The Incel movement is a terrorist ideology.

[flashbac]

It's worrying that it isn't seen as such.

Hi @urbanbuddha, I did actually list various consequences of the movement being classified as terrorist a little way above.

Its strange that people are more comfortable with using labels such as 'psychopath' or 'abuse victim' than they are using the identity the killer gave himself.

If you don't understand the incel movement then its hard for you to see how it led to this mass murder, or what significance the victims held in the mind of the killer.
None of what he did was random. He was not a monster or a psychopath. This is how radicalization works; it attracts and recruits angry, disaffected men and a percentage of them become killers.

@TheGumption
Dont talk absolute rubbish and bring colour into this.
There was the same attitude about the guy who stabbed the elderly lady in her front garden and who had been ignored by mental health services, he was black.
Why the heck do this?
People that are going to care do not bother about the colour of skin.
As someone who has been in the situation of begging for help because of suicide risk for someone and told they can only help if he attempts it, even though he has been sectioned before for the same thing and not bothered with, people like you make me sick, belittling mental health and bringing it all down to colour.

Before this incident happened I wouldn’t have said it was a terrorist attack as there are many examples of mass/serial killings and they aren’t caused by terrorists. But reading up over the last couple of days and this groups message and how similar it is to known terrorist groups like ISIS then I absolutely think the law should be changed to include them as terrorists like other countries have.

These sorts of extremist groups not only promote violence and murders but also the individuals often end up in what’s classed as terrorist groups, so at the very least they should be known as gateway terrorist groups and members of them need to be flagged up and watched and not be given firearm licenses!

I'd call them hate criminals

I think that grooming of shy young men, who may be struggling with personal relationships that require trust and respect needs to be considered.

They are encouraged to think of themselves as physically repulsive. To improve looks or work out to get a girlfriend. Whilst being fed a message that 'females' are inferior and don't deserve respect.

That a 22 year old is filled with despair and writes themselves off and thinks others deserve to die does not happen by random or in a vacuum.

Somehow he came to be convinced that having a home and a job wasn't enough. At 22. Because he'd never been a teenager in love?

@MurielSpriggs

Incidentally, the surviving Manchester bomber was convicted of murder (multiple counts) not any Terrorism Act offences. Applying the statutory definition might not lead to the outcome that many people on here want. Choose your definition carefully!

That's very true and it's very complex.

A friend of mine works as a lawyer for the CPS in complex cases. (So terror threats etc)

She said if you can't prove absolutely to the law a certain charge you leave it open to be found not guilty. The charge must be what you can prove absolutely with no doubt.

She said at times it's incredibly frustrating.

FFS the posters who are so certain that the definition of terrorism in UK statute is what "matters". As if the concept of "terrorism" is something fixed and certain and NOT something that (in actual fact) has no definition in international law and is hotly debated and fought over - never heard of the many many debates on "one person's terrorist is another person's freedom fighter". Event he legal definition of "terrorism" we have in UK ISN'T USED TO CONVICT PEOPLE OF "TERRORISM". It is used to trigger a whole host of other measures and limits and such like.

Why are you so invested in minimising violent behaviour targeting women or in the name.of hatred of women? Ask yourself why you are dancing on a fucking pin head over definitions of "terrorism" rather than engaging in the very real terror many people are describing.

Incels should be charged with "Hate Crime" because that's what it is. But when it escalates into actual murder some might want to change a hate crime charge to a terrorism charge. I can see their point.

Hi @Griefmonster

Ask yourself why you are dancing on a fucking pin head over definitions of "terrorism" rather than engaging in the very real terror many people are describing.

It's because a lot of wider consequences flow from whether this activity falls within the definition of terrorism.

Ask yourself why you are dancing on a fucking pin head over definitions of "terrorism" rather than engaging in the very real terror many people are describing

Ask yourself if it’s not possible to do both. It’s been clearly explained that words are important legally when using an incorrect one can mean the difference between securing a conviction and someone guilty of a heinous offence walking away free.

What I also don’t understand is how they came to the conclusion that it wasn’t a normal terrorist attack so quickly! I assumed it would take a few days to go over the evidence but they said it as soon as they got there they said straight away it wasn’t a terrorist.

The only thing I can think of is that they saw that he’d killed his mum and a criminal psychologist was there and said that that doesn’t happen with typical terrorists I don’t know.

@toocold54

What I also don’t understand is how they came to the conclusion that it wasn’t a normal terrorist attack so quickly! I assumed it would take a few days to go over the evidence but they said it as soon as they got there they said straight away it wasn’t a terrorist.

The only thing I can think of is that they saw that he’d killed his mum and a criminal psychologist was there and said that that doesn’t happen with typical terrorists I don’t know.

It's because he's a white man. And terrorists are brown in the uk.

@belinda789

Incels should be charged with "Hate Crime" because that's what it is. But when it escalates into actual murder some might want to change a hate crime charge to a terrorism charge. I can see their point.

It’s not a hate crime because sex isn’t included as a hate crime category. From the CPS:

In England and Wales the monitored strands of hate crime are:

racially and religiously aggravated;
homophobic, biphobic and transphobic; and
disability hate crime.
These strands are covered by legislation (sections 28-32 of the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 and sections 145 and 146 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003) which allows prosecutors to apply for an uplift in sentence for those convicted of a hate crime.

The police and the CPS have agreed the following definition for identifying and flagging hate crimes:

"Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on a person's disability or perceived disability; race or perceived race; or religion or perceived religion; or sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation or transgender identity or perceived transgender identity."

There is no legal definition of hostility so we use the everyday understanding of the word which includes ill-will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment and dislike.

It's because he's a white man. And terrorists are brown in the uk

Just stop it. N Irish terrorists aren’t brown. This is bad enough without conflating it with race. Terrorists tend to claim responsibility for their attacks quite quickly.

It's because he's a white man. And terrorists are brown in the uk.

That was my first thought as soon as they said it. But I’m trying (hoping) to work out another way they could tell so quickly.

Terrorists tend to claim responsibility for their attacks quite quickly.

I believe the Manchester bomber just set off his device without saying anything and they knew straight away that it was a terrorist.

@toocold54

It's because he's a white man. And terrorists are brown in the uk.

That was my first thought as soon as they said it. But I’m trying (hoping) to work out another way they could tell so quickly.

Presumably because the first victim was his mother, it was put on the domestic category.

Out of interest, does anyone know if there will actually be a police investigation, given the perpetrator is dead? I’m assuming not as there’s no prosecution to be brought but would the police have to prepare something for the coroner?

@toocold54

Terrorists tend to claim responsibility for their attacks quite quickly.

I believe the Manchester bomber just set off his device without saying anything and they knew straight away that it was a terrorist.

Well, to be fair, what else would a bomb be?

Presumably because the first victim was his mother, it was put on the domestic category.

I think this is probably right. To be classified a terrorism his motive is relevant. This sounds more like some sort of horrific revenge attack on a specific person.

Well, to be fair, what else would a bomb be?

A mass killing is a mass killing, there are Islamic terrorists who stab people to death and non terrorists who use bombs.

Presumably because the first victim was his mother, it was put on the domestic category.

Out of interest, does anyone know if there will actually be a police investigation, given the perpetrator is dead? I’m assuming not as there’s no prosecution to be brought but would the police have to prepare something for the coroner?

I was wondering if it was because he killed his mother first as I don’t think religious terrorists do this.

I drove past earlier and there is still a crime scene tent up and the roads have been blocked as they were searching each place. Which I don’t think they would do if there isn’t an investigation but I’m not sure.

Which non terrorists use bombs?

And for what?

From a two second google, it's not unprecedented for a terrorist to kill their mother
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hanau_shootings