Killing Motivated By Ideology
Complexities Of The Current Domestic Terrorist Landscape
On April 15, 2013, Tamerlan and Dzhokhar Tsarnaev planted two bombs near the finish line of the Boston Marathon, killing three people and wounding as many as 260. This was the largest terrorist event on U.S. soil since 9-11. Authorities believe the Tsarnaevs became self-radicalized over the course of the past several years. The investigation into the motive for the attack indicates that both Tsarnaev’s came to believe that the United States’ military involvement in Iraq and Afghanistan constituted an unjust war on Muslims. Their radicalization was cemented through information espoused on jihadist Internet websites such as Inspire (produced by al-Qaida in Yemen), and other online publications such as Infowars. Tamerlan Tsarnaev also had a personal relationship with a shadowy American imam known as “Misha” who is thought to have had a significant influence in shaping his thoughts.
It is difficult to comprehend why two young men, who seemingly had bright futures ahead of them, carried out an act of such abhorrent and indiscriminate violence against innocent civilians to include numerous children. Upon further examination and hindsight, the Tsarnaev’s appear to be empty vessels in search of a cause. They were looking to bring meaning and fulfillment to their lives, and decided to choose the path of the jihadist. It will be undoubtedly be a challenge in years to come for us to detect those living among us who may be on a path to violence in the name of religion.
While the Boston Marathon bombings were devastating, it is important to note that religious is not the only motive for mass casualty attacks in the U.S. In April, a former Ku Klux Klansman by the name of Frazier Glenn Cross gunned down three people outside Jewish affiliated facilities (a community center and a retirement home). In May, Elliot Rodger went on a stabbing and shooting spree in Isla Vista, California, killing six people before taking his own life. In a YouTube manifesto recorded by Rodger prior to his rampage, he claimed he was motivated by his hatred of women for rejecting him. In June, two Las Vegas Police officers were ambushed and shot to death by Jerad and Amanda Miller inside a strip mall pizza parlor as they ate lunch. A civilian was also killed by the Millers a short time later as they fled the initial crime scene. Their motive: the Millers are believed to have adhered to the sovereign citizen movement’s anti government ideology, and viewed the police as their enemies.
Although it may be difficult, if impossible to prevent all manifestations of ideological violence, there may be some interventions — which vary depending on in the U.S., one solution is for law enforcement to conduct outreach to various communities in the U.S. For example, the New York Police Department has a New Immigrant Outreach Unit with designated police officers assigned to the Muslim-Arab, Caribbean-Arab and other ethnic/religious communities. Programs such as this are constructive in establishing trust and dialogue with groups that may feel disenfranchised. Representatives of such minority groups may be much more inclined to bring information of concern to authorities through a process of ongoing discourse.
Anti-semitic, sovereign citizen and white supremacist movements all espouse a radical ideology, and may be more difficult to deal with through community outreach. By nature, members of these groups view law enforcement and the government as a whole as adversaries. Federal, state and local law enforcement should investigate when laws have been, or are about to be broken. It is important to observe that many of these groups walk a fine line between spewing hatred, and actually carrying out acts of violence.
The Elliott Rodger’s case is somewhat unique. While all indications are that Rodger was severely mentally ill, many people saw his violence as endemic of a misogynistic culture here in the U.S that foments violence against women. Both Elliott Rodger and Adam Lanza highlight the current limitations of detecting certain mentally ill individuals before they engage in extreme acts of violence. Even if they are deemed to be threats against society, it is difficult to hopitalize or incarcerate individuals merely on a hunch they may be dangerous.
