Lucero, murdered in Long Island, had lived a quiet life in the United States for 16 years and had reportedly been sending money back to support his mother, a cancer survivor. During the attack, the gunman made phone calls in which he pledged his loyalty to Islamic State. But the El Paso shooting felt different, Cartagena noted.
If you are a citizen, watch out, everyone gets lumped together. Martinez said that at least two previous major attacks in the United States may have been acts of terrorism against Latinos, though they were not portrayed that way in news coverage at the time.
Both attacks deserved renewed scrutiny, she said. In , a white man deliberately flew a plane into a Roman Catholic church near Brownsville, Texas. More than people were in and around the church, including many Mexican American schoolchildren, but no one was harmed — an outcome hailed as a miracle. As with right-wing extremists, firearms accounted for the majority of fatal left-wing attacks.
Based on the left-wing attacks in the data set between and , the most frequent types of left-wing targets included: businesses, particularly in industries involving animals or lumber 52 percent ; government, military, and police facilities or personnel 17 percent ; private individuals or property, particularly related to their involvement in environmental issues, animal rights, or right-wing politics 17 percent ; and educational institutions, particularly those conducting research on animals 7 percent.
The focus of left-wing terrorist attacks has shifted from to the present. Between and , most left-wing targets were businesses, particularly lumber companies and companies in the meat and fur industries. Between and , there was a particularly heavy focus by extremist animal rights groups on universities and labs conducting research on animals.
Over time, however, left-wing terrorists shifted to government, military, and police targets. This change appears to reflect an evolution in left-wing extremism in the United States from a focus on the environment and animal rights to anarchism and anti-fascism—with a particular emphasis on opposing the government and corporations.
This shift also appears to be occurring in Europe. Between and , 36 percent of left-wing attacks targeted government, military, and police facilities or personnel. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detention facility in Tacoma, Washington. The remainder targeted private individuals and property 14 percent , religious institutions 8 percent , or educational institutions 3 percent.
Explosives and incendiaries were by far the most common weapon used by left-wing terrorists. However, firearms have been increasingly common in left-wing attacks, and they account for the majority of fatal left-wing attacks. For example, in June , James Hodgkinson opened fire on a congressional Republican baseball practice. The second most common weapons were melee weapons such as knives, hatchets, and hammers, which accounted for 7 percent of attacks.
Examples included the destruction of property—such as construction equipment—by groups like the Animal Liberation Front and Earth Liberation Front. Firearms were the third most common weapon, used in 6 percent of attacks. However, firearms have been more common in recent years, and they were the primary weapon in 25 percent of left-wing attacks between and Although most left-wing attacks involved explosives and incendiaries, the 11 fatal left-wing attacks since were primarily conducted with firearms.
Firearms were used in nine of these attacks 82 percent , compared to explosives and incendiaries, which were used in the other two 18 percent. Six fatal left-wing attacks have occurred since , and all six used firearms. For example, Gavin Long open fired on police in July , killing three and injuring three others. He saw the attack as a response to the unfair prosecution of African Americans by the justice system.
Salafi-jihadists inspired by al-Qaeda and the Islamic State accounted for most religious attacks in the data set. Over the past five years, Salafi-jihadists primarily attacked government, military, and police targets, though some of the most lethal targets included nightclubs and public locations like pedestrian paths. Much like right-wing and left-wing terrorists, Salafi-jihadists used firearms in most fatal attacks. Between and , the most frequent targets of Salafi-jihadists included: government, military, and police facilities and personnel 41 percent ; private individuals or property 22 percent ; businesses 12 percent ; and transportation and infrastructure 12 percent.
The proportion of religious terrorist targets remained fairly consistent between and Between and , Salafi-jihadists targeted government, military, and police facilities and personnel 43 percent ; private individuals and property 18 percent ; businesses 14 percent ; transportation and infrastructure 14 percent ; educational institutions 7 percent ; and religious institutions 4 percent.
Unlike right-wing or left-wing terrorists, Salafi-jihadists indiscriminately targeted private individuals and businesses. These attackers frequently intended to send a broad message to American society. Some of the most lethal targets were public venues. For example, in October , Sayfullo Saipov, who pledged allegiance to the Islamic State, indiscriminately killed 8 people and injured 11 more when he drove a rental truck on a bike path on the West Side Highway in Lower Manhattan, New York City.
Unlike right-wing and left-wing terrorists, religious terrorists have not overwhelmingly used one type of weapon. Explosives, incendiaries, and firearms were most commonly used in religious terrorist attacks overall, though firearms and melee weapons such as knives were the most common over the last five years. As shown in Figure 6, terrorists used explosives and incendiaries and firearms in 31 percent of the 49 religious attacks between and The remainder of attacks involved either vehicles 10 percent or threats or hoaxes 8 percent.
Between and , the proportion of melee attacks increased and matched firearms as the most commonly used weapon type at 32 percent. Salafi-jihadists used explosives and incendiaries in 18 percent and vehicles in 4 percent of attacks—both less frequently than average. The high percentage of attacks using firearms and melee weapons might be caused by the guidance provided by the Islamic State and al-Qaeda, which encouraged individuals to use simple and easily accessible weapons.
Despite this diversity of weapon choice, firearms were most likely to result in fatalities. This is consistent with the data on right-wing and left-wing fatal attacks. Between and , 62 percent of the 16 fatal religious attacks were conducted with firearms—the same as the percentage of the fatal attacks involving firearms between and Despite a 50 percent decline in terrorism across the globe between and , the number of terrorist attacks in the United States has increased over the same period by percent, according to CSIS data.
According to one poll published in , 73 percent of Americans considered terrorism a major threat, second only to the spread of infectious diseases such as Covid Our data suggest that the threat of terrorism in the United States will likely increase over the next year based on several events, such as the November presidential election, the response to the Covid crisis, and other polarizing events such as racially-motivated killings.
Consequently, it is important to understand trends in domestic terrorist tactics and targets. Our data indicate that the most common weapons for fatal attacks over the past five years were firearms, which comprised 73 percent of fatal far-right attacks, percent of fatal far-left attacks, and 62 percent of fatal Salafi-jihadist attacks. In addition, the primary targets for right-wing extremists included individuals based on ethnicity, race, or religion such as African Americans, Latinos, Jews, and Muslims.
For left-wing extremists and Salafi-jihadists, the primary targets were government, military, and police personnel and locations. In light of these findings, there are several policy implications.
First, based on the tactics of domestic terrorists, enacting stricter legislation to ban some types of guns such as assault rifles and further strengthening background checks could help prevent some would-be terrorists from getting access to weapons. Firearms are—by far—the most common weapon for fatal attacks by far-right, far-left, and Salafi-jihadist extremists. Based on data from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System NICS , the number of firearm background checks for gun purchases has spiked to its highest level ever in —reaching nearly 4 million in June In addition to guns, other types of weapons—such as vehicles, melee devices, incendiary devices for arson attacks, and the components for homemade explosives—are also widely available.
Second, based on the target selection of domestic terrorists, there are some steps that organizations can take to reduce the likelihood of an attack, mitigate the consequences if an attack occurs, or even deter an attack. For example, organizations can increase and improve their use of closed-circuit televisions CCTVs ; construct more effective barriers to prevent vehicular attacks; increase security personnel including armed guards and improve protective security measures and procedures such as layered defenses at businesses and other potential targets; conduct training and education for all employees to increase vigilance and improve their response to an attack; organize table-top and other exercises; and carry out routine risk assessments to identify security gaps and vulnerabilities.
Yet it will be virtually impossible to prevent some of the most common types of attacks, which involve targeting individuals at public locations based on their ethnicity, race, or religion. They are not anomalies. At times, people use racism and the racialization of people as a way to act out their frustrations with the world.
Domestic terrorism is so concerning that the Director of National Intelligence and the Department of Homeland Security have classified domestic violent extremism to be the biggest threat for mass violence in the United States. But in order for us to recognize these acts as hate crimes, we have to ensure that racist perspectives are not brushed aside as normal.
We also have to change statutes. This is because America over-individualizes and normalizes domestic terror incidents, particularly when committed by white men. We know that people have bad days all the time. Most people experiencing bad days do not go on a shooting spree and target businesses where Asians work, Latinos shop, or Black people worship. These types of comments speak to the level of sympathy, compassion, and restraint shown to white supremacists.
Long, Crusius, and Roof were apprehended peacefully, despite some of them being armed and leading police on a chase. Roof was even taken to Burger King on his way to the police station because he was hungry. We have to be honest that some of the people who do the arresting and writing of the police reports empathize with white supremacists, to paraphrase Ida B.
Captain Baker had anti-Asian sentiment spewed on his Facebook timeline. But, according to federal law and most state laws, these acts will probably be interpreted as free speech. In this regard, not only does law enforcement have limited legal statutes by which to interpret these incidents, but some of them have limited capacity to actually process these incidents as hate crimes.
Many people engage in self-justification by classifying racist actions as normative and justifiable.
0コメント