driver was 53-year-old white British man (a local resident)
27 people taken to the hospital by ambulance
another 20 people were treated at the scene
4 children among the injured
1 adult and 1 child seriously injured
4 people trapped under car, including 3 adults and 1 child
police are not treating the incident as terrorism
My thoughts (speculation):
This sounds like pure, unadulterated road rage. To consider that “not terrorism” implies that violence by drivers against pedestrians is “normal,” not political, which of course is an absolutely car-brained POV.
The reason they are quick to make it non political is not because of what you said, it’s because the last time something like this was made political in the uk it led to some of the worst riots the country has ever seen. The police are just being extremely careful so something like that doesn’t happen again.
I mean…I wouldn’t say it’s normal, but that doesn’t mean it’s political.
In this case, I’d label it as terrorism even if it’s not political. He intentionally drove his car into a crowd with the intent of causing harm. Political or not, that’s still terrorism.
Terrorism is defined as “politically-motivated violence.”
Pedestrians and cyclists (“vulnerable road users”) may not be protected classes, but in a lot of ways they’re treated similarly to racial or sexual minorities. Maybe most people wouldn’t consider violence by drivers motivated by hate for other road users to be “political,” but they should.
What seems to be known so far:
driver was 53-year-old white British man (a local resident)
27 people taken to the hospital by ambulance
another 20 people were treated at the scene
4 children among the injured
1 adult and 1 child seriously injured
4 people trapped under car, including 3 adults and 1 child
police are not treating the incident as terrorism
My thoughts (speculation):
This sounds like pure, unadulterated road rage. To consider that “not terrorism” implies that violence by drivers against pedestrians is “normal,” not political, which of course is an absolutely car-brained POV.
The reason they are quick to make it non political is not because of what you said, it’s because the last time something like this was made political in the uk it led to some of the worst riots the country has ever seen. The police are just being extremely careful so something like that doesn’t happen again.
Well yes, but also, it can be two things.
I mean…I wouldn’t say it’s normal, but that doesn’t mean it’s political.
In this case, I’d label it as terrorism even if it’s not political. He intentionally drove his car into a crowd with the intent of causing harm. Political or not, that’s still terrorism.
I disagree with you twice over:
Terrorism is defined as “politically-motivated violence.”
Pedestrians and cyclists (“vulnerable road users”) may not be protected classes, but in a lot of ways they’re treated similarly to racial or sexual minorities. Maybe most people wouldn’t consider violence by drivers motivated by hate for other road users to be “political,” but they should.
Terrorism is, by definition, political.