference between mass murder that is school shootings and mass murderer that is an act of terrorism.

As one prepares to draws lines based on religion, nationality, ethnicity,,,, remember that Timothy McVeigh's act of mass murder was also considered an act of terrorism.

He killed 168 people and it was not considered terrorism by the US or Oklahahoma govt. He was charged under the criminal code, and not as a terrorist. The media described the bombing as an act of terror, but usually refered to him as a nut.   That may be due to the fact that the bombing was being called a terrorist act before they found out who did it.

 McVeigh was indicted on 11 federal counts, including conspiracy to use a weapon of mass destruction, use of a weapon of mass destruction, destruction by explosives and eight counts of first-degree murder. He was nevr treated as a terrrorist under 

Also  Many Irish Nationalist terrorists living in the US who were convicted of various crimes (from helping procure and smuggle weapons, and money by robbing US banks for terrorist groups, the IRA and the provisional IRA) were never charged with acts of terror. See Patrick Nee.

This is because they were white and either Catholics or atheists. (The IRA was officially atheist, but many membrs were Catholics) 

OF course in Canada, we have no problems with seeing Irish nationalist as terrorists as they are the one group responsible historically for the vast majority of terrorist activities in Canada.  Howevr at best in the US, they are called freedom fighters or criminals.  In fact the US regularly allowed them to use the US as a staging ground for terrorist acts inside Canada. and the UK.

Here is an interesting article I just read. Seems to claim that colour=muslim, while white = us. Thus anti-muslim views are really anti people of colour.

Religious bigotry heavily influences perceptions of Boston Marathon bomber before suspects were divulged; even worse now

As of today, on the NBCNews Facebook page, these rumors were still flying, particularly when it was discovered the suspects are from the Chechnya Republic, a state that is predominately Sunni Islam.   Commenters on the Facebook page voiced surprise the new suspects looked white:

–more attacks by a MUSLIM, and the MUSLIM president will NOT call them out because he IS one..

–Wow… they are Caucasian… and I only thought terrorists were grouped in bias to be islamic, hispanic, or african americans

–hey probably are not really caucasian i would guess in family history.. Chechens are mostly muslim and are decendants from other countries.. Does skin.color really matter. you are being racist. Educate yourself.

........

  Fearing violence from the American public, Muslim leaders in Boston have cancelled Friday prayers, and condemned the bombing.  In a country that has a proud tradition of religious freedom, this sort of fear is unconscionable