Summer Sale Extended! Get unlimited digital access for 13 weeks for $13.
News Opinion Op-Eds

Call the Colorado shootings what they were: terrorism

In the search for answers in the wake of the shootings in Aurora, Colo., authorities have made one curious conclusion about the suspect, James Holmes. The FBI has made clear that Mr. Holmes has no ties to terrorism. This is flat wrong — he is a terrorist. And this label matters.

According to the police, Mr. Holmes — armed with an assault rifle and other guns, and ensconced in battle armor — indiscriminately and emotionlessly shot at moviegoers, some of whom were children, and some of whom were trying to escape. The rampage also appears to have been premeditated. Mr. Holmes recently bought thousands of rounds of ammunition and, on the night of the movie premiere, authorities say, he calmly purchased a ticket and returned to his car to prepare himself before reentering the theater to disorient and then shoot at the large crowd. He now faces charges of killing 12, including a 6 year-old girl, and injuring dozens more. That mass shooting inflicted deep psychological wounds on countless others.

For that reason alone, the crime Mr. Holmes is accused of — the cold, calculated shooting of innocents in a movie theater — qualifies as terrorism and its perpetrator as a terrorist. As Adam Gopnik notes in The New Yorker, "we don't know, and perhaps never will, what exactly 'made him' do what he did; but we know how he did it." The "why" may explain and offer context, but the "how" is enough for the incident to fall into the category of terrorism.

To suggest otherwise and insist that acts of terrorism must be premised on an established ideology or discernible beliefs would be to place subjective motivation above objective action. It would be to posit, in effect, that the "terrorism" definition applies without question to those who claim some allegiance to radical Islam, regardless of their psychological condition, whereas all others get the benefit of the doubt. This double-standard is unfair to Muslims and lets everyone else off the hook, to our own peril.

Accordingly, there are advantages to defining terrorism as the premeditated, random murder of innocent people that causes physical and psychological harm on a community, without regard to whether the perpetrator attempted to further a possible message.

A terrorist, through his or her conduct, severs connections with orderly society. Mr. Holmes, by his conduct, is no longer worthy of any identity other than that of a terrorist, much in the same way that individuals who pervert Islam to justify terrorism deny themselves any valid claim to be Muslims. To call Mr. Holmes a terrorist would be to acknowledge the social significance of his acts, deny him any political or personal cover for those acts, and to signal the extent of the public's condemnation.

To be sure, Mr. Holmes; Jared Lee Loughner, who is charged in the shooting that seriously wounded Rep. Gabrielle Giffords and killed six others; and Virginia Tech shooterSeung-Hui Cho were all loners and thus may have felt marginalized as is. The "terrorist" label would, however, impose an additional social cost to their actions and may undermine any permanent legacy that such mass murderers are ostensibly seeking.

In failing to immediately and universally frame Friday's incident as terrorism, we failed to properly conceptualize what occurred, failed to hand down a swift and damning social sentence on the perpetrator, and failed to further disincentivize similar incidents.

The terrorism label also has national security implications. Last week, a government inquiry into the 2009 Fort Hood shootings revealed that officials were reluctant to investigate Major Nidal Hasan because of concerns that they would be perceived to be profiling Muslims. But if we weren't so reluctant to label as terrorism horrific acts like the Colorado theater shootings, we might not be so concerned about appearing bigoted against Muslims.

If our definition of terrorism centered on conduct, not ideology, our security officials would be freed to focus on scrutinizing individualized behavior, such as emailing known terrorists, flying long distances one-way without checked bags, or amassing huge stockpiles of ammunition. In doing so, our defense against domestic shootings may be heightened and such incidents might have less of a chance recurring. And as the Fort Hood report suggests, such a shift in how we think about terrorism might have helped us prevent Mr. Hasan from engaging in the mass shooting in the first place.

As we continue to mourn and debate the propriety of stronger gun control laws, among other responses to these killings, let us agree upon two certainties. What took place on Friday is a tragedy. It is also terrorism.

Dawinder S. Sidhu, a Maryland native, is an assistant professor at the University of New Mexico School of Law. His email is

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Shootings are God's will, Godlessness or other?

    In an interview with Fox News hours before the Aurora gun massacre, George Zimmerman, who stands accused of fatally shooting Trayvon Martin, said that the young man's death was "God's plan." Hours after James Holmes used three guns, including a semiautomatic rifle, to commit mass murder at an Aurora,...

  • Gun laws save lives

    Contrary to the assertions in Doyle McManus' op-ed ("People, not politicians, killed gun control," July 27), the national gun laws enacted in the 1990s did help reduce gun violence, and most Americans, including gun owners, support key new laws such as universal background checks for gun purchases.

  • The NRA's big secret: Nobody is actually trying to take your guns

    The NRA's big secret: Nobody is actually trying to take your guns

    Sales of firearms are spiking on completely unrealistic fears that the Colorado shooting will lead to new gun control

  • Assaulted by gun-related idiocy

    We are surrounded by idiots! There are the idiots who are able to buy assault weapons with no problems. We have idiots from the film industry who insist on releasing idiotic violent movies. We have newscasters who barrage their audiences with violent stories (Has anyone watched the 11 o'clock local...

  • Crime is down because of less gun control

    Instead of "People, not politicians killed gun control," Doyle McManus should have titled his July 27 op-ed "people and politicians reduce crime in America." Not until the middle of his commentary does he admit that crime is down, and he attributes the lack of interest in gun control to this fact....

  • Rep. Andy Harris and the Aurora massacre

    Katie Medley is in the hospital, having joyously given birth to her first child, baby Hugo, while one floor away the new father, Caleb Medley, lies in an induced coma after being blasted by the heavily armed gunman who attacked a crowded theater in Aurora, Colo., last week.