Anti-Terror

I was just listening to a radio broadcast discussing how some state prosecutors are using anti-terrorist laws to prosecute "regular" criminals. The first example involved a young girl who was shot in the head by a gang member in New York City. The people involved in the shooting apparently fled to Mexico, but the prosecutor brought charges against 16 members of the same gang under the anti-terrorist laws stating that they were "intimidating the civilian population." The second example was from Boone, North Carolina where the district attorney was tired of the violence associated with crystal meth labs, and the people who make crystal meth that were getting off with only short jail terms. He tried to bring charges against some of these crystal meth makers using an anti-terrorist law that had to do with the production of weapons using toxic chemicals (they use toxic chemicals to make crystal meth) with the intent to do violence or to intimidate the civilian population. Of course someone who is prosecuted under an anti-terrorist law is subject to stiffer penalties and longer jail terms.

Both examples seem fairly ridiculous to me. It is an obvious stretch to jump from production of an illicit drug to manufacturing chemical weapons. And since when do we prosecute people because they were in the same "association" as someone who committed a crime? McCarthy couldn't have done it better himself.

I don't think that the word "terrorist" should be limited to foreign nationals who illegaly enter the country. There are plenty of examples of domestic terrorism--the Unibomber and the Oklahoma City bombing to cite two. However using anti-terror laws to prosecute criminals just because the prosecutor thinks the regular laws aren't stiff enough? That seems criminal in itself. Not to mention the basic human rights violations that seem to accompany anyone associated with the word "terrorist." This stuff makes me ill.