A few years ago, a young woman named Rachel King decided to make her mark on the US with an ambush of police officers in a rural area of Mississippi.
Her motive was unknown, but she apparently had no qualms about carrying a gun and taking it out on them.
After her rampage, she was charged with a number of crimes and convicted.
And since then, there have been several similar incidents across the US, all in rural and remote areas of the state.
A number of local media outlets have picked up on this trend and have been quick to describe it as “a new wave of white-on-white terror”.
In fact, they’re just as likely to describe this as a new wave in the US of people who are either motivated by an anger over the death of a police officer or by some other reason.
But the similarities are striking.
This new wave seems to be coming from rural areas of America and not in the cities where the vast majority of people live.
And it has the potential to affect the lives of thousands of people in the United States.
The people of these rural areas have had few opportunities to experience the thrill of being armed.
For them, the new wave is a reminder of a time when the only way to defend oneself was to use a gun.
And, as we’ll see, that’s not something many people in rural America would have much of a choice about.
In the case of the Louisiana shooting, this fear of a possible reprisal of the police officers was enough to drive a few people to commit a massacre.
The motive The first wave of shootings occurred in November of last year, when a man named Dylann Storm Roof was arrested in the aftermath of the fatal police shooting of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri.
He allegedly started the massacre by opening fire on a black church and a local convenience store before turning his guns on himself.
This was not a random act of violence.
He apparently had some previous experience with police violence, having been involved in an armed robbery and a carjacking in Missouri.
The police initially found that Roof was a white supremacist who was on probation for another crime and had been arrested a year earlier for assaulting a black man.
They charged him with armed robbery.
Roof was found guilty and sentenced to life in prison.
He died in prison in 2017.
Roof did not attend his trial and the jury, instead of choosing between a life sentence or the death penalty, chose the latter.
The verdict was a shock to the community, as the police officer who had stopped Roof at the church was black and he had no prior record.
In a few years, the jury would find Roof guilty of murder and the judge would sentence him to death.
It is not clear exactly how the judge decided to sentence Roof to death, but it seems to have been a case of “no jury”.
The case against Roof was one of the first of many in the state to focus on the lack of due process in a case where the accused had no legal right to a trial.
The prosecution argued that the state had failed to properly disclose the nature of Roof’s criminal record.
But in fact, the judge in the case was not involved in the process of determining whether Roof had a right to have a trial, but merely found that he was guilty of the crime he was accused of committing.
This is not an isolated incident.
In February of this year, a woman named Amanda Berry was found dead in her car in the woods near her home in North Carolina.
She had been shot and killed.
Her car was also found with a bullet hole in the driver’s side.
She was 19 years old.
The trial of Berry was postponed until October, and the verdict of her killer was never made public.
A week later, another young woman, Dylan Roof, was found hanging in his cell at the Federal Correctional Institution in Florence, South Carolina.
He was 19.
Roof’s defence was that he had been in a fight with two friends at the time of the killing and that they accidentally shot him in self-defence.
He had no criminal record, and his lawyer argued that his actions had nothing to do with his guilt or innocence.
This defence was the first time that a white person was found not guilty by reason of race.
But while this new wave was not necessarily new, the way it was carried out in this case was.
While the jury had decided that Roof deserved the death sentence, the prosecution argued for life in jail.
That’s right, life in federal prison.
The judge in this trial had no role in sentencing Roof, and he never heard a word of the prosecution’s argument.
This meant that, despite the fact that Roof had been charged with murder, he had never received a fair trial.
There was no trial.
A manhunt was launched to find the gunman, but no one was found.
As soon as the news