This week, the Virginia man arrested for shooting a security guard inside the Washington, DC, headquarters of the Family Research Council has been indicted by a grand jury on terrorism charges that are being utilized for the first time.
Floyd Lee Corkins was arrested in August after opening fire on the anti-gay lobbying group’s ground floor and hitting guard Leonardo Johnson in the arm. Corkins’ sexuality hasn’t been reported on, but he was volunteering at a local LGBT center at the time of the attack and carried Chick-fil-A sandwiches in his backpack when he entered the building. During the assault, he told Johnson,”don’t shoot me—it was not about you, it was what this place stands for.”
That indictment alone carries a possible 30-year sentence, but Corkins was also charged with attempted murder, second-degree burglary and carrying a firearm across state lines.
So far, he is pleading not guilty to all.
“The terrorism indictment announced today makes clear that acts of violence designed to intimidate and silence those who support natural marriage and traditional morality violate the law and undermine the security and stability of our form of government,” said FRC president Tony Perkins. “We again call on organizations like the Southern Poverty Law Center to stop its reckless practice of labeling organizations that oppose their promotion of homosexuality. The SPLC’s `hate’ labeling of Christian organizations is fostering a dangerous and deadly environment of hostility and it needs to stop.”
Using pretzel logic to politicize a heinous act by a disturbed individual—there’s some great family values right there.
So let me get this straight, a law passed by scared stupid politicians right after the Sept. 11 incident (which was meant to deal with incidents and perpetrators similar to that) is being used on a relatively low level criminal (in the grand scheme/range of criminals)? Is there something in the water in DC? First the raping of our constitution and now this BS. I’m welling to wager that if this was a mass shooting at a LGBT building in DC where people actually died, the suspect wouldn’t get this terrorism charge.
@MacTX: Of course it won’t, the provisions in the law are quite clearly worded so that only the right wing and christian nationalists can utilise them, with specific banning of the use of the law against minorities.
I have read the mandate, and in my work campaigning against similar laws here in the UK it is sad how far our “democracies” are going to shut up the “evil Liberals”, lets not forget that the US can now detain anyone without trial for an indefinite amount of time with no chance of a parole hearing.
@2eo: Sadly I was already aware of the NDAA. I’ve been aware of the duplicity of our government since the elections of 2000.
Optimistically we’re a representative republic but truthfully we’re right at the edge (and about to go over) of tyranny. The final act to get us to total tyranny is removing our 2nd amendment rights, the right to keep and bear arms. We’ve already lost the right to free speech, unlawful search and seizures, right to fair and expedited trial, among others. Sadly the mindless zombie that you know as the American people don’t realize this. Although those rights haven’t been removed from the Constitution outright (which is more difficult to do for a reason), they’ve been neutered/legislated by policy and new laws that essentially remove/censor them and our coward of a judicial system won’t or can’t do what they’re suppose to and balance the system.
We’re too preoccupied with making ends meet, arguing over politicians who we often times don’t elect nor have our best interests in mind, watching pointless sports, and figuring out what the Kardashian or Honey Boo Boo is doing. We’ve obviously forgotten what 1776 was all about and sadly will have to be reminded again and countless innocent lives will unfortunately be lost along the way.
only in an ass-backwards country like America can a hero be charged with terrorism.i am deeply ashamed to call myself an American citizen right now
This man deserves to be tried for terrorism. Violence of any kind is unacceptable
That mentality is exactly why we have the Patriot Act, NDAA 2012, and TSA putting their hands down our pants (expect cavity searches on our current trajectory). Which, I’m guessing you’re ok with? 9/11 is Terrorism. It was an attack on the American people and our way of life. Attempted murder is just that, attempted murder. I bet most of the people who are cheering for this charge never even heard of Floyd Lee Corkins before this.
“Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.” Are you familiar with that quote? In America present day, we have lost liberty and we’re not any safer and I’m willing to bet you don’t even realize this. Scared, small minded individuals who have to be spoon fed by the government is what the American people has become and what has allowed laws to be past that do little to make us safer but does a fine job at stripping out rights and freedoms.
@MacTX: No, I’m not for the Patriot Act or the NDAA 2012. What I am for is someone who commits violence against any individual being tried for that violence in a court of law. I am not for giving up individual liberties but I am for those who commit violence being tried in a court of justice for their crimes. I have been against the Patriot Act, and it’s like minded ilk, ever since it was first signed into law. Our liberties have been shredded by these bills, which was exactly the intent of the terrorists when 9/11 first happened. What I am for is someone who commits grievous acts of violence against his fellow citizens being tried in a court of law for those acts of violence, something that has not been mentioned in any of these comments. Oh, and before you assume something about me, ask me what my viewpoints are on a subject before jumping to the wrong conclusion! The shredding of our liberties is something I take very seriously.
I don’t understand then how you could be in support of the liberal labeling of the term terrorism. You should know as well I do then that the pieces are already in place for vagrant abuse of power and justified actions against the American people under the veil of making us safe from terrorists. We will NEVER be completely safe from terrorists. Giving up all our rights and freedom won’t change that. 9/11 was a complete system wide failure of the US government and their intelligence network or like some have suggested, an inside job. It’s an interesting theory and one not helped by the fact that the US did a piss poor job at investigating what went wrong and why the entire system designed to prevent it, failed.
Justice is not what is at issue here. The guy is in custody and he’ll be tried for his actions. He is an attempted murderer, we already have laws in place to deal with people like him. Do you want every act of violence to be labeled as an act of terrorism, no matter the scope or impact? Do you think it will stop there? Before we know it, we’ll wake up to a country where the citizens have been completely disarmed and all protesting will be acts of terrorism. We’re already well on our way to that eventuality as some parts of the country already have horrendous gun laws/restrictions, and some protesters have already been treated like they were terrorists. Imagine it on a country wide scale. It’s a pandora’s box that shouldn’t be open. It sounds a bit extreme but likewise, if you had told me (or any other citizens) a decade ago that I would need to get intimately felt up to fly, I would have thought you were crazy. Yet here we are today lining up like zombies for just that. The next time you go through airport security, look around at the people waiting in line and their expressions. It’s so sad to see what we’ve become.
@MacTX: I will admit that the use of the terrorism by me was wrong. It was an angry reaction to the fact that I saw no one except on this page condemning his acts, except for the person who wrote the article, and one person actually praising it. I shouldn’t have said that we need to agree that this person deserves to face justice for the crimes he has done. I’m a pacifist who tends to get angry when violence isn’t condemned. So, I am indeed sorry for that. As to your points. I am not for labeling all acts of violence as terrorism because they aren’t. I know we will never be completely safe from terrorist acts which is why I am against the Patriot Act and its ilk because it gives the government too much power which can readily be abused. Our rights have been shredded ever since 9/11 first happened. Wire-tapping, loss of due process, the fact that people can be detained without evidence are all things I am against. I don’t believe that it was an inside job, but I do believe that we have systemically lost our rights since then because we haven’t said stop to the government intrusion on our civil liberties. And I agree. We need to stand up for our rights as American citizens in order to retain our liberties. And again, I apologize for using an erroneous term in haste and anger.
The labeling was my only issue. I consider myself a pacifist but the more I read, learn, and understand, the less of a pacifist I remain. I can understand why the large majority of the people choose not to know and bury their heads instead.
I doubt we’ll ever know for certain if it was an inside job. Such an act would require people completely loyal to the cause and those who were not would have been eliminated by now. I find our government’s lack of interest in finding out what happen and how we can better protect from that type of attack suspicious. I’m not one to believe in conspiracies but as the saying goes, where there’s smoke, there’s usually a fire; so I do keep an open mind on the subject.
You have my apology for putting you in the same category of clueless people I usually end up conversing with.
Comments are closed.