Example of domestic terrorism critical thinking

Domestic terrorism refers to the violence against infrastructure or civilian population of any country. It may or may not be conducted by citizens of that country and is usually aimed at intimidating, coercing, or influencing national policy through kidnapping, mass destruction or assassination. In order to address issues of national security, all nations should invest in objective research that assist government agencies in mitigating and preventing terrorist activities as well as improving disaster readiness, response, and recovery. There are several lobby and activist groups that fight for a better cause; however, some of their members get involved in violence acts that fall under domestic terrorism. One example of such activist groups is Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC). Therefore, in this paper, we shall discuss the SHAC’s activities that make it be mistaken for a terrorist outfit.
Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC) refers to the international animal rights movement created to shut down Huntingdon Life Sciences, Europe’s biggest animal testing laboratory. SHAC came into existence in November 1999 (“ Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC)”). It was formed by three Britons, Heather James, Greg Avery, and Natasha Dellemagne after a video clip believed to have been shot inside HLS by People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals showed HLS staff punching, shaking and shouting at beagles under their care was broadcasted by Channel 4 in the United Kingdom. HLS examines non-medical and medical substances on approximately seventy five thousand animals (ranging from rats to mandrills) annually (Cohen and Regan 76). The laboratory having been under constant attacks from reporters and activists since 1989 dismissed the employees and had them prosecuted (Townsend). In order to continue with its operations, it threatened PETA with legal actions forcing it to stop its protests. With PETA’s decline, SHAC rose as a formidable resistance with no leader.
SHAC members comprise compassionate people from varied backgrounds and people of all age groups, ranging from children to retirees. All of them are angered by the existence of HLS and are committed to doing everything they can to ensure that the company is completely shut down. SHAC uses a three tier tactic against HLS: they campaign against suppliers who supply HLS with important tools used for carrying out their research, customers who give HLS income and profits, and lastly, HLS’s financial links such as banking facilities, market marketers and shareholders. Additionally, SHAC has called for boycott of HLS and is pleading with all companies that conduct business with Huntingdon to shun animal cruelty (Townsend).
In conclusion, it is a fact that SHAC is not a terrorist group, but an animal rights group. This is because its main objective is seeing the closure of HLS, a massive laboratory conducting tests on animals. However, some of the activities that are linked with SHAC’s protests and demonstrations can be classified as terrorist acts. For instance, SHAC is alleged for firebombing residential houses of executives linked with HLS’s investors and clients. Additionally, the Southern Poverty Law Centre charged with the responsibility of monitoring domestic extremism in the United States has described the manner in which SHAC operates as “ terroristic tactics comparable to those used by anti-abortion extremists (“ Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC)”). Additionally, FBI’s warrant of arrest for Daniel Andreas San Diego, a member of SHAC, for the bomb attacks in California against two clients of HSL also links the animal rights group to terrorist acts.

Works Cited

Cohen, Carl, and Tom Regan. The Animal Rights Debate. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2001. Print.
“ Stop Huntingdon Animal Cruelty (SHAC).” ARE Information. 2013. Web. 6 Aug. 2013.
Townsend, Mark. “ Exposed: Secrets of the Animal Organ Lab.” The Observer 20 Apr. 2003.