When it was announced yesterday that the shooter of the CEO of United Health Care would be charged with terrorism, I wondered why. Of course he shouldn't have done it, no matter how awful the company was. We are, or were, a nation of laws and courts, and taking justice into his own hands wasn't right.
Now, though, is it right to call this terrorism just because he killed a leader of a company making millions? There are days now when I feel like we're living in The Hunger Games or Fahrenheit 451, where the masses are kept in check with poverty, screens and drugs and the rich are in charge, creating laws unto themselves, benefiting themselves while keeping all others in check.
The killer should be arrested, arraigned and put on trial, for murder. But if guns are legal when they're used to kill innocent children, I don't understand the difference when it's a CEO. It's not terrorism; it's what's it always been: a person cracking and using guns to kill.
Making guns scarce for all murders would be the just solution.
More Important than Children?
