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.
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.