# wowzers that bus story was freakin scary eh...



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

there`s been a LOT of stabbings in Japan this year, already more than all of 2007, and now Canada too...what the fack is going on?
What a strange story this one is...I`ll have to keep an eye on Yahoo Canada to see what the perp has to say about why he did it.


----------



## noobcake (Mar 8, 2006)

Yeah Japan is a country with a whole lot of gruesome crimes going on, but a crime like this is really one of the first of its kind in Canada. The description of the criminal as a calm man that acted "as if he were a robot" is quite disturbing. I mean damn this sounds like a real life terminator or something?! My sympathies to the victims friends and family. I'm definitely keeping an eye on this story, it's quite intriguing.


----------



## Michelle (Aug 21, 2006)

Mind-controlled slaves are a reality, he was probably 'triggered' from the lyrics in the music the victim was playing. (see project Montauk, MKULTRA)


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

I actually regretted clicking on that story on the CBC website. Of course it had a disclaimer (disturbing content) But it was a full eye witness testimony. I could not get it out of my head all night! Poor victims families notwithstanding... Poor people on the bus.. But why do they have to be so graphic? Oh yeah I know, misery sells....


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

I wasn't there, but I'm struggling with the fact that nobody jumped him. I guess you never know how you're going to react in a situation like that, but I have stepped in and pulled a knife from someone's hand when they were waving it in someone's face.

At any rate, this guy should never see the light of day again, regardless of whether he's found to be legally insane or not.


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

Milkman said:


> I wasn't there, but I'm struggling with the fact that nobody jumped him. I guess you never know how you're going to react in a situation like that.....


From what I understand, the guy had a large survival knife and was stabbing the sleeping guy in the throat. He did it so suddenly that no one realized what was going on - and after one hit in the throat with a knife that big there would not be much hope of survival for the victim. 

Getting the women and children (there was at least one) out of harms way was the best they could do. Once everyone was out of the bus, a few guys were armed with tools and contained the guy in the bus until the cops arrived.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Hamm Guitars said:


> From what I understand, the guy had a large survival knife and was stabbing the sleeping guy in the throat. He did it so suddenly that no one realized what was going on - and after one hit in the throat with a knife that big there would not be much hope of survival for the victim.
> 
> Getting the women and children (there was at least one) out of harms way was the best they could do. Once everyone was out of the bus, a few guys were armed with tools and contained the guy in the bus until the cops arrived.


Yup, I saw the interviews too. Still, if I'm being stabbed in th throat, please feel free to intervene, even if you're qualified to determine that the wounds I have already suffered are fatal.

Like I said, I can't promise how I would have reacted.

No matter how you look at it, it's a horrific experience for everyone on the bus.


----------



## kous (Apr 12, 2007)

I was shocked to hear the news as well. Stabbing is already horrifying, but decapitating? 

The neat thing about Greyhound is that you can just board the bus and things went quite smooth. Same as VIA as well (the last time I rode it). I guess they are going to have to install security points now. The sense of safety is gone.

It scares me; as a person that rides public transit often, sometimes late at night, I don't want to hear events like these.



sneakypete said:


> there`s been a LOT of stabbings in Japan this year, already more than all of 2007


Luckily, no teens stabbing family members here.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Paul said:


> That bus would be where we'd want somebody with a clear shot and an available firearm handy. I'm no fan of hand guns, but sometime they just might be the best solution.
> 
> I think you react differently depending on where you are in life. Is your first instinct to come to the aid of a stranger, or to protect your child's father???? This isn't a dig.....what I would have done 20 years ago is markedly different from what I would do now. I suspect that is true for all of us as we mature.



Hard to say. I tend to be fairly action oriented, and thus far have not panicked under pressure. I think a good analogy is 1st aid. Lots of people take the training but precious few are able to keep a cool head when someone really needs them. 

It's impossible to guarantee how you would react.


----------



## geezer (Apr 30, 2008)

I have stepped into a few situations when I was younger to help someone and once getting a knife away from a known nutcase but, even though my first thought was that I would have been right on him, a witness stated that he was a large man and being in the mental state he was in I doubt that one person would be able to subdue him.I have a brother that's bipolar and tough and it has taken six cops to get him under control.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

It sounded to me like the people on the bus behaved amazingly well given the circumstances.

I mean ... try and place yourself in the scene .... bus droning quietly along the prairies in the dark, you're reading, sleeping - have been for a few hours now .... and in a matter of seconds some freak is shrieking, wailing away with a knife, blood is everywhere ... I'm sure that by the time your mind registers that it's really happening, your instincts have already taken you as far from the threat as possible.

I'm sure that the 30-odd people on the bus gave us a pretty good idea of what the general response would be............


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

Milkman said:


> ... Still, if I'm being stabbed in th throat, please feel free to intervene, even if you're qualified to determine that the wounds I have already suffered are fatal...


O.K., but if the roles are reversed, get out and save yourself. I'm worth more to my family dead than on life support in a vegitative state. My organ donar card is signed and in my wallet.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Paul said:


> That bus would be where we'd want somebody with a clear shot and an available firearm handy. I'm no fan of hand guns, but sometime they just might be the best solution.


I guess if this happenned in Texas we'd be hearing news reports about 33 of 37 passengers riddled mans body with bullets as he attacks man beside him.


----------



## Gunny (Feb 21, 2006)

It's not normal for me to suggest this kind of idea, but... is this an example of violent video game stuff influencing the killer on the bus? I don't think the mainstream horror movies in the theatres show the kind of thing that happened in this incident.


----------



## Luke98 (Mar 4, 2007)

a witness on the news (one of the guys who held the bus doors shut with the driver and a trucker who stopped) said the guy was 6 feet tall 200 pounds. Well this is all over the internet by now anyways so you can find the information if you want it... i think someone intervening would have only made things worse, locking him in the bus was a good call.


----------



## GuitarsCanada (Dec 30, 2005)

Milkman said:


> Yup, I saw the interviews too. Still, if I'm being stabbed in th throat, please feel free to intervene, even if you're qualified to determine that the wounds I have already suffered are fatal.
> 
> Like I said, I can't promise how I would have reacted.
> 
> No matter how you look at it, it's a horrific experience for everyone on the bus.


Certainly it's hard to predict what any of us might do in that situation. I know that I have stepped in several times where someone was getting bullied or beaten up. Nothing with a knife. But I am also 6' 250 pounds as well. I think, if I had even the slightest opportunity, I would have come down on the freaks skull with the heaviest thing I could get my hands on. Unfortunately, we don't tend to help each other out much anymore. I was on vacation once in the Carib and a older lady collapsed on the beach about 200 yards down from where we were. I watched for a moment or two as people around her just kept going about their business, even walking right by her while her husband stood there shocked. I ran down there and got a hold of some beach patrol to get her out of there.

The worst one was at dinner on a cruise ship where this poor guy about 3 tables over from us suddenly turned blue and literally fell over face first into his soup. I swear to you that other than his wife, all others at the table kept eating. Finally a waiter came over and pulled him up out of there. I am no doctor and have limited knowledge in the medical field other than being a volunteer firefighter for about 4 years but at least went over there to see if I could help in some way. Not sure what the the deal is but for the most part, people dont want to get involved. Just my thoughts from personal experience.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

GuitarsCanada said:


> Certainly it's hard to predict what any of us might do in that situation. I know that I have stepped in several times where someone was getting bullied or beaten up. Nothing with a knife. But I am also 6' 250 pounds as well. I think, if I had even the slightest opportunity, I would have come down on the freaks skull with the heaviest thing I could get my hands on. Unfortunately, we don't tend to help each other out much anymore. I was on vacation once in the Carib and a older lady collapsed on the beach about 200 yards down from where we were. I watched for a moment or two as people around her just kept going about their business, even walking right by her while her husband stood there shocked. I ran down there and got a hold of some beach patrol to get her out of there.
> 
> The worst one was at dinner on a cruise ship where this poor guy about 3 tables over from us suddenly turned blue and literally fell over face first into his soup. I swear to you that other than his wife, all others at the table kept eating. Finally a waiter came over and pulled him up out of there. I am no doctor and have limited knowledge in the medical field other than being a volunteer firefighter for about 4 years but at least went over there to see if I could help in some way. Not sure what the the deal is but for the most part, people dont want to get involved. Just my thoughts from personal experience.



Yes, sadly this is a vicious circle. People are afraid to help people because it could be a trap and that means if you're really in trouble it's less likely someone will help you.

Anyway, I feel like a creep for second guessing the poor souls in that bus. It's hard not to be angry with the guy who did it regardless of his condition.


----------



## Jeff Flowerday (Jan 23, 2006)

Gunny said:


> It's not normal for me to suggest this kind of idea, but... is this an example of violent video game stuff influencing the killer on the bus? I don't think the mainstream horror movies in the theatres show the kind of thing that happened in this incident.
> It also occured to me that the victim was playing the kind of music that would incite a 'racial' incident. Or, maybe the poor kid just fell asleep with the music on and annoyed the guy to the point that he flipped - BUT - why was the killer carrying such a deadly weapon? For that matter, I just don't see why people have to carry guns or knives [unless they INTEND to use them] but that's another discussion.
> 
> I've said enough here. Whatch think?


I don't know a video game that even simulates the events that happened on the bus.

IMO, sometimes people just flip. We had an incident here in Calgary a few months back. Normal family guy is good one day, the next day he calls his parents and says he's losing his mind and talking to the devil, the next day his whole family is dead.


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

I just wanna hear his explaination. 
Over here, the recent rash of stabbings have been explained this way...the killer was frustrated or angry at a family member or co worker and all have said...they just wanted to get back at those people by targeting anyone who happened to be close by..."anyone" in all but one of the cases where the perp was a male, were women....so I don`t buy what they`re saying, they are selecting the easiest target and avoiding any possibility of getting the living crap beaten out of em by targeting men...but I have to add, I doubt any of the natives would raise a finger to help any stranger.
A story going around here recently was the case on a train where a guy had a tiny camera on the end of his shoe and had his leg stretched in an un-natural way tring to get some upskirt pics of a woman who didn`t know what was happening. Just so happens she was standing directly on fron of a foreigner who noticed how the guy was standing, saw the camera and stood up and grabbed the guy...a scuffle ensued but the foreigner was the brother of a TV personality from Africa named Bobby...but the best part is, the brother involved in the scuffle is a trained K-1 fighter, and he told the guy, you can relax or this is gonna get ugly...he selected the latter and was arrested...but theres a really dark side to the culture here that does not get reported overseas...they NEVER miss an opportunity to report on crimes when a non native is the suspect however.
How would I have reacted in the bus? Don`t know but I do keep a small baseball bat in my bag, you`ve probaly seen em, they`re replicas of the real ones about 18" long, I`ve been carrying it around for years, sure it`s small but I think it would break an arm, if not break it, certainly inflict enough pain for an attacker to drop the weapon...blades are still the weapons of choice in Japan.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

As our population increases even a low percentage of criminals and nutbars starts to become a significant number. 1% of 10 is only one. 1% of 40 million is a lot more!

One of the choices we made as a society was to hand over pretty well all of our personal defense to the police and government. Guns and weapons were for the most part taken out of the hands of the ordinary citizen. We got rid of duels and personal vendettas. If you were robbed you went to the police. You didn't try to handle it yourself.

On a group basis this works reasonably well. We can argue about whether or not the police and courts do a good job but that doesn't change my basic point. The "system" has far more power and resources to handle crime and violence than we do as individuals.

Who among us has their own CSI lab?

Still, all this didn't come for free. The other part of the equation is that NOTHING in the system can help you PERSONALLY if attacked! There's no time to call a cop. Forensics are done on dead people.

When someone goes nuts and starts shooting up a school the police will eventually stop him but a lot of people will be hurt or killed before they can do that.

Years ago this was only common sense! No one EXPECTED police to do the impossible! Everyone knew that you had to protect yourself, particularly if you frequented the more dodgy parts of town.

So people often carried items of personal defense, not always firearms but knives, saps or whatever. We also seemed to be more physically self-reliant. If someone accosted you and your lady friend in an alley you might bust his nose!

Today there's a perception that the robber might sue you...and win!

We are schooled against violence and that makes us less capable as individuals of opposing it.

I think that part of the reason that people will walk by or ignore someone in distress is that we have been conditioned to expect that "the authorities will look after it! We ordinary folk might screw things up! Leave it for those who are qualified and certified!"

I threw that last point in because one of the things that both amazes and frustrates me today is that we seem to have courses and certificates for EVERYTHING, especially for things that we once considered simple common knowledge. I have a farmer friend who was both shocked and amused to discover that he was expected to take a 6 week course and get a certificate to be allowed to cut down dead trees on his farm. Even more ridiculous, if he wanted to sell a few cords to a neighbour that was a different 6 week course and certificate!

The attitude today seems to be that you need a certificate to be qualified to wipe your butt. Moreover, if you don't have a certificate you can't possibly know how to do it.

I'm not saying that we should go back a hundred years. Only that we've made a tradeoff with our own personal ability to defend ourselves. You could make an argument that when you look at the numbers it's been a good trade. As a society we're safer. It's just that as individuals sometimes we're not. We're playing a lottery. The odds are low that we will be attacked. Still, it's the kind of lottery where if you win...you lose!

A bus load of Texans with handguns might not have been able to save that poor young man but it's guaranteed there would never be any more victims from that assailant, either on that bus or anywhere else in the future.

I am NOT calling for everyone to carry a gun! I'm just suggesting that we might have gone too far down a path and that we should return to a more balanced approach.

On the other hand, an army of police on the OUTSIDE of the bus couldn't have done anything to save any victims.

I guess how you feel about such things depends on whether or not you find yourself sitting in such a bus...

:food-smiley-004:


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> As our population increases even a low percentage of criminals and nutbars starts to become a significant number. 1% of 10 is only one. 1% of 40 million is a lot more!
> 
> One of the choices we made as a society was to hand over pretty well all of our personal defense to the police and government. Guns and weapons were for the most part taken out of the hands of the ordinary citizen. We got rid of duels and personal vendettas. If you were robbed you went to the police. You didn't try to handle it yourself.
> 
> ...



The "busload of Texans" would have likely shot several of the other passengers in their efforts to exact "justice", not to mention the probability that the assailant himself would have been more likely to have a gun, making it more likely that there would have been multiple victims.

The Archie Bunker solution to terrorists and so on (arm ALL the passengers) is meant to be a joke.

Personally, and this is just my opinion, I would much rather be on a bus with one guy carrying a big knife than on one with seven or eight carrying guns.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

Milkman said:


> The "busload of Texans" would have likely shot several of the other passengers in their efforts to exact "justice", not to mention the probability that the assailant himself would have been more likely to have a gun, making it more likely that there would have been multiple victims.
> 
> The Archie Bunker solution to terrorists and so on (arm ALL the passengers) is meant to be a joke.
> 
> Personally, and this is just my opinion, I would much rather be on a bus with one guy carrying a big knife than on one with seven or eight carrying guns.


Well, if you would feel safer who am I to tell you different?

Speaking for myself, I would like to examine the situation a bit deeper. Seven or eight sane guys with guns would not bother me at all, assuming they were ordinary folks and not robbers. One nutbar with a knife would bother me a LOT!

Your argument suggests that folks with guns are somehow more likely to be violent than folks with knives. Me, I'm more worried about the intent than the tool.

I think you're making a common assumption here, as well. There's no reason to expect EVERYONE to be armed! As a deterrence, it's enough that some would be and that a criminal or a nutbar would not be able to tell who's who. Criminals pick easy targets. I never heard of one that was honourable enough to look for someone who could give him even an equal match.

However, as I said my point is not that we should all have bandoliers of shotgun shells across our chests when we go out in public. I'm simply saying that we should be more conscious of the fact that police can't protect us from sudden and immediate danger and that we are loopy if we expect that they can. We should all think more about our own defense and at least try to recognize dangerous situations and avoid them. Maybe we usually can't do much but if it saves your ass even once...


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> Well, if you would feel safer who am I to tell you different?
> 
> Speaking for myself, I would like to examine the situation a bit deeper. Seven or eight sane guys with guns would not bother me at all, assuming they were ordinary folks and not robbers. One nutbar with a knife would bother me a LOT!
> 
> ...


Seven or eight "sane" guys? Ordinary folks? Do you mean like the Texan who shot and killed the two guys robbing his neighbors house? He was "ordinary folks" by many people's definitions.

Lots of people would call him sane. I wouldn't and that's part of the problem. Seven or eight trigger happy ******** on a bus and who knows' who's going to end up shot?

And what if guns WERE more prevalent in our society? What if the killer had had a glock instead of a knife? He might have shot six or seven before any of the other gun toting passengers had been able to pull theirs and start shooting. Yes I'm fully in favour of people being prepared to defend themselves, but adding handguns to the mix will only escalate the damage in most cases.

Just my opinion of course.


----------



## Lemmy Hangslong (May 11, 2006)

It's a tough situation to be in for sure... one never really knows how they will react... the way I see it is... likely the victim could not have been saved but his body might have been spared the indignities it suffered and he may have been able to return to his family for a last goodbye that would be hard but not so tough as it will be now.

I'm not sure if the family of the victim will be able to see him or not but I'm sure that getting murdered is bad enough... getting butchered will only add to the unbearable nature of loosing a loved one.

Myself... and I don't wanna sound like a hero cuz like I said you never know how you will react... you may have your children with you and their safety would be paramount... however there must have been something to hurl at the guy... he had a knife... not a gun so maybe a fire extinguisher to the head would have been a good solution... then there is the angry mob approach... sure someone may get hurt or even killed but what if this guy had something else up his sleeve like a gun and was planning on making life for everyone there a living hell.

Not sure I'm sleeping well at night yet... running scared, cowards, however you say it the result is the same... the victim recieved no support.

Craig


----------



## noobcake (Mar 8, 2006)

Actually Wild Bill 1% of 10 is 0.1


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Milkman said:


> The "busload of Texans" would have likely shot several of the other passengers in their efforts to exact "justice",


If you're not one of the one's carrying a gun, get the hell out of the way.


----------



## Stratocaster (Feb 2, 2006)

noobcake said:


> Actually Wild Bill 1% of 10 is 0.1


Check noobcake bust out the math skills


----------



## sneakypete (Feb 2, 2006)

yeah it`s really hard to say for sure how I`d react if I were confronted with that type of situation, I do think about it though...I mean most people here do these days what with so many cases...and folks are dealing with other problems too...meat and fish wholesalers who import from abroad and relabel products as domestic is a huge one in Japan right now. One well established restaurant in Osaka was busted for recycling food...though I`d wager it`s more common than we think, I worked in restaurants when I was a student... and the steel makers who fudged test results making their product appear stronger than it is, as well as the cement makers who was adding cheaper materials to their product causing it to crumble...the list goes on...what a freakin world eh...still, it`s the only one we got eh.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

noobcake said:


> Actually Wild Bill 1% of 10 is 0.1


largetongue Man, I really should post msgs AFTER coffee!:smile:

Still, it just emphasizes my point even more.

BTW Milkman, if you read what I said I don't believe I was saying that EVERYONE carrying guns was the solution!

No disrespect, but sometimes I wonder if we're all speaking English here.

Oh well, c'est la guerre....

:food-smiley-004:


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> largetongue Man, I really should post msgs AFTER coffee!:smile:
> 
> Still, it just emphasizes my point even more.
> 
> ...


I understood you clearly Bill. All or most? The point remains, more guns = higher probability of additional casualties and injuries IMO.

I think my English is above average.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> If you're not one of the one's carrying a gun, get the hell out of the way.


Out of the way? In a bus full of gun toting average guys, there's no such thing as out of the way.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

Milkman said:


> I understood you clearly Bill. All or most? The point remains, more guns = higher probability of additional casualties and injuries IMO.
> 
> I think my English is above average.


"I am NOT calling for everyone to carry a gun! I'm just suggesting that we might have gone too far down a path and that we should return to a more balanced approach."

"However, as I said my point is not that we should all have bandoliers of shotgun shells across our chests when we go out in public. I'm simply saying that we should be more conscious of the fact that police can't protect us from sudden and immediate danger and that we are loopy if we expect that they can. We should all think more about our own defense and at least try to recognize dangerous situations and avoid them. Maybe we usually can't do much but if it saves your ass even once..."


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> "I am NOT calling for everyone to carry a gun! I'm just suggesting that we might have gone too far down a path and that we should return to a more balanced approach."
> 
> "However, as I said my point is not that we should all have bandoliers of shotgun shells across our chests when we go out in public. I'm simply saying that we should be more conscious of the fact that police can't protect us from sudden and immediate danger and that we are loopy if we expect that they can. We should all think more about our own defense and at least try to recognize dangerous situations and avoid them. Maybe we usually can't do much but if it saves your ass even once..."


Yup, and right before that you said 

"A bus load of Texans with handguns might not have been able to save that poor young man but it's guaranteed there would never be any more victims from that assailant, either on that bus or anywhere else in the future."


and in other posts there are other comments which also indicate that you are in favour (or should that be favor?) of a more American environemt when it comes to handguns and how we as Canadians see them.

No problem, I dislike hand guns and would prefer to see them all but eliminated. I certainly don't want their acceptance and popularity to increase.


At least we do agree on one thing (I think). One way or another, this guy, whatever folks choose to cal him, should never, ever, be allowed to walk freely among the rest of us again.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Out of the way? In a bus full of gun toting average guys, there's no such thing as out of the way.



It was just a joke, but I gaurantee if I see a gun come out while on the bus I will find out of the way might quick.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> It was just a joke, but I gaurantee if I see a gun come out while on the bus I will find out of the way might quick.


Perhaps, but you might have to pull a George Costanza (trample some women and children) to do so.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Yup, and right before that you said
> 
> 
> and in other posts there are other comments which also indicate that you are in favour (or should that be favor?) of a more American environemt when it comes to handguns and how we as Canadians see them.


Some would favor the Canadian environment for guns would be to outlaw guns so only outlaws would have them.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Perhaps, but you might have to pull a George Costanza (trample some women and children) to do so.


I was merely pushing them to the ground for their safety.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> I was merely pushing them to the ground for their safety.


LOL, SOMEbody has to be a leader!


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> Some would favor the Canadian environment for guns would be to outlaw guns so only outlaws would have them.


That's certainly one way to look at it. Even with that rather "NRA" perspective, I'd rather have only the bad guys (and of course the cops) armed. I'm one of those loony lefties who believes that having a gun in my home is more likely to get me or someone I care about shot.

There's also the reality that MANY handguns are regularly stolen during break ins in the USA.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Milkman said:


> That's certainly one way to look at it. Even with that rather "NRA" perspective, I'd rather have only the bad guys (and of course the cops) armed. I'm one of those loony lefties who believes that having a gun in my home is more likely to get me or someone I care about shot.


I can't say I totally disagree with you. For those very reasons I don't own or allow guns in my home. Although one nagging fear I always have is "home invasions." My thought is that if guns were totally banned, home invasions would rapidly increase as criminals could be certain that they would not encounter firearm resistance. The way it is now, I don't have a gun in the home but the criminals don't know that. I'd like to think that discourages at least some criminals who might otherwise take up a career in home invasions.
Its nice to think that if it were only criminals and cops that had guns it would just be them duking it out. But the reality is that unless you live around the corner from a doughnut shop, there usually isn't a cop when you need them.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Paul said:


> In the book "Freakonomics" the author makes the point that far more children die in backyrad pool drownings than from home shootings. Which house would you not want your child to visit? The one with the pool, or the one with a firearm????
> 
> I don't disagree with you, in that the designed purpose of a handgun is portable deadly force, but we do have to consider the biggest threats, not necessarily the biggest headlines.


I also don't have a pool.

Parents who leave kids unattended or who don't adequately secure pools are of course a different subject altogether unless of course a robber breaks into your home and falls into the pool.

You're also more likely to be hit by a bus than to be bitten by a shark, but I'm still not inclined to swim off the coast of Australia.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> I can't say I totally disagree with you. For those very reasons I don't own or allow guns in my home. Although one nagging fear I always have is "home invasions." My thought is that if guns were totally banned, home invasions would rapidly increase as criminals could be certain that they would not encounter firearm resistance. The way it is now, I don't have a gun in the home but the criminals don't know that. I'd like to think that discourages at least some criminals who might otherwise take up a career in home invasions.
> Its nice to think that if it were only criminals and cops that had guns it would just be them duking it out. But the reality is that unless you live around the corner from a doughnut shop, there usually isn't a cop when you need them.



Well I guess if someone invades my home and is armed with a gun, I'll be inclined to let them take what they want. I'm sure I would not want to shoot someone over some possessions anyway.

I would say (and this isn't based on any research) that the vast majority of home invasions are robbery related as opposed to psychos who want to hurt people.

I just think the risks of having a handgun outweigh the benefits but a long shot (sic).


----------



## nitehawk55 (Sep 19, 2007)

Firearm in the house is not an issue if you know how to properly handle and it is stored as it should be , this includes long guns as well as hand guns . 

My wife was deathly afraid of hand guns as a lot of people are but after she finally got involved with learning about guns , taking a safety course with our local club she enjoys target shooting as much as my sons and I do . :smilie_flagge17:


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

nitehawk55 said:


> Firearm in the house is not an issue if you know how to properly handle and it is stored as it should be , this includes long guns as well as hand guns .
> 
> My wife was deathly afraid of hand guns as a lot of people are but after she finally got involved with learning about guns , taking a safety course with our local club she enjoys target shooting as much as my sons and I do . :smilie_flagge17:


And if the hand gun is properly triggerlocked and the amo is secured elsewhere, how helpful would it be in the case of a home invasion?

The reality is that in order for a hand gun to be of any use as home defense it has to be loaded and close at hand.

Same goes for long guns.

I've taken hunter safety courses and at one point had a firearms acquisition cert, but I've never owned a gun and don't really want one.

For what it's worth, I'm not afraid of guns. I just don't klike them.


----------



## Wild Bill (May 3, 2006)

Paul said:


> In the book "Freakonomics" the author makes the point that far more children die in backyrad pool drownings than from home shootings. Which house would you not want your child to visit? The one with the pool, or the one with a firearm????
> 
> I don't disagree with you, in that the designed purpose of a handgun is portable deadly force, but we do have to consider the biggest threats, not necessarily the biggest headlines.


You know, a handgun is not the only option. What about taking a self-defence course? Or carrying some Mace? What about a simple baseball bat by the bed?

A middle-aged person with a cane or staff can be a formidable opponent if they've had some training.

Or even a big dog? My mutt is large enough to be intimidating, until she got close enough to slobber on you.largetongue

I agree a handgun can be a great equalizer if you're aged or infirm but for most of us it doesn't have to be your first option.

A taser might have some risks but to be honest, if someone provokes an innocent or a cop into using a taser I don't have much sympathy for the consequences.

Mind you, six cops jumping on a guy, ALL of them giving multiple taser shots is a different story. We really shouldn't hire such ignorant idiots for our police.

:food-smiley-004:


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Wild Bill said:


> You know, a handgun is not the only option. What about taking a self-defence course? Or carrying some Mace? What about a simple baseball bat by the bed?
> 
> A middle-aged person with a cane or staff can be a formidable opponent if they've had some training.
> 
> ...



All true in my opinion.

I don't keep anything around specifially to use as a weapon, but there are plenty of items at hand in any home that will suffice.

Self defense training is a great idea. My oldest daughter, my son and I are all trained to one extent or another in Judo (and first aid).


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

Milkman said:


> Well I guess if someone invades my home and is armed with a gun, I'll be inclined to let them take what they want. I'm sure I would not want to shoot someone over some possessions anyway...


Not trying to be critical o anything, so don't take this as a stab.

I find it interesting that you would jump in to get a maniac off of a dead stranger and then choose not to defend your family against a home invasion. 

I'm the exact opposite, I can't help a dead stranger but I would not only kill anyone that attempted a home invasion on my house, I would torture them for an hour or so before I killed them and then called the cops.

Letting home invaders off only means that they live another day to terrorize or kill someone else, like the old lady down the road.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Hamm Guitars said:


> Not trying to be critical o anything, so don't take this as a stab.
> 
> I find it interesting that you would jump in to get a maniac off of a dead stranger and then choose not to defend your family against a home invasion.
> 
> ...


I think you're missing a key element in my point of view. I would throw myself in front of a train to save any member of my family, but I would not do so to save any material posession.

There's a difference betwen saving someone's life and shooting someone who is trying to steal your DVD player.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Milkman said:


> I think you're missing a key element in my point of view. I would throw myself in front of a train to save any member of my family, but I would not do so to save any material posession.


You've got assume much more is at stake in a home invasion than material possesions. Statistically they often result in brutal violence and death. It takes a certain type of dangerous criminal that carry out these types of crimes. 
I'm with Hamm on this one.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> You've got assume much more is at stake in a home invasion than material possesions. Statistically they often result in brutal violence and death. It takes a certain type of dangerous criminal that carry out these types of crimes.
> I'm with Hamm on this one.


Did I not just say I would throw myself in front of a train...et cetera?

What that means is that I would use whatever force I had to if I thought my loved ones were going to come to harm. I would NOT however try to kill someone over a theft.

Assuming is a good way to....well you know how the saying goes.


or are you in favour of a shoot first, ask questions later approach?


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Did I not just say I would throw myself in front of a train...et cetera?
> 
> What that means is that I would use whatever force I had to if I thought my loved ones were going to come to harm. I would NOT however try to kill someone over a theft.
> 
> ...



I hear what your saying. But what are you going to do when a supposed theft starts to look very much like a potentially deadly situation. Don a superman cape and go in to action? I would condone shoot first and ask questions later in certain situations. A home invasion would be one of them. Unfortunately for me I don't (and won't) own a gun if the situation ever occurs. But I won't fault those that do.
I have a couple of Tele's and if I can get to them in a situation they can prove pretty deadly.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> I hear what your saying. But what are you going to do when a supposed theft starts to look very much like a potentially deadly situation. Don a superman cape and go in to action? I would condone shoot first and ask questions later in certain situations. A home invasion would be one of them. Unfortunately for me I don't (and won't) own a gun if the situation ever occurs. But I won't fault those that do.
> I have a couple of Tele's and if I can get to them in a situation they can prove pretty deadly.


Well I think we agree more than we disagree in this case. I'm not opposed AT ALL to smacking some piece of crap in the head with whatever I can lay my hands on if he harms a hair on the head of anyone in my family.

I choose not to live my life in fear and I value human life above material things.

That's me. I don't see that changing soon.


----------



## fraser (Feb 24, 2007)

had i been there., i wouldve shot the guy and then spent months in jail suffering for it, but hey-
there is only one right and one wrong- life is hard, but its not rocket science:smile:


----------



## Big White Tele (Feb 10, 2007)

Milkman said:


> I wasn't there, but I'm struggling with the fact that nobody jumped him. I guess you never know how you're going to react in a situation like that, but I have stepped in and pulled a knife from someone's hand when they were waving it in someone's face.


Its unfortunate for the young fellow that you were not on that bus...


----------



## Stratin2traynor (Sep 27, 2006)

Paul said:


> In the book "*Freakonomics*" the author makes the point that far more children die in backyrad pool drownings than from home shootings. Which house would you not want your child to visit? The one with the pool, or the one with a firearm????
> 
> I don't disagree with you, in that the designed purpose of a handgun is portable deadly force, but we do have to consider the biggest threats, not necessarily the biggest headlines.


LOVED that book. What a great read. Really enjoyed how he busted up the myth of Rudy Giuliani.


----------



## Stratin2traynor (Sep 27, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Well I think we agree more than we disagree in this case. I'm not opposed AT ALL to smacking some piece of crap in the head with whatever I can lay my hands on if he harms a hair on the head of anyone in my family.
> 
> *I choose not to live my life in fear and I value human life above material things.*
> 
> That's me. I don't see that changing soon.


I'm with you on that Milkman. 1000% 

I think that is one of the major problems in our society. The big machine is happily scaring the crap out of everyone which will (in my jaded view) eventually generate some form of revenue for someone somewhere. 

...I was in the middle of writing this long post about the effects of the media coverage on incidents like these. But I find it too frustrating. So I deleted it. This incident was horrible and my condolences go out to the victims. I can't see how the extensive media coverage benefits anyone. It was an anomaly. But if the media keeps up their extensive coverage, they may just spawn some copy cats.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Big White Tele said:


> Its unfortunate for the young fellow that you were not on that bus...


LOL, I doubt anyone could have saved the poor guy, but I don't think anyone on the bus knew that. I'm just surprised that nobody tried to do ANYthing to save him.

Like I've said, I wasn't there, but as others have said, there are heavy objects such as fire extinguishers, heck throw a freaking cell phone at him....ANYthing. While this may not be a popular point of view, really all they did was scramble for the door.


----------



## Greenbacker (Mar 29, 2007)

kous said:


> The neat thing about Greyhound is that you can just board the bus and things went quite smooth. Same as VIA as well (the last time I rode it). I guess they are going to have to install security points now. The sense of safety is gone.


I sure hope they don't! This is what I love about being Canadian. If it were in the US, the whole system might've went crazy. (Terrorism?) I hope we can recognize this as an isolated incident and let things go on as normal. I think it is more probable that I would get stabbed randomly on the street in Toronto than it would be on the bus and I've never had a problem here. If this guy was carrying a massive hunting knife around, I'm pretty sure he was going to kill somebody that day regardless...


----------



## Greenbacker (Mar 29, 2007)

Milkman said:


> Personally, and this is just my opinion, I would much rather be on a bus with one guy carrying a big knife than on one with seven or eight carrying guns.


Well said! This is where I stand too.

No matter how good or bad a person's intent is with a handgun, their aim might be worse!


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

And now we must spend a fortune to first decide if the "accused" is mentally fit to stand trial before we can spend millions on his trial and subsequent life-long incarceration.

I understand that his only words in court were "kill me". We can't do that - and that's another story - but perhaps we should cut our losses and ship him home and let him be a drain on his "birth-country" instead.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

allthumbs56 said:


> And now we must spend a fortune to first decide if the "accused" is mentally fit to stand trial before we can spend millions on his trial and subsequent life-long incarceration.


Not natural life. This is Canada. He'll be paroled in 10 to 15 years. Since he's still fairly young he'll still have a murder or 2 left in him when he gets out.



allthumbs56 said:


> I understand that his only words in court were "kill me". We can't do that - and that's another story - but perhaps we should cut our losses and ship him home and let him be a drain on his "birth-country" instead.


When he arrives in his cell to find all his prison issue belongings its too bad that nice strong rope with a neatly tied noose wasn't sitting there to give him the choice to take his own life.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> When he arrives in his cell to find all his prison issue belongings its too bad that nice strong rope with a neatly tied noose wasn't sitting there to give him the choice to take his own life.


If he'd really wanted to die then he would have just used the knife on himself and an innocent man would still be alive.


----------



## Greenbacker (Mar 29, 2007)

Where was he born?


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Greenbacker said:


> Where was he born?


As best as I can recall from the news he came from China in 2001, is 40, delivers newspapers and has/had a common-law relationship and a child.


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

Greenbacker said:


> Where was he born?


What does that have to do with anything?


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Paul said:


> I'm not so naive that I don't see evil where evil exists, but this case begs for more information before we rush to judgement.


According to reports he repeatedly stabbed a sleeping man 40 - 60 times, dismembered, beheaded, and ATE part of the body, and was found with small body parts in a baggie in his pocket.

What's to judge? Bipolar or depressed, sick or evil - he has forfeited his right to walk among us.


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

Unfortunately my husband found the radio transmissions from the police on the net last weekend and I listened. The police were watching the "defilement" taking place while they were waiting for backup and relaying it to the dispatcher. It was chilling to say the least. I don't think too many people would have had a problem had the police "accidentally" discharged their fire arm in this case.


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

So how should we react to a wolf in the school yard? With vengance, justice or compassion?

I don't think we should cut him any slack because he is sick and twisted - his actions speak for themselves. Why would anyone want to be merciful to someone that does things like that, regardless of if he is ill or not?

Kill him, problem solved. They can find out what is wrong with him at the autopsy.





Paul said:


> The difference is how we react; with vengeance, with justice or with compassion. Mental illness is, (and I've already said this), an incredibly cruel disease. I have no idea if mentall illness is involved here. Jeffery Dahmer was judged sane, so anything is possible.
> 
> Have you ever been in a room with a diagnosed mentally ill person while they are experiencing visual and/or auditory hallucinations? It's an absolutely incredible, mind boggling and terrifying experience. Russel Crowe's performance in "A Beautiful Mind" is almost insulting to the mentally ill. It is not reasonable to assume that a mentally ill person will be able to reason their way through "safe" interpretations of their hallucinations.
> 
> In the meantime, the accused is in custody and presumable no longer a threat to himself or others, and time will tell if he is determined to be a criminal, a patient, or a combination of the two. I suspect the latter.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Hamm Guitars said:


> So how should we react to a wolf in the school yard? With vengance, justice or compassion?
> 
> I don't think we should cut him any slack because he is sick and twisted - his actions speak for themselves. Why would anyone want to be merciful to someone that does things like that, regardless of if he is ill or not?
> 
> Kill him, problem solved. They can find out what is wrong with him at the autopsy.


I have sympathy for those suffering from mental illnesses but I have to agree. It's not worth the risk to EVER allow this guy to walk among us again.

Also I find it hard to accept that some small part of his mind did not know he was committing an evil act.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Hamm Guitars said:


> So how should we react to a wolf in the school yard? With vengance, justice or compassion?
> 
> I don't think we should cut him any slack because he is sick and twisted - his actions speak for themselves. Why would anyone want to be merciful to someone that does things like that, regardless of if he is ill or not?
> 
> Kill him, problem solved. They can find out what is wrong with him at the autopsy.


While I'm not sure about killing him I do agree with the sentiment. It doesn't really matter to me what his motivation was or whether he harms himself. I don't think that anything that approaches "justice" can be done - although perhaps we should leave that question to be answered by the victim's family.

What I care about is the greater good, the safety of me and mine and you and yours. Why did this guy do what he did? I don't care. Can he be rehabilitated? I don't want to take that chance. 

Should he be killed? I don't know - I loved Old Yeller .... but he still needed to be put down.


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

I think the police should have just shot him on the spot., like they would have done if it was a cougar on the bus killing people. You forfiet your rights when you do things like this, regardless of your mental state.

I think if you wanted to be really cruel, and this guy is mentally ill (there is obviously something wrong there), spend the time and cure him so that he can live with the memories and guilt of what he has done.

There is only one way to get rid of deamons like that, and I think it is best for everyone involved.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Paul said:


> Police have used the shoot first approach in the past. It was wrong then, it's wrong now.


Assaulting a woman at a bus stop and dismembering and partially eating an innocent victim on a bus are slightly different IMO.

I wouldn't have shed a tear if the cops had put this guy down, regardless of his mental state, not out of vengence or anger, but simply to stop the guy from dong ANYthing else to the body or to someone else.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Paul said:


> Police have used the shoot first approach in the past. It was wrong then, it's wrong now.


So was it a real hammer or a toy one? Was the woman assaulted or not? Didn't the inquest determine those things as well?


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

Milkman said:


> I wouldn't have shed a tear if the cops had put this guy down, regardless of his mental state, not out of vengence or anger, but simply to stop the guy from dong ANYthing else to the body or to someone else.


According to the timline on on CBC news the attack occurred at 9pm and Li jumped off the bus and was apprehended at 01:30 in the morning. The fact that he was left alone with the body for that period of time is reprehensible. I really do not know how the police could stand by and watch what was taking place. My heart aches for the MacLean family...


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Paul said:


> I know this is very hypothetical...but would YOU put this guy down"?. Would you shed a tear if if was YOU pulling the trigger? I find that there are a lot of folks that are willing to have someone else do the wet work for them.
> 
> I think the police acted incredibly professionally in this case. As disturbing as it is, (and I am in no way trying to diminish the horror of this crime, although I find it odd that we some how "rate" murders), the police knew that there was no longer a threat that justified lethal force on their part. Canada does not have capital punishement, either after a conviction, or at the scene of the crime.


I'm not a policeman. I'm also not a butcher and prefer to have my meat prepared by one as opposed to doing it myself.

A policeman knows when he chooses that profession that he will likely be obliged to use force, maybe deadly force at some point in his career.

I don't question whether the cops in this case followed the law, or protected themselves from the inevitable outcry that some would have brought forth had they shot him.

I'm just saying it would not have been a bad thing if the killer had not survived the encounter.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Starbuck said:


> According to the timline on on CBC news the attack occurred at 9pm and Li jumped off the bus and was apprehended at 01:30 in the morning. The fact that he was left alone with the body for that period of time is reprehensible. I really do not know how the police could stand by and watch what was taking place. My heart aches for the MacLean family...


Yup. Regardless of the killers "disease" or mental state, one thing is clear. His victim was not responsible for what happened to him and neither was the victim's family.

The closed casket funeral (possibly cremation) supports this perspective IMO.


----------



## Hamm Guitars (Jan 12, 2007)

Paul said:


> Police have used the shoot first approach in the past. It was wrong then, it's wrong now.


Yes, the cops should work on their shooting skills (only landed three out of six shots).

what about this one:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2004/08/27/hostagegun_040827.html

I think if you take a hostage or attempt kill a complete stranger, you've crossed a line. I think if these people were shot on site we would have less violent crime and far less offenders that re-commit.

I think you could classify anyone that attacks or kills complete stangers for no good reason as being mentally ill.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Paul said:


> The inquest determined as many facts as they could, but the important part of the inquest was the jury recommendations. Learning how to deal with the mentally ill is an ongoing process. We no longer condone the blanket institutionalization of people determined unfit, (for lack of a better word), but that policy has created the situation where we as a society do not have the immediate right to intervene, (read: forcibly medicate) on the behalf of people who may be unfit to make decisions and act in their own best interest.
> 
> The Edmond Yu inquest jury recommendations are here, on page 9 of 17.
> 
> I don't have the answers, we may never determine the correct answers in dealing with the mentally ill, but I am convinced that patience and compassion will always be part of any answers we try.


I wasn't asking about Yu's mental health at the time or anybody's mental health in general - I was simply asking whether he had already been - or was a threat at the time of the shooting - to me that's extremely important.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Paul said:


> Print your words on a card and keep them with you at all times. They'll keep you out of jury duty.
> 
> Have you ever witnessed an elderly couple where one of them is deep into Alzheimers? People with Alzheimers can be incredibly cruel to the people they loved,and who love them. There is no intent, no deliberate act behind the cruelty. We react in part with compassion because the Alzheimers paitient is a victim of a disease. Perhaps, and we don't know this yet, the accused in the bus killing is also the victim of a disease. That can be a mitigating factor. Mental illness does nothing to excuse or diminish the horror of this crime, but it may help to explain it.
> 
> And until we know for sure, I will NOT be among the folks seeking vengeance.


I can only imagine that Alzheimer's is an agonizingly emotional death to face. One that I would find unbearable. I know its morally wrong to do this but I would probably someone would end my life if I ever had to go through it.
Maybe this guy is so tormented with his demons that he wishes someone would just gun him down. The police had their opportunity to save the tax payers money, insure that this guy never hurt anyone else and possibly do this guy a favor, and they blew it.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Paul said:


> I don't have the answers, we may never determine the correct answers in dealing with the mentally ill, but I am convinced that patience and compassion will always be part of any answers we try.



Patience and compassion should never come before safety. There should be certain actions that a person does that allows the police to act as judge and jury on the spot. I would think that multiple stabbing, leading to decapitation and subsequently eating of the victims flesh should fall under that category. Once a person crosses that type of line I no longer have an interest in finding out why, or determining if there is any chance of rehabilitation. 
Don't get me wrong, I think we should have compassion for the mentally ill and our system needs to address the problems much more efficiently. But once the line is crossed where they are causing devastation like the bus incident they need to be deemed incurable and put down in the quickest most humane way.


----------



## Stratin2traynor (Sep 27, 2006)

Paul said:


> The difference is how we react; with vengeance, with justice or with compassion. Mental illness is, (and I've already said this), an incredibly cruel disease. I have no idea if mentall illness is involved here. Jeffery Dahmer was judged sane, so anything is possible.
> 
> Have you ever been in a room with a diagnosed mentally ill person while they are experiencing visual and/or auditory hallucinations? It's an absolutely incredible, mind boggling and terrifying experience. Russel Crowe's performance in "A Beautiful Mind" is almost insulting to the mentally ill. It is not reasonable to assume that a mentally ill person will be able to reason their way through "safe" interpretations of their hallucinations.
> 
> In the meantime, the accused is in custody and presumable no longer a threat to himself or others, and time will tell if he is determined to be a criminal, a patient, or a combination of the two. I suspect the latter.


Can't agree with you there. Pedophilia is a mental disorder as well and you would have a hard time finding sympathy for that disorder. What about severe mental delusions that cause people to fly planes into buildings? Or leave a briefcase bomb in a busy downtown cafe? Or park an exploding truck in front of a federal building? 

The kicker is that many of these "disorders" can be controlled with the right medication. The trick is finding the right meds and making sure that the affected people take their meds. From what I understand many of the meds that eliminate symptoms also have some side effects that may or may not affect the persons quality of life. Also you run into the "I feel better now so I don't have to take my meds anymore" which eventually leads to an episode of some sort. 

It kinda reminds me of the TV show LOST...when they had to enter the code every 108 minutes. According to the theory, everything would be fine if someone entered the code every 108 minutes but if they didn't "something bad would happen". No one new what but they knew if would be bad. Then one day, someone decides not to enter the code....then booooomm! 

I'm sorry but as much as I have sympathy for those of us with mental disorders (chemical disorders, hormonal imbalances....whatever the case may be) I think we have to draw a line in the sand at some point and say "if that line is crossed then...."

So in keeping with my LOST analogy, if you refuse to enter the code then...say bye bye.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Stratin2traynor said:


> Can't agree with you there. Pedophilia is a mental disorder as well and you would have a hard time finding sympathy for that disorder. What about severe mental delusions that cause people to fly planes into buildings? Or leave a briefcase bomb in a busy downtown cafe? Or park an exploding truck in front of a federal building?
> 
> The kicker is that many of these "disorders" can be controlled with the right medication. The trick is finding the right meds and making sure that the affected people take their meds. From what I understand many of the meds that eliminate symptoms also have some side effects that may or may not affect the persons quality of life. Also you run into the "I feel better now so I don't have to take my meds anymore" which eventually leads to an episode of some sort.
> 
> ...



Consider this.

Who in their right mnd would ever commit murder?

Does this mean that anyone who does so is mentally ill?

That's a pretty broad concept but some mass murderers have been found fit to stand trial and others have not.

Talk among yourselves (or to your other identities).


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Milkman said:


> Consider this.
> 
> Who in their right mnd would ever commit murder?
> 
> Does this mean that anyone who does so is mentally ill?


Good question.

I'm sure that Paul Bernardo felt justified in what he did. So did Adolf Hitler. Both commited horrific acts. If I could go back in time I'd gladly strangle both in their cribs - screw their meds.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Paul said:


> The columnist known as Miss Manners once spoke to the idea that most crime is a result of Etiquette violations.


If the Oklahoma city bombing was a product of hate, does this mean that you think those involved were sane? Killing more than 140 people is sane?

Tough call.

I think in most cases these people should be put down as long as there's no doubt at all that they actually DID what they're accused of.

With as many eye witnesses as there were on that bus there can be no reasonable doubt this time.


----------



## Milkman (Feb 2, 2006)

Paul said:


> I think it was Stalin who said that one death is murder, a million deaths is foreign policy.
> 
> I'm sure that the medical and legal definitions of "sane" are not quite identical. I don't know that I'd call Timothy McVeigh and/or Terry Nichols insane. I do know that I think religious folks are delusional. Insanity and delusional are not synonomous, but neither are they mutually exclusive.
> 
> ...



Whether or not the homicide was culpable or not is of little consequence to the victim, his family or the next potential victim.

We must protect ourselves as others have said.

I'm not a supporter of the death penalty, simply because I lack confidence in our legal system's ability to conclusively determine guilt or innocence.

I'm thinking in non legal terms here, but there's no doubt that there WAS a homicide and an indignity to the victim's body. If he IS that sick, putting him down would be an act of kindness IMO.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Milkman said:


> I'm not a supporter of the death penalty, simply because I lack confidence in our legal system's ability to conclusively determine guilt or innocence.


I have an equal concern in our system's inability to put them away and keep them there.

Perhaps when there is absolutely no shred of doubt (such as this case, or Paul Bernardo/Karla Holmoka, Manson, Dalmer, etc.) then capital punish might not be such a bad idea. To think that Karla Holmoka is free today because of a weak prosecution or that the Manson Girls are even remotely being considered for release does it for me.


----------



## Stratin2traynor (Sep 27, 2006)

Paul said:


> Pedophilia is tough. I believe we have to protect victims first. But how do you identify _potential_ pedophiles, and what do you do with them???? The Edmond Yu inquest accepted evidence that 1% of the population suffers from some form of paranoid schizophrenia. That means there is a strong probalility that 34 members of the GC forum are suffering, and 1 of them is online right now. Every second full subway car has a mentally ill person on it. *Who is it and what do we do about *it?


Nothing. I wasn't advocating pro actively searching for mentally ill people and doing something about it. I was merely saying that we can't just excuse people for horrific crimes because they have or haven't yet been diagnosed with a mental disorder. 



Paul said:


> *The severe mental delusion that caused people to fly planes into buildings is called religion. * I'm already on record that I have no use for religion, and I side with Richard Dawkins in that raising children to believe in an all-power omnipotent supernatural personal god, when those children are years away from developing the critical thinking skills necessary to come to their own conclusions on the existence or non-existence of god, is a form of child abuse.


Okay. I have a problem with this statement. I'm with you on the rest although I think Dawkins could use a course on "communicating with people so they don't think your a self-aggrandizing pompous ass..." (I only made it through about 1/3 of his book - just couldn't take it anymore). But anyways, my point is that Delusions are listed in the DSM IV TR as mental disorders under Schizophrenia. While I know a lot of people that are devout, none would commit mass murder in the name of...I hope. 



Paul said:


> The Oklahoma City bombing was a product of hate. But how quickly was the gut reaction the perpetrators were mid-east terrorists? The gut reaction was wrong, as it often is.


I firmly believe the gut reaction was caused by what most people perceive to be recent history and what people see on TV. CNN talks about people in the middle east strapping grenades to themselves and walking into public places, or car bombs....when it happens at home then it must be the same thing. 



Paul said:


> The briefcase bomb in a cafe.....I can't think of a the specific example you are referring too, but terror attacks are the weapon of evil people with a sense of dis-enfranchisement fueled by religious or political delusions.


I wasn't referring to one specific incident...there have been too many. But the rest of your statement pretty much adds up to = crazy people (to put it crudely). 

No matter what a person's motivation is when they commit an atrocity, their actions fall outside of what is generally considered normal behavior. I just don't think that we should try to make excuses for it. 



Paul said:


> I've had the sad experience to witness this first hand. I have friends and relatives that live this almost daily. It is something I wouldn't wish on anyone.


I'm sorry to hear that. It hits very close to home for me as well.



Paul said:


> I've never watched Lost, so I'm no good to you here.


Shame on you!!!! Get a PVR and tune in. I rarely watch TV, but this is one show I never miss.



Paul said:


> Let's just hope we somehow make sure that everybody always knows what the code is, and where and when to enter it.....


That's what doctors are for.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Paul said:


> The prosecution/investigators screwed up. I wish there was a way they could be held professionally liable for that. The fact that the Crown honored that agreement is something I do respect.


And we have to disagree there - she shouldn't be walking the streets. I don't care who screwed up or who honoured what deal - this is not some lost business deal or a game - it's real .... and she is most definitely very dangerous.

For me, I would have respected the Crown if they'd said "In light of this new evidence we renege on our deal - sue us".

It would have been the right thing to do.


----------



## Stratin2traynor (Sep 27, 2006)

allthumbs56 said:


> And we have to disagree there - she shouldn't be walking the streets. I don't care who screwed up or who honoured what deal - this is not some lost business deal or a game - it's real .... and she is most definitely very dangerous.
> 
> For me, I would have respected the Crown if they'd said "In light of this new evidence we renege on our deal - sue us".
> 
> It would have been the right thing to do.


I second that motion (sound of huge gavel slamming against an old oak bench top). I think public safety is paramount.


----------



## bscott (Mar 3, 2008)

PeTA has hijacked this random horrific story for their own agenda and publicity. I did not have much repsect or consideration for them before but now I have absolutely none. How low can you go??! Just ask PeTA they will go to any lengths. Despicable.

Brian


----------



## Starbuck (Jun 15, 2007)

bscott said:


> PeTA has hijacked this random horrific story for their own agenda and publicity. I did not have much repsect or consideration for them before but now I have absolutely none. How low can you go??! Just ask PeTA they will go to any lengths. Despicable.
> 
> Brian


Yeah I saw that yesterday and it's too vile for words, but also you have to question the ethics of the newspaper that would print that ad?


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

Paul said:


> If the Crown reneged on the deal, they would NEVER be able to make a deal with any accused again. The Crown aren't the investigative branch, the police are. The police who excectued the search warrants were the ones who didn't find the hidden tapes. The Crown made the deal with the evidence they had at the time. Hindsight is 20/20, but at least the Crown honoured their word. That is worth something to me.
> 
> YMMV.


I agree. Sometimes you have to make a deal with the devil for the overall good of putting away the worst offender in a case. However I feel the Homolka case was a screw up from the beginning. They could have gotten Paul Bernardo without Karla's help. Its a shame because she should be rotting away in jail for the rest of her life along with Bernardo. But due to gross negligence in this case she walks among us. Its a tough call to determine whether prosecutors should be held liable in this case.


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

guitarman2 said:


> I agree. Sometimes you have to make a deal with the devil for the overall good of putting away the worst offender in a case. However I feel the Homolka case was a screw up from the beginning. They could have gotten Paul Bernardo without Karla's help. Its a shame because she should be rotting away in jail for the rest of her life along with Bernardo. But due to gross negligence in this case she walks among us. Its a tough call to determine whether prosecutors should be held liable in this case.


I don't have a problem with holding incompetence liable BUT I still think that she shouldn't have walked - no way - no how. This is not about punishment - it's about protection and I am sure that she is not done yet.

For the record, I live three doors down from her parent's house - 200 feet from the basement where she gave Paul Bernardo her younger sister as a Christmas present.


----------



## guitarman2 (Aug 25, 2006)

allthumbs56 said:


> I don't have a problem with holding incompetence liable BUT I still think that she shouldn't have walked - no way - no how. This is not about punishment - it's about protection and I am sure that she is not done yet.
> 
> For the record, I live three doors down from her parent's house - 200 feet from the basement where she gave Paul Bernardo her younger sister as a Christmas present.


I will hold to the notion that I would not want the integrity of the whole deal making process compromised to endanger future possible deals that need to be made for the over all good. I also would not judge an individual to take it upon them sales to balance the scales of justice through vigilante justice for Karla.


----------



## soundhound6 (Jun 30, 2008)

*Bus horror*



bscott said:


> PeTA has hijacked this random horrific story for their own agenda and publicity. I did not have much repsect or consideration for them before but now I have absolutely none. How low can you go??! Just ask PeTA they will go to any lengths. Despicable.
> 
> Brian


Not only Peta...yesturday I heard in the Wpg sun that there is an american
"baptist church group" is going to try and "picket the funeral". HUH!! 
They're declaring that "god is punishing canada" for allowing homosexuality to be legal.To quote their spokesjerk.."We're trying to get you to see that your rebellion against the standards of god,your disobedience to the commandments - your idols,your false gods,your filthy ways have brought wrath upon your head." Am I missing someting here? What has some american baptist group that doesn't agree with homosexuality got to do with a deranged man murdering
and mutilating another human being !?
In my book a truly religious person would be out helping in a positve "godly"
way, not running around desparate for attention and forcing themslves on others.They sound more like a group of hate mongering suprematists!
Good news is that they were denied entry at the border. :smilie_flagge17:
Apparently that Li guy wanted the police "to kill me", because his girlfriend
broke up with him. My guess is that he thought his horrific actions would result in a flurry of bullets.I say deport him to his old country and let him stew in his own juices for the rest of his natural life.
Ah well...there greater minds than mine out there, so who am I to say?
Jan


----------



## allthumbs56 (Jul 24, 2006)

Paul said:


> Holy six degrees of separation Batman!!! My highschool musice teacher had Bernardo in the first class in which she was a student teacher. A girl I went to grade school with was a bridesmaid at the Bernardo/Homolka wedding.


I'd much rather have Kevin Bacon as a neighbour. 

I see Karla's mom every day. Her dad pretty much stays inside. Karla is a girl who to this day does not comprehend what she has done - does not accept tha she has done anything wrong. She can talk on one hand about how her and Kristen used to have fun doing each other's hair, and then how they had to kill her because they had to go out for Thanksgivng Dinner ............ and now she's a mother herself.

And you talk to me of integrity and honour like it means something to these people.

No deals, all bets are off. Where's Charles Bronson when you need him.


----------



## zontar (Oct 25, 2007)

Paul said:


> Here is the picket schedule of yet another religious group for which I have no use:
> 
> Picket schedule
> 
> This group of self described Xtians also picket the funerals of American soldiers killed overseas. Apparently local chapters of bike gangs have been quite active in creating a shield between the funeral party and the $%&*#(!!! lunatics of Westboro Baptist Church.


That's the same group.
Do not confuse them with real Christians.

They're deluded at best.

They take their misunderstanding of a verse or two and extrapolate that to a ridiculous extreme. then they use that as an excuse to act like idiots, and then feel persecuted when nobody likes them. This is about a persecution complex. There are people with that of all stripes. Peta is not that different. Although they also remind me of the child that does whatever it takes to get attention--negative attention is fine.

But at the roots, Peta & Westboro are not that different.


----------



## noobcake (Mar 8, 2006)

zontar said:


> That's the same group.
> Do not confuse them with real Christians.
> 
> They're deluded at best.
> ...


Agreed 10000000%


----------

