Glad you're here! Good stuff to know, and I'm picking up part of DirkGently's post here. I had not heard of "stochastic terrorism" before, but the definition certainly makes sense and has relevance to now.
Here's the Daily Kos post you referenced, or a similar one:
Stochastic terrorism is the use of mass communications to stir up random lone wolves to carry out violent or terrorist acts that are statistically predictable but individually unpredictable.
This is what occurs when Bin Laden releases a video that stirs random extremists halfway around the globe to commit a bombing or shooting.
This is also the term for what Beck, O'Reilly, Hannity, and others do. And this is what led directly and predictably to a number of cases of ideologically-motivated murder similar to the Tucson shootings.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2011/01/10/934890/-Stochastic-Terrorism-160-Triggering-the-shooters
It does make me wonder about the downside of the First Amendment. It's already been tweaked and reevaluated in light of the new definition of corporations as people and money as free speech. Should it be further tweaked to refine against inflammatory talk like this, that I'm firmly convinced only fires up nutcases to kill at will? LET ME SAY UP FRONT HERE - YEEEEESSSSSSSSS I realize the definition of same is in the eye of the beholder. YES I GET THAT. It's the Constitutional equivalent of "the cost of doing business." YES I GET THAT. One invites the whole "well, who gets to define it then?" argument. YES I GET IT!!! But at some point, WHEN is enough too much? Should we not reevaluate it again along these lines? Can we not even consider such a thing? Could we not codify the whole "you can't shout 'Fire!' in a crowded theater" thing? Because this is the EXTREME extrapolation of that very convention. Assholes like alex jones are shouting "Fire!" in the crowded theater of the full, coast-to-coast-and-all-the-ships-at-sea America mindset, forcryingoutloud! These deaths and mass murders are ON HIS CONSCIENCE, and made far more likely by vicious hatespeak LIKE HIS. At some point I just don't think it should be allowed. Besides, we have indeed already seen that kind of reevaluation in favor of corporations and big-spender types. Why not for the rest of us as well?
Just a thought. I suppose the next thing I should say at this point is - "flame away..." 
Edit history
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
= new reply since forum marked as read