Whether the company still owned the cars (still in a car lot) or if they were already sold, is not relevant. If it’s not your property then you don’t have a right to burn it.
BTW the article wasn’t clear as to who owned the vehicles.
A property owner has a right not to have their property destroyed, a vandal has a right not to be unreasonably detained. Destruction of property is usually a civil matter and when it isn’t it is a criminal matter that doesn’t fit the standard definition of terrorism outside really specific circumstances. Both parties deserve to be treated fairly through this process - America has removed that guarantee for the vandal.
No, because they live in a country with rights.
lucky 🥺
They have a right to burn another person’s property in Germany? Interesting.
No, not at all. But it sure as hell will not be labeled „domestic terrorism“.
This will be 100% put into the yearly criminal statistic as far-left terrorism.
There’s a good chance it will be labeled just that. Left extremist terrorism.
Corporations are not people outside of the US.
Whether the company still owned the cars (still in a car lot) or if they were already sold, is not relevant. If it’s not your property then you don’t have a right to burn it.
BTW the article wasn’t clear as to who owned the vehicles.
A property owner has a right not to have their property destroyed, a vandal has a right not to be unreasonably detained. Destruction of property is usually a civil matter and when it isn’t it is a criminal matter that doesn’t fit the standard definition of terrorism outside really specific circumstances. Both parties deserve to be treated fairly through this process - America has removed that guarantee for the vandal.