Terrorists are War Criminals

Why do I believe terrorists should be kept out of civilian courts?

First and foremost, I am concerned about the safety of our nation. What if there was a legal flaw in our political system? And what if the terrorists were declared innocent? When I know someone has committed an act of terrorism, I think they have already brought the judgment on themselves.

There is a difference between a civilian crime and an act of terrorism. In a civilian crime, a few citizens may be affected and others threatened. However, in a single crime whether it is as extreme as a murder, the whole nation is never threatened. In this case, the civilian has their right to be tried in a fair, civilian court. In an act of terrorism, a threatening message of hate is sent to the entire nation. Should we place the safety of our entire nation in the hands of a single civilian court?

I see that the opposing side of this arguments states that we should provide a fair trial for everyone. The way I see it, an every-day criminal has the right to be held in a civilian court. A person who commits an act of terrorism is no longer an every-day criminal, but has sent a message of war. A war criminal should not be tried in a civilian court. A war criminal should not even have the chance to interact with the civilians living in the country he has attacked. I agree we should set an example for other nations by our fair, legal system. However, we should set the example by the way we try our own citizens. Trying terrorists in a civilian court would be a mockery to our system and would also risk exposing our political processes. I do not say we should jump the gun and execute possible terrorists without reason or interrogation. What I do say is that we leave war criminals to the military who have been trained to deal with issues of war.