Lone Wolf Terrorism in Legislation : A Legal Overview
individuals will help scholars and policymakers in creating effective legislation . Scholars should continue to research and debate the definitional issue of unaffiliated politically violent individuals to help inform policymakers about the lack of an accepted definition , and , until there is a standard agreement , encourage language in laws that refrains from phrases like “ lone wolf ,” “ lone offender ,” and “ solo terrorist .” Creating standard definitions is not purely an exercise but will provide insight into which individuals are motivated by political or religious ideology instead of “ lumping them in ” with criminal activity . It is probably safe to assume that most researchers , legislators , and even the general public would consider acts of terrorism — especially those that result in a multitude of deaths and attempt to influence governments outside of the normal democratic process — much more severe of a crime than simple criminal activity such as bank robbery or murder . Creating laws to properly punish individuals who conduct these terrorist activities , rather than use simple criminal statues , requires an adequate definition .
As research grows , this will have the added benefit of others having more data to draw from ; future research will undoubtedly benefit . Currently , it is difficult to understand the extent of lone wolf terrorism activity fully . Without a standard definition or the legislation to back it up , policymakers and researchers are having a difficult time even counting the number of lone wolf terrorists or the number of attacks they have committed .
Reconsider Federal Dominance
States and local branches of government need to reconsider federal dominance
with respect to lone wolf terrorism . Often , state laws are used as “ backups ” to prosecute terrorists in the event issues arise with federal prosecution , or to “ add time ” to a terrorist ’ s federal sentencing to ensure it is years before the perpetrator is set free . However , usually , these state laws tend to be criminal statutes such as money laundering , weapons possession , or murder . Again , as mentioned above , often the goal is simply to get the suspected terrorist off the street ; in these instances , any criminal statute that applies will suffice .
However , state and local governments should consider how the various roles of prosecutorial bodies at the local , state , and federal level behave . The Department of Justice ( DoJ ) excels at prosecuting large scale , criminal conspiracy types of crimes . While they also prosecute individuals for lesser crimes , the experience of DoJ and their access to resources make them well suited for prosecuting complex crimes and terrorists . However , individuals who conduct terrorist attacks alone are much more likely to come to the attention of local and state law enforcement agencies before becoming known to federal agencies . Lone wolf terrorists rarely communicate with others with similar violent ideologies and often conceive , plan , and conduct their attacks within local jurisdictions without extensive travel beyond their local environment . It then makes sense to consider local and state law
17