Welcome to BrainStuff, a production of I Heart Radio.

Hey Brain Stuff, Lauren Vogelbaum here with another classic episode from our archives.

This one has to do with the definitions of terrorism and why it's become such a politically loaded term.

Hey Brainsduff, Lauren Vogelbaum here.

When the news of another mass murder in the United States breaks, people are forced

to stumble their way through a series of inescapable emotions.

The psychological stages, much like the well-known stages of grief goes something like this shock revulsion fear

curiosity anxiety anger numbness and finally depression and perhaps acceptance

somewhere along that arc too comes the inevitable question. Was it

terrorism? The question is way more easily asked than answered. That's

partially because the legal definition of the word terrorism is as murky as the

motivations of the people who commit these drastic crimes. We talked with Dr. Jane

Kramer, a professor of political science at the University of Oregon. She told us

every terrorism textbook, every terrorism

class begins with the definition problem. Most people have to be

satisfied with no definition. The Miriam Websterizing of the term

terrorism has become so tricky in fact, so fraught with politics and legal pitfalls that even after decades of trying, the United Nations can't come up with an agreement on what constitutes terrorism or what a terrorist is.

That's not all that surprising maybe, considering that what one group might call a cowardly and

despicable act, another might term a patriotic or even wholly duty.

At least within the borders of the United States, the legal definition seems a little less troublesome.

Several federal laws list some variation of the terms, but the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations defines terrorism as the unlawful use of

force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government

...