# Greyhound bus killer avoids jail time



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Vincent Li found not criminally responsible Unbelievable!!!!!  XX)  beejacon


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

Justice Canadian style strikes again.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

AHHHH MAZING! People are no longer held criminally responsible for their actions anymore - because they've experienced a moment of insanity....Who hasn't done that at one time or another? 

At any given moment, somebody next to you - on the bus, in a bank teller line-up, in the grocery store, driving down your neighborhood street, having dinner in a restaurant, etc etc...could experience a moment of insanity and take you out, and they won't be held criminally responsible. ...I can't dwell on it though - unless I want to become a paranoid shut-in. 

Here's a question...If a person is aware of their own mental illness and they choose not to treat it, then could they be held criminally responsible?


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

Why is it Canadian style, SINC? Is this sort of thing unique to Canada? 



> Li was hearing voices in his head -- which he believed came from God -- telling him to eliminate "the force of evil" by attacking the sleeping Mr. McLean, psychiatrists said.
> 
> Li stabbed the carnival worker to death, then beheaded and cannibalized the body.


Does this sound like something a sane person would do? Seems like a pretty silly thing to do for sh!ts n' giggles.

Regardless, if he is exploiting mental illness to avoid jail time there is a good chance he will be found out once he is fully diagnosed.


----------



## Lichen Software (Jul 23, 2004)

*Not quite that easy*



SINC said:


> Justice Canadian style strikes again.


From the point of view of "Easy Justice":

If you go in on a murder charge, you are guaranteed a chance at parole. Going into an institution for the criminally insane on the other hand has no guarantee of any chance of getting out.

Think of it as the original dangerous offender charge. We keep you until you are no longer dangerous.

From the point of view of how it was dealt with, if ever there was a cut a dry case of insanity and lack of responsibility for actions performed, this is probably it.

I don't think you will see this fellow out on the street any time soon.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

Lichen Software said:


> From the point of view of "Easy Justice":
> 
> If you go in on a murder charge, you are guaranteed a chance at parole. Going into an institution for the criminally insane on the other hand has no guarantee of any chance of getting out.


But the fact that he may be released is disturbing. Can you ever be "cured" after having knifed and decapitated someone? I'd wager that most Canadians would hope not.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

So does this mean that if you want to kill someone, eat part of the victim so you can go to a mental institution and recover?

Seriously, we need to have a plea called "Guilty and Insane" so that insane murderers can got to a prison built to treat their insanity.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MannyP Design said:


> Why is it Canadian style, SINC? Is this sort of thing unique to Canada?


Sure it's unique to Canada. Try China for example and see how they deal with it. 

The comment was directed at the Canadian justice system in general. Where else for example, does a life sentence for murder mean you can get out in 15 or 25 years? We're pussies when it comes punishing offenders. We're the original "slap on the wrist" justice system. Justice by wimpy judge and not the people.


----------



## chasMac (Jul 29, 2008)

Macfury said:


> So does this mean that if you want to kill someone, eat part of the victim so you can go to a mental institution and recover?
> 
> Seriously, we need to have a plea called "Guilty and Insane" so that insane murderers can got to a prison built to treat their insanity.


That is actually a very sound call. We need a Juniper Hill or an Arkham.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

KC4 said:


> AHHHH MAZING! People are no longer held criminally responsible for their actions anymore - because they've experienced a moment of insanity....Who hasn't done that at one time or another?
> 
> At any given moment, somebody next to you - on the bus, in a bank teller line-up, in the grocery store, driving down your neighborhood street, having dinner in a restaurant, etc etc...could experience a moment of insanity and take you out, and they won't be held criminally responsible. ...I can't dwell on it though - unless I want to become a paranoid shut-in.
> 
> Here's a question...If a person is aware of their own mental illness and they choose not to treat it, then could they be held criminally responsible?


Here's a question...If a person is aware of their own mental illness, *seeks treatment*, but still commits a criminal act could they be held criminally responsible?

I don't think that should enter the equation. A lot of drugs used for treating people have been linked to causing serious depression, suicide, and acts of violence towards others. The treatment could make matters worse for some.

I think at this point the biggest question is "short of being sent free, does it really matter what happens to this guy?" If he's as deranged as he's made out to be then a guilty verdict and jail would only serve as a symbolic gesture for the family - unless they hope he goes the way of a Jeffrey Dahmer and gets some prison justice. As for Vincent Li, jail might be pretty good for a guy who supposedly has a messed-up mind - daily routine, 3 square meals a day and various other forms of entertainment. If he can't comprehend murder I doubt he could feel punished by being put in a cell (likely solitary confinement). The psychiatric facility is likely just as good in this case - get him to understand what he did then he can truly suffer the anguish once he understands the reality of his actions. Otherwise, it's all pointless IMO.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Sometimes every justice system loses track of at least one primary function. In this case the primary function would be to segregate this individual from the general population, in order to insure this does not happen again. If mental illness precludes jail, then a short stay in a mental institution, followed up with; "Who cares about your meds go out there and do it again!" just doesn't cut it. 

Somehow this individual needs to be put away for the safety of others. Any psycho that turns him loose must be held personally responsible for any act(s) of violence this individual commits after that release.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

Something to think about regarding our justice system and it's "weakness"...

It's seems typical of people that live in the most affluent parts of the world that we often complain about our justice system when it fails to meet our idea of justice and the punishment it should hand out, especially when it comes to situations like the Vincent Li case.

In the less affluent countries and even in some of the poorer areas of the affluent nations, I wonder what might have happened had Li committed this crime in the presence of people who live there? Sometimes you see on the news where a criminal has been dealt with by an angry mob who have caught him in the act. It would appear that these people not only demand harsh treatment of criminals they sometimes dish it out, too. Are the consequences of their actions left unpunished - I don't know. Could any of us who demand the tougher stances against crime walk the walk too if the situation presented itself?

Like it or not, I think a country's mode of operation is a reflection of the majority of it's people. Therefore if the justice system is weak, well....


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

SINC said:


> Sure it's unique to Canada. Try China for example and see how they deal with it.
> 
> The comment was directed at the Canadian justice system in general. Where else for example, does a life sentence for murder mean you can get out in 15 or 25 years? We're pussies when it comes punishing offenders. We're the original "slap on the wrist" justice system. Justice by wimpy judge and not the people.


Oh... so that's how it works. We exclude all other countries and contrast our system with China.

Gotcha.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MACenstein'sMonster said:


> Could any of us who demand the tougher stances against crime walk the walk too if the situation presented itself.


Yep in a heart beat in certain situations.



MACenstein'sMonster said:


> Like it or not, I think a country's mode of operation is a reflection of the majority of it's people. Therefore if the justice system is weak, well....


That is pretty much non-senese, it MAY be reflective in the case of a true democracy, but in how many places does that really exist. Even in Canada where around 50% of the people participate in Federal elections, how truly representative of the "majority" (whatever that means in the first place in a country as ethnically, culturally, religoiusly and idoelogically diverse as Canada) are those who we elect to represent us.

The judicial system is more truely a reflection of our past than it is of our present due to the nature of the system being based on precident.


----------



## darkscot (Nov 13, 2003)

MannyP Design said:


> Oh... so that's how it works. We exclude all other countries and contrast our system with China.
> 
> Gotcha.


Nah, I think he's saying he wants to move to China


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

screature said:


> Yep in a heart beat in certain situations.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Voting for party A, B, or C, even if 100% of eligible voters participated, wouldn't necessarily change anything. People getting off their asses and doing more than talking is a better example of a society's strength. For example, the African American people who refused to use the bus system for a year in Alabama after the Rosa Parks incident - *that's an example of "strength"*. I guess not enough of us are really bothered to the point of flexing any other muscle than the ones that hinge our mouth when it comes to our "weak" justice system.

And as far as your claim about taking direct action, always easier said than done. But who knows, maybe you grew up scrapping and having knives flashed in your face. Maybe you'd be as quick to grab a makeshift weapon and charge a guy like Li than turn and flee for your life. Obviously, you'd have been the exception on that Grey Hound bus on that given day. BTW, not judging the people on the bus to be cowards or weak, but I'm thinking the majority of Canadians have a different idea of what "taking action" means in situations like that. Violence isn't a part of a typical Canadian's day, unlike many of those who live in more impoverished regions.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MannyP Design said:


> Oh... so that's how it works. We exclude all other countries and contrast our system with China.
> 
> Gotcha.


Of course not just China. Compare it to any other country you want. Fill your boots. What other countries do does not interest me in the least. 

What does interest me is a justice system that reflects the severity of crime. Ours does not in so many cases and especially now with murderers walking free after 15 or 20 years when they have received a life sentence. Life is life, except in Canada.


----------



## MannyP Design (Jun 8, 2000)

SINC said:


> Of course not just China. Compare it to any other country you want. Fill your boots. What other countries do does not interest me in the least.


Of course. It does nothing but point out the flaw in your silly comment. :lmao:



> What does interest me is a justice system that reflects the severity of crime. Ours does not in so many cases and especially now with murderers walking free after 15 or 20 years when they have received a life sentence. Life is life, except in Canada.


Less than 10 percent of those walk free after 15 years. The rest are still rotting in jail.

Unless, of course, you feel we should bring back the death penalty?


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

MannyP Design said:


> Of course. It does nothing but point out the flaw in your silly comment. :lmao:
> 
> Less than 10 percent of those walk free after 15 years. The rest are still rotting in jail.
> 
> Unless, of course, you feel we should bring back the death penalty?


Why do you insist on picking at me by trying to put words in my mouth? I wrote nothing of the death penalty. And it is well known by anyone on this board that I oppose the death penalty. I've stated so many, many times.

My comment was not silly, it was meant to demonstrate that there are extremes on both sides of the question.

I stand by my original post that we are too lenient on criminals, and murderers specifically.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

It is arguable that any murder is an act of insanity, temporary or otherwise. Insanity should not be an excuse for the act of murder especially such a heinous murder as this where so many were victimized beyond just Tim McLean. Everyone on that bus was victimized and traumatized.

It is a bogus argument to say that Li didn't know what he was doing or as has been said "People who are mentally ill should not be convicted when they don't know what they did was wrong." Do we not convict people routinely because ignorance of the law is no defense? Are people who break laws that they didn't know existed not "convicted when they don't know what they did was wrong"?

Additionally it was documented by police that after Li was apprehended and questioned that, "Police tried to interview Li but he refused to make verbal responses, Dalmyn said. However, he did softly mutter that he was "guilty" at least four times, she said."

Does a man who didn't know what he did was wrong say "Guilty"?

This ruling is a travesty of justice and I for one certainly hope that it is the Tipping Point for judicial reform.


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

All those commenting on "easy justice" obviously have no idea of 
a) the nature of Schizophrenia 
b) the nature of the mental institutions in Canada. 
c) the central values of our justice system

First of all, for sufferers of Schizophrenia, it is extremely hard- if not impossible- to ignore the imaginary voices that are generated in their minds. This man did not experience a "temporary moment of insanity", he had schizophrenia for his entire life- I recall reading that he was taking medication for it, but obviously he either forgot to take it or his doctor failed to re-assess him for it. There was a similar case, can't remember the name right now, where a man murdered both his children because god told him that Satan had placed the "Beads of Buddha" in their skulls, and that he had to murder them to prevent Satan from using them to take over the world. Normally, his Schizophrenia was perfectly under control, but his mental patterns had shifted and the medication his doctor had him on became ineffective, and thus he was lead to that. 

Also, it is important to remember that these facilities are not holiday resorts- they are still prisons, however they are designed differently to house people who suffer from these diseases. They are kept in a room for most of the day, constantly monitored by psychiatrists, and when they are taken outside, they are very closely monitored by, sometimes even tethered to, the workers of the institution. I think Mr. Li would most likely deteriorate in a normal prison, and become even more of a threat to workers and his fellow inmates. And for all those worried this man will be released and still be a danger to the public... don't be. He is most likely going to be placed under the supervision of the government's top psychiatrists, and will not be released until they are absolutely certain he poses no danger. That could mean 10 years, it could mean never. I'm thinking it is more likely never- his crimes were absolutely appalling, it is unlikely anyone would want to bear the responsibility of signing a release note. Not only that, if he were released, he would not necessarily be free as a bird- he would still be extensively monitored, probably required to attend weekly checkups or something such as, and he could have a tracked attached to his foot. 

Also, in our justice system, to be convicted a criminal must possess two qualities: _actus reus_ (guilty act- the act of committing a crime) and _mens rea_ (guilty mind- or the free intent to commit a crime). If the defense can prove the absence of mens rea, or criminal intent, then there is no murder charge. For defences such as self-defence or provocation, this usually results in a manslaughter charge. However, for a successful defence of mental illness, this results in a decision of "not criminally responsible". The first example of this was when a fellow with the last name of McNaughten (also suffering from Schizophrenia) shot and killed Robert Peel's secretary in the 1840s. A British court found him "not criminally responsable by reason of insanity".


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

broken_g3 said:


> Also, in our justice system, to be convicted a criminal must possess two qualities: _actus reus_ (guilty act- the act of committing a crime) and _mens rea_ (guilty mind- or the free intent to commit a crime). If the defense can prove the absence of mens rea, or criminal intent, then there is no murder charge. For defences such as self-defence or provocation, this usually results in a manslaughter charge. However, for a successful defence of mental illness, this results in a decision of "not criminally responsible". The first example of this was when a fellow with the last name of McNaughten (also suffering from Schizophrenia) shot and killed Robert Peel's secretary in the 1840s. A British court found him "not criminally responsable by reason of insanity".


Again "he did softly mutter that he was "guilty" at least four times."


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

screature said:


> Again "he did softly mutter that he was "guilty" at least four times."


Yes, however he pleaded "not guilty", and he also begged several times for police officers or court clerks to take his life- another command from the voices. I was reading in another article (may have been Globe & Mail, not sure) that he sat next to Mr. McLean, and initially interpereted him as "friendly", but then received a command from god that he was an "agent of evil" and that he must be destroyed; Mr. Li was "told" that he would die if he did not kill Mr. McLean.

The man is clearly insane. No reasonable individual (another assumption of our justice system: what would a reasonable person do in the same situation?) would just randomly kill a stranger and then move his body parts around a bus to ensure they did not "re-assemble" to come back and kill him. He has a history of Schizophrenia. It's not like the illness was a self-induced stupor brought on by drugs. Had he mutilated this person under the influence of marijuana, I would absolutely agree that he should be sent to prison. But Schizophrenia is different... he can't help it, he didn't decide to have it, and he can't get rid of it. It warped and robbed his mind, and so he could no longer make conscious and self-made decisions.


----------



## Dr.G. (Aug 4, 2001)

Having worked with young people and adults with forms of Schizophrenia, I would have to echo some of broken g3's points. While I was horrified when I first heard of this senseless crime, the more I thought about this crime the more that I realized that this was not the act of a sane person. 

Full disclosure -- if this was my son who was murdered, I cannot in all honesty say that I would not also want a form of revenge in the form of imprisonment for this person. I am able to show a sense of understanding for this act from the protection of the fact that it was the son of another person who was senselessly murdered.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

broken_g3 said:


> Yes, however he pleaded "not guilty", and he also begged several times for police officers or court clerks to take his life- another command from the voices. I was reading in another article (may have been Globe & Mail, not sure) that he sat next to Mr. McLean, and initially interpereted him as "friendly", but then received a command from god that he was an "agent of evil" and that he must be destroyed; Mr. Li was "told" that he would die if he did not kill Mr. McLean.
> 
> The man is clearly insane. No reasonable individual (another assumption of our justice system: what would a reasonable person do in the same situation?) would just randomly kill a stranger and then move his body parts around a bus to ensure they did not "re-assemble" to come back and kill him. He has a history of Schizophrenia. It's not like the illness was a self-induced stupor brought on by drugs. Had he mutilated this person under the influence of marijuana, I would absolutely agree that he should be sent to prison. But Schizophrenia is different... he can't help it, he didn't decide to have it, and he can't get rid of it. It warped and robbed his mind, and so he could no longer make conscious and self-made decisions.


Do you really think he was not instructed to plead not guilty. Of course he is insane, that is not the issue, except for our screwed up judicial system. Again to commit any murder is an act of insanity, just because you have a clinical definition for a particular type of insanity should not nullify the criminality of the act.

Your assumption that he had no choice in the matter is infinitely debatable. How many people suffer from schizophrenia and how many commit these types of acts?


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

screature said:


> Do you really think he was not instructed to plead not guilty. Of course he is insane, that is not the issue, except for our screwed up judicial system. Again to commit any murder is an act of insanity, just because you have a clinical definition for a particular type of insanity should not nullify the criminality of the act.


An act of insanity indeed! When the mafia orders a hit on someone, or when someone murders the owner of a car to make a getaway, there is clearly rational interest involved! They have something to gain, someone to move out of the way of their interests, etc. In the case of Mr. Li, he would gain nothing in the real world by killing Mr. McLean- he was lead to by his condition- he could not control it. THIS is what separates murders from schizophrenics.



screature said:


> Your assumption that he had no choice in the matter is infinitely debatable. How many people suffer from schizophrenia and how many commit these types of acts?


This exudes ignorance of the fact. Schizophrenia has varying degrees, or stages of severity, like any mental disorder. I will use Alzheimer's as a comparison. Assume two people have Alzheimer's. One of them is in the beginning stages, and is beginning to forget where he placed objects, or is beginning to engage in needlessly repetitive acts. Now assume there is someone who cannot recognize their family, who cannot remember how to turn on a television, wash themselves or even walk, and who is completely dependant on help from others. They BOTH have Alzheimer's, but one has moved into a more serious stage of the disease.

Now let's move back to Schizophrenia. I will compare my brother-in-law, who suffers from mild schizophrenia, to Mr. Li. My brother-in-law hears voices in his head, telling him to complete certain actions (such as turning off a computer that someone else is using, or to not pay fare on the streetcar, or to pick flowers out of a private garden), however he tries to ignore them, the condition is minor, and is easily controlled with medication. He HAS Schizophrenia, only the symptoms are minor and almost unnoticeable, he is in a very early stage, and will hopefully not progress. He's not murdering anyone, he's actually working in a software company. Perfectly functional member of society living with Schizophrenia. Mr. Li's symptoms, on the other hand, are extremely dangerous; he is receiving violent commands from voices that he believes is god, he cannot cannot ignore them, he feels threatened by what the voices tell him, and the condition obviously required heavy doses of medication. True, few people who suffer from Schizophrenia will murder someone else, but it is because they are affected to a far lesser degree by the illness.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

broken_g3 said:


> An act of insanity indeed! When the mafia orders a hit on someone, or when someone murders the owner of a car to make a getaway...


It is called sociopathy.



broken_g3 said:


> This exudes ignorance of the fact. Schizophrenia has varying degrees, or stages of severity, like any mental disorder. I will use Alzheimer's as a comparison. Assume two people have Alzheimer's. One of them is in the beginning stages, and is beginning to forget where he placed objects, or is beginning to engage in needlessly repetitive acts. Now assume there is someone who cannot recognize their family, who cannot remember how to turn on a television, wash themselves or even walk, and who is completely dependant on help from others. They BOTH have Alzheimer's, but one has moved into a more serious stage of the disease.
> 
> Now let's move back to Schizophrenia. I will compare my brother-in-law, who suffers from mild schizophrenia, to Mr. Li. My brother-in-law hears voices in his head, telling him to complete certain actions (such as turning off a computer that someone else is using, or to not pay fare on the streetcar, or to pick flowers out of a private garden), however he tries to ignore them, the condition is minor, and is easily controlled with medication. He HAS Schizophrenia, only the symptoms are minor and almost unnoticeable, he is in a very early stage, and will hopefully not progress. He's not murdering anyone, he's actually working in a software company. Perfectly functional member of society living with Schizophrenia. Mr. Li's symptoms, on the other hand, are extremely dangerous; he is receiving violent commands from voices that he believes is god, he cannot cannot ignore them, he feels threatened by what the voices tell him, and the condition obviously required heavy doses of medication. True, few people who suffer from Schizophrenia will murder someone else, but it is because they are affected to a far lesser degree by the illness.


Again the disorder or the severity of it should not nullify the criminality of the act.


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

Oh. My. God.

So this guy is going to be allowed to be in public where his voices can tell him to behead another poor guy? I bet his family must be absolutely pissed right now. I would be.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

broken_g3 said:


> Now let's move back to Schizophrenia. I will compare my brother-in-law, who suffers from mild schizophrenia, to Mr. Li. My brother-in-law hears voices in his head, telling him to complete certain actions (such as turning off a computer that someone else is using, or to not pay fare on the streetcar, or to pick flowers out of a private garden), however he tries to ignore them, the condition is minor, and is easily controlled with medication. He HAS Schizophrenia, only the symptoms are minor and almost unnoticeable, he is in a very early stage, and will hopefully not progress. He's not murdering anyone, he's actually working in a software company. Perfectly functional member of society living with Schizophrenia. Mr. Li's symptoms, on the other hand, are extremely dangerous; he is receiving violent commands from voices that he believes is god, he cannot cannot ignore them, he feels threatened by what the voices tell him, and the condition obviously required heavy doses of medication. True, few people who suffer from Schizophrenia will murder someone else, but it is because they are affected to a far lesser degree by the illness.


You seem to be unwittingly making the case that people who have schizophrenia and take heavy doses of medication could conceivably become violent if their medication fails. Screature is not arguing that all people suffering from schizophrenia ought to be imprisoned, however, just those who take the lives of others.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

dona83 said:


> Oh. My. God.


An erudite rebuttal.  
Edit: sorry dona83 I replied before I saw the addition of your further statement.


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

screature said:


> An erudite rebuttal.
> Edit: sorry dona83 I replied before I saw the addition of your further statement.


*shrugs* I only understood 33% of that sentence anyway, I'll let you guess which 33% I understood. Lol.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

:lmao:


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

I guess I just want to know that if Li is not criminally responsible, are they at least going to ensure that this never happens again at least by Li? Will this at least be manslaughter? I feel bad for McLean's family.


----------



## rgray (Feb 15, 2005)

deleted... words cannot express my feelings.


----------



## KC4 (Feb 2, 2009)

*Mental Illness and Violence*

From The CMHA Canadian Mental Health Association website: 

"In today's media reports about mental illness, there is a tendency to emphasize a supposed link between violence and mental illness. News stories regularly suggest that there is a strong connection between mental illness and crime. But the majority of people who are violent do not suffer from mental illnesses. In fact, people with a mental illness are more likely to be the victims, rather than the perpetrators of violence."

CMHA has been trying for years to reduce the stigma of mental illness....and with actions such as Mr. Li's, I'd say they have an uphill battle. Part of the problem, as touched on by others, is that Mental Illness is such a wide net...it covers everything from mild depression to murderous psychopathy. Another factor playing against CMHA are those that actually are not mentally ill, but since there is no "Blood test" to prove or deny it's existence, will attempt to use it as a "get out of jail" card. 

I'm not afraid of anyone that's on the depressed end of the spectrum but I'm sure as hell terrified of the other side. Now, the challenge is, how do I tell them apart before my family boards the bus? Alas, I cannot.


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

dona83 said:


> I guess I just want to know that if Li is not criminally responsible, are they at least going to ensure that this never happens again at least by Li? ....


This is of course what is most important. How it is accomplished less so. Forgiveness is fine only if it does not cost someone else their life!


----------



## kps (May 4, 2003)

> a) the nature of Schizophrenia
> b) the nature of the mental institutions in Canada.
> c) the central values of our justice system


True, I know nothing in detail about any of that and I'm not going to philosophize, but one thing I know, Vincent Li should never be let out into society again.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

broken_g3 said:


> Also, in our justice system, to be convicted a criminal must possess two qualities: _actus reus_ (guilty act- the act of committing a crime) and _mens rea_ (guilty mind- or the free intent to commit a crime).


I would think that carrying a butcher knife onto a Greyhound shows some unspecific intent. I don't doubt that the man is loony, but like someone mentioned earlier, there should be a prison for loonies with mandatory sentences and a criminal record. No one can recover from experiencing something like this, whether first hand or a witness. The case can be made that all murderers have a lapse of insanity. Pre-meditation can be argued that it is a form of insanity in itself. Sorry, this is a defect to the gene pool (as harsh as it sounds). 

Regarding a comment made earlier about Canadians being "weak" and our justice system is a direct reflection of us: I remember reading blogs and comments around the world and there were many that thought the passengers didn't do enough. I truly don't know what I would do and hope I never have to.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

I think there should be a prison term for those who defend scum like Li. He deserves to be locked up for the rest of his natural life. I don't particularly care if it's a prison or a looney ward as long as he never gets out. 

If one do-gooder comes forward a couple of years from now and recommends he be released back into society, there ought to be a prison for the likes of them as well.


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

kps said:


> True, I know nothing in detail about any of that and I'm not going to philosophize, but one thing I know, Vincent Li should never be let out into society again.


No, he should not be let out into public. I'm leaning towards "never" releasing him, he just seems to dangerous. I'm not trying to excuse him, I'm just saying he should be institutionalized somewhere where he can recover from his illness and not somewhere that will make it worse.


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

KC4 said:


> Another factor playing against CMHA are those that actually are not mentally ill, but since there is no "Blood test" to prove or deny it's existence, will attempt to use it as a "get out of jail" card.


Christ knows why they would want to do that, a mental institution is hardly a nice place. It would be better for them to use some sort of other defense; I dunno, something like Duress.



SINC said:


> I think there should be a prison term for those who defend scum like Li.


Hmm, that would be nice for the state-appointed lawyers. You're called to defend someone, it's part of your job to serve the government, then you get thrown in jail. Wonderful Idea.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

broken_g3 said:


> Hmm, that would be nice for the state-appointed lawyers. You're called to defend someone, it's part of your job to serve the government, then you get thrown in jail. Wonderful Idea.


I wasn't referring to lawyers, we all know that happens. I was referring to normal people who somehow turn abnormal and support Li in public.


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

SINC said:


> I wasn't referring to lawyers, we all know that happens. I was referring to normal people who somehow turn abnormal and support Li in public.


Oh, OK, sorry about that. 

You're right; he does not deserve support for his actions. Anyone who supports what he did is probably a Satanist anyways. But we should find the best mode of treatment for him. If that means locking him away in a mental institution until he's 81, so be it.


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

MACinist said:


> I would think that carrying a butcher knife onto a Greyhound shows some unspecific intent.


It was a hunting knife. A much more potent weapon.


----------



## gordguide (Jan 13, 2001)

" ... Where else for example, does a life sentence for murder mean you can get out in 15 or 25 years? ..."

In the US, there are thousands of examples of murderers getting out in less than 10; in Louisiana after Katrina they were releasing murderers after serving less than 2 months. I'm not kidding.

Canada has kept people in Psychiatric Prison for more than 50 years, and we still do it. You are more likely to serve a long sentence under the order this judge gave than under a regular first-degree murder conviction. The actual language says he is to be kept "at the pleasure of the minister" for Corrections; in other words, it's a sentence with no end date. We never have to let him out.

This guy gets to live with the most dangerous killers in the country, and a Maximum Security Prison in Canada is the picture of freedom compared to a Maximum Security Psychiatric Prison.

I don't see it as a slap on the wrist. You can't be cured of Schizophrenia; it can only be "managed", and to get out he needs a panel of shrinks to agree he's cured. He will be there for life.

It's why in Canada nobody pretends to be nuts in order to get off; in the US the verdict is "not guilty by reason of insanity". You can walk if you can prove "temporary insanity". We did not find him "not guilty; it's a subtle but important difference.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

gordguide said:


> " ... Where else for example, does a life sentence for murder mean you can get out in 15 or 25 years? ..."
> 
> In the US, there are thousands of examples of murderers getting out in less than 10; in Louisiana after Katrina they were releasing murderers after serving less than 2 months. I'm not kidding.
> 
> ...


You've killed the buzz on everybody's knee jerk reaction :lmao:


----------



## kloan (Feb 22, 2002)

broken_g3 said:


> Oh, OK, sorry about that.
> 
> You're right; he does not deserve support for his actions. Anyone who supports what he did is probably a Satanist anyways. But we should find the best mode of treatment for him. If that means locking him away in a mental institution until he's 81, so be it.


Being a Satanist, I take offense to that.

I would never condone the act of violance towards others, and what he did is certainly no exception. He deserves to be locked up for the rest of his days.

Anyway, just because we Satanists worship gluttony, greed, and generally all the fun and mischievous vices life has to offer doesn't mean we're total nutters. This guy is just wacked. :lmao:

j/k though.. not really a Satanist....


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

kloan said:


> Anyway, just because we Satanists worship gluttony, greed, and generally all the fun and mischievous vices life has to offer doesn't mean we're total nutters. This guy is just wacked. :lmao:
> 
> j/k though.. not really a Satanist....


Good Joke... Good Joke.  :clap:


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

eMacMan said:


> This is of course what is most important. How it is accomplished less so. Forgiveness is fine only if it does not cost someone else their life!


That Mr. Li never be released into society is of course the most important result. However, the semantics of the decision are also important, not only to society but those who were victimized by his actions.

To say that he was not criminally responsible for his actions with the result being that he will not even have a criminal record is an affront to the to the family of his victim(s) (plural because as those who were witness to his actions were all victimized).

In certain cases such as this, our judicial system is leveraged in defence of the accused with little to no regard for the victims. While it may be understandable that it is not in the best interests of Mr. Li to be placed in a typical penal institution, it is not understandable that his interests should take precedence over the interests of his victims and the family of his victims.

There needs to be a middle ground here where both interests can be served. Mr. Li needs to be isolated from society and receive medical treatment, this is clear, however it should not mean that justice and the perception of justice being served be denied.

Mr. Li should have been found guilty of murder complete with a criminal record and all else that it entails, with the exception of the terms of his incarceration (special medical attention etc.) and where (not within a general penal population) he serves his sentence.

This could satisfy the family of his victim in that a guilty sentence has been handed down and that Mr. Li is held to be accountable for his acts, while providing for the special interests of Mr. Li due to his illness. A result such as this could provide for a sense of closure for the victim's family and they would be able to move on rather than being tormented believing that the society in which they live respects and values the life of their son's killer more than that of their son or even their lives and their right to see justice served.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

"Guilty and Insane" should be the judgement.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

Macfury said:


> "Guilty and Insane" should be the judgement.


Yep.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Candian injustice at work - and it wasn't like some crazy judge let him off - both the defense and prosecution made "a case" that he just didn't understand that carving the skull off a human and eating the brains on a bus was against the law.

I think I'll use that the next time I get a hassle for say, speeding on the highway. I'll butcher the cop, eat the brains, then get off easy because it is obvious that I didn't realize that butchering and eating a skull were somehow wrong.

I'm old school, so I don't think I need to say that this retard should be strung up from the nearest mighty oak tree, with the rest of the criminal scum like Bernardo, Olsen, etc...


----------



## dona83 (Jun 26, 2005)

I thought that not knowing the law doesn't exclude someone from being criminally charged. What's that term, my roommate who was studying criminology explained it to me once.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

dona83 said:


> I thought that not knowing the law doesn't exclude someone from being criminally charged. What's that term, my roommate who was studying criminology explained it to me once.


Yeah. I can see it now...

Lawyer: (Hands Li a book of criminal law open to the page which is relevant to his crime) "Read this."

Li: (Moments later) "Oh. I get it now."


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

dona83 said:


> I thought that not knowing the law doesn't exclude someone from being criminally charged. What's that term, my roommate who was studying criminology explained it to me once.


Yes dona83, I referred to that earlier and it is true, ignorance of the law is no excuse. _Ignorantia juris non excusat _.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MACenstein'sMonster said:


> Yeah. I can see it now...
> 
> Lawyer: (Hands Li a book of criminal law open to the page which is relevant to his crime) "Read this."
> 
> Li: (Moments later) "Oh. I get it now."


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

If any of you are really worried about Vincent Li being a repeat offender then I know you'll be out there on the street protesting if/when the day comes that he is being considered for release. Or will that be a lot more difficult/inconvenient than bitching about it on a message board? Again, we reap what we sow.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

screature said:


>


My thoughts exactly.

Yet, this point seems to elude some people's comprehension .


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MACenstein'sMonster said:


> If any of you are really worried about Vincent Li being a repeat offender then I know you'll be out there on the street protesting if/when the day comes that he is being considered for release. Or will that be a lot more difficult/inconvenient than bitching about it on a message board? Again, we reap what we sow.


In case you don't get the concept a forum is a place for people to exchange their thoughts and ideas.  Obviously a forum isn't going to change anything, what discussion ever does, you have made comments like this before so I must wonder why you bother to come to a forum and participate in threads only to chastise others who enter into a dialogue for their so called "navel gazing"(bitching about it on a message board)? Did you decide to join the thread just to p**s people off.

It seems that all you are doing is offering a critique of the quality of the "bitching" of others which is in of itself actually as lame if not lamer than the those who are at least actively participating in a debate.

You also are obviously not even paying enough attention to know that the major point of contention is not whether or not Mr. Li will be released into society at some point in the future as we all very well understand that is highly unlikely. The main sticking point is the notion that he is not considered to be criminally responsible nor will he have a criminal record because of his mental health. It is also that the judicial system is in need of reform and this is a prime example of why.

So do try and keep up, if you are going to be a critic, at least pay attention to the plot.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

screature said:


> In case you don't get the concept *a forum is a place for people to exchange their thoughts and ideas*.  Obviously a forum isn't going to change anything, what discussion ever does, you have made comments like this before so I must wonder why you bother to come to a forum and participate in threads only to chastise others who enter into a dialogue for their so called "navel gazing"(bitching about it on a message board)? Did you decide to join the thread just to p**s people off.
> 
> It seems that all you are doing is offering a critique of the quality of the "bitching" of others which is in of itself actually as lame if not lamer than the those who are at least actively participating in a debate.
> 
> ...


So I gave.

So what's your point, again?


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

EvanPitts said:


> I think I'll use that the next time I get a hassle for say, speeding on the highway. I'll butcher the cop, eat the brains, then get off easy because it is obvious that I didn't realize that butchering and eating a skull were somehow wrong.


The speeding ticket will stick but you'll get off on the murder.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

broken_g3 said:


> Christ knows why they would want to do that, a mental institution is hardly a nice place.


I tend to disagree, the one on Queen and Ossington in Toronto is quite nice with pools, indoor basketball courts, game rooms etc... now that they have built expansion wing, its even nicer. I used to rent the gym there on the weekends for years....


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MACenstein'sMonster said:


> So I gave.
> 
> So what's your point, again?


You are criticizing people for the very act that you are guilty of yourself... you know when you point your finger at someone else there are three fingers pointing back at you sort of thing... I think they call it hypocrisy...


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

screature said:


> You are criticizing people for the very act that you are guilty of yourself... you know when you point your finger at someone else there are three fingers pointing back at you sort of thing...


You gave your opinion.

I gave my opinion.

You got irritated by my opinion and went on a rant.

I asked for clarification since you seemed to be contradicting yourself.

You replied something about pointing fingers.

And now, "tag" -------------------- "you're it" 

BTW, in case you didn't notice I was spot on with my reply with regards to central point of this discussion. Unfortunately you missed it. 

(Hint - Li doesn't understand the reality of his actions which makes him different than somebody who knows right from wrong but is not knowledgeable about Canadian Law. One person can to be taught to understand the error of their ways. The other possibly believes that pink elephants can fly and if they tried hard enough they could crawl into a tube of toothpaste.)


----------



## gmark2000 (Jun 4, 2003)

So like, a serial killer like Clifford Olsen is insane or not?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MACenstein'sMonster said:


> You gave your opinion.
> 
> I gave my opinion.
> 
> ...


*"Or will that be a lot more difficult/inconvenient than bitching about it on a message board?" *is an opinion? Ok if it is then you are also guilty of it, as you are bitching about the bitchers, i.e., being hypocritical.

No tag you are still it.

What I said was hardly a rant, if you think it was you should read your own postings sometime. 

You were obviously being critical of those who take exception to the Li ruling and the "ease" of passing comment about it in an open forum as opposed to taking some sort of action, such as protesting at some hypothetical point in the future if he were to be released and yet some how your statements rise above the "bitching" of others?

The central point is that Canadian law is flawed, not whether or not Li is capable of understanding what is right or wrong. YOU missed the point of the thread. If you choose to take it on a tangent, that is your business.


----------



## chas_m (Dec 2, 2007)

SINC said:


> Sure it's unique to Canada. Try China for example and see how they deal with it.
> 
> The comment was directed at the Canadian justice system in general. Where else for example, does a life sentence for murder mean you can get out in 15 or 25 years? We're pussies when it comes punishing offenders. We're the original "slap on the wrist" justice system. Justice by wimpy judge and not the people.


"Unique" is generally accepted to mean "unlike anything else."

I assure you that no matter how "lenient" you think this sentence is, Canada is HARDLY "unique" in this regard. There are plenty of US and UK (et al) cases I could point to with equally "outrageous" sentencing and/or releases.

If I accept your "life sentence means out in 15-25 years" statement for murderers as the truth, it seems to me that you should be *glad* Li got put away for mental illness rather than just convicted for murder. With the former, societal pressure will ensure that he is isolated from society essentially forever, whereas the latter would (according to you) assure us that he'd be back on the streets before you know it.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

chas_m said:


> With the former, societal pressure will ensure that he is isolated from society essentially forever, whereas the latter would (according to you) assure us that he'd be back on the streets before you know it.


And THAT is precisely what we are all concerned about. With no criminal record and no length of sentence, some damn do-gooder will want him out on the streets far too soon. Be afraid. Be very afraid of both the do-gooders and of Li himself. I'm not sure which one is the more scary of the two.


----------



## broken_g3 (Jun 27, 2008)

SINC said:


> And THAT is precisely what we are all concerned about. With no criminal record and no length of sentence, some damn do-gooder will want him out on the streets far too soon. Be afraid. Be very afraid of both the do-gooders and of Li himself. I'm not sure which one is the more scary of the two.


I'm not afraid. It takes more than one do-gooder to get this guy out. It will take an entire panel of top-notch psychiatrists to reach a consensus, whether he is safe to be let out into society or not. Don't be worried about biased judges or sympathetic doctors. It ain't that easy to get freedom.


----------



## CamCanola (Jan 26, 2004)

"Be afraid. Be very afraid of both the do-gooders and of Li himself. I'm not sure which one is the more scary of the two." 

It's you who are scary SINC - it's a good thing you're no do-gooder, eh. Doing good would be a bad thing right. Therefore doing the "wrong" thing would be putting a mentally ill person into a jail setting rather than into a clinical one. Put him with all the other losers of society, the throwaways, everybody but you who does no good. 

You sound terrified of life SINC. You need to get out more. Take a trip up to Alberta Hospital. Go and talk with the youth criminal justice people and the kids themselves. Talk to someone with Schizophrenia before you blow your hard horn. And for God's sake stop thinking with your knee, jerk.


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

CamCanola said:


> "Be afraid. Be very afraid of both the do-gooders and of Li himself. I'm not sure which one is the more scary of the two."
> 
> It's you who are scary SINC - it's a good thing you're no do-gooder, eh. Doing good would be a bad thing right. Therefore doing the "wrong" thing would be putting a mentally ill person into a jail setting rather than into a clinical one. Put him with all the other losers of society, the throwaways, everybody but you who does no good.
> 
> You sound terrified of life SINC. You need to get out more. Take a trip up to Alberta Hospital. Go and talk with the youth criminal justice people and the kids themselves. Talk to someone with Schizophrenia before you blow your hard horn. And for God's sake stop thinking with your knee, jerk.


One: you don't call SINC a jerk.
Two: SINC already made it very clear that he's OK with Li being tossed in a mental ward--as long as it's forever.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

screature said:


> *"Or will that be a lot more difficult/inconvenient than bitching about it on a message board?" *is an opinion? Ok if it is then you are also guilty of it, as you are bitching about the bitchers, i.e., being hypocritical.
> 
> No tag you are still it.
> 
> ...


You TALK about what needs to be done and HOPE that change occurs. All I did was suggest a course of action you could take if things don't go your way (in fact, you could take to protesting the verdict itself right now). Then you became miffed. This is typical of talkers, not doers. People will spend countless hours going on about the woes of the world but as soon as someone suggests a course of action that could help alleviate some of their problems the complainers suddenly get defensive. This is likely due to the fact that taking action involves more work than complaining.

I'm surprised you haven't given me a line about how you pay your taxes and therefore you shouldn't have to get involved in a meaningful way to help create the change YOU desire. Oh yeah, I forgot, you're going to take action by voting for the ABC political parties (and then bitch again when they fail to live up to their promises after all your hard....um....marking with an "X"?).

Lastly, you say Canadian law is flawed because the system failed to find a man guilty of committing a crime even though at the time he may have been completely out his mind due to a mental illness that is believed to be beyond his control? This verdict thing bothers you despite the fact he may still spend the remainder of his life in a mental institution? 

Here's some advice that might help you deal with this situation - read "_Of Mice And Men_". After you're done reading it try and draw some parallels to the case involving Vincent Li. During this process you may discover that although we would like life to be a series of simple choices based on simple ideas it can be rather complex at times with difficult choices to be made and sometimes not everyone is happy with the final decisions. Ultimately, you may come back and see that Canada's legal system is just fine as it is and as it will be or at least as good as the people who shape it who in turn come from the ranks of the same people who...wait for it...bitch about it  Ah, we've come full circle again, but do you understand, yet? At least read the book - it's a gooder.


----------



## SINC (Feb 16, 2001)

CamCanola said:


> "Be afraid. Be very afraid of both the do-gooders and of Li himself. I'm not sure which one is the more scary of the two."
> 
> It's you who are scary SINC - it's a good thing you're no do-gooder, eh. Doing good would be a bad thing right. Therefore doing the "wrong" thing would be putting a mentally ill person into a jail setting rather than into a clinical one. Put him with all the other losers of society, the throwaways, everybody but you who does no good.
> 
> You sound terrified of life SINC. You need to get out more. Take a trip up to Alberta Hospital. Go and talk with the youth criminal justice people and the kids themselves. Talk to someone with Schizophrenia before you blow your hard horn. And for God's sake stop thinking with your knee, jerk.


Apparently you can't read very well. I stated my only issue is that if he is to be in a hospital setting, there is no guarantee he will not be released in a year or two, or three.

I want him sentenced to life no matter where he is confined. I never want him to walk the streets again.

And for the record, I have dealt with the courts, the youth criminal justice people and the kids themselves for over 40 years now. I know their challenges all too well, but if they choose the path of a life of crime, I would come down hard on them today, tomorrow and in the future.

Parents are mostly to blame anyway. Look at the mess here in St. Albert where 14 teens were charged and found guilty of hazing at high school. And what did the judge do? - They had to write a letter of apology to the victim. 90 days would have sent a clear message, but oh no, we can't do that. We have to coddle criminals.

That letter went to the guy whose buttocks were bleeding from being beaten with hockey sticks with nails in them. Yep you know all about youth criminals don't you?

And speaking of jerks . . . had a look in your mirror lately?


----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

MACenstein'sMonster said:


> Here's some advice that might help you deal with this situation - read "_Of Mice And Men_".


Uh, do you seriously know people who haven't read it? That's pretty scary.


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

EvanPitts said:


> Candian injustice at work - and it wasn't like some crazy judge let him off - both the defense and prosecution made "a case" that he just didn't understand that carving the skull off a human and eating the brains on a bus was against the law.
> 
> I think I'll use that the next time I get a hassle for say, speeding on the highway. I'll butcher the cop, eat the brains, then get off easy because it is obvious that I didn't realize that butchering and eating a skull were somehow wrong.
> 
> I'm old school, so I don't think I need to say that this retard should be strung up from the nearest mighty oak tree, with the rest of the criminal scum like Bernardo, Olsen, etc...


HEAR HEAR!!! FINALLY, someone close to my own heart. I personally DO believe in the death penalty because quite frankly, I can think of several other causes I'd like my tax dollars to support. I don't mind trying to 're-form' a wide variety of criminals but rape, wanton murder, and a few other offenses, I do not support. There is no 'cure' for certain mental illnesses. The illnesses are only 'controlled' by medications. Who is going to babysit the likes of Li, Bernardo, etc. to ensure they take their meds? Since Canada doesn't approve of the death penalty, then I have other ideas for these criminally insane: in the world of science, we are constantly sacrificing and torturing mice, rats, dogs, monkeys, etc - all in the name of testing products for human consumption. If we must keep these creatures like Li, Bernardo, etc., alive, then could we please test these products on them? I don't ever recall a mouse decapitating or grinding up a fellow mouse to satiate some insane desire. And quite frankly, I also believe what SINC says about stringing certain sympathizers up. So go ahead, attack my post but I simply do not want these creatures re-entering our communities and reproducing because as a geneticist, there are far too many traits that are ingrained in our genes and non-negotiable regardless as to external (nurture) attempts to subdue them. 
Ciaochiao


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

*Lesser of two...*



MACinist said:


> The speeding ticket will stick but you'll get off on the murder.


:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MACenstein'sMonster said:


> You TALK about what needs to be done and HOPE that change occurs. All I did was suggest a course of action you could take if things don't go your way (in fact, you could take to protesting the verdict itself right now). Then you became miffed. This is typical of talkers, not doers. People will spend countless hours going on about the woes of the world but as soon as someone suggests a course of action that could help alleviate some of their problems the complainers suddenly get defensive. This is likely due to the fact that taking action involves more work than complaining.


Absolute rubbish!!. You suggested no course of action what so ever, you were being facetious with your comments. _"If any of you are really worried about Vincent Li being a repeat offender then I know you'll be out there on the street protesting if/when the day comes that he is being considered for release. Or will that be a lot more difficult/inconvenient than bitching about it on a message board?"_  How would you know my level of activism regarding bringing about change regarding anything!? Cut the pretentious, presumptuous and arrogant BS!!




MACenstein'sMonster said:


> I'm surprised you haven't given me a line about how you pay your taxes and therefore you shouldn't have to get involved in a meaningful way to help create the change YOU desire. Oh yeah, I forgot, you're going to take action by voting for the ABC political parties (and then bitch again when they fail to live up to their promises after all your hard....um....marking with an "X"?).


Again you completely missed the point regarding my rebuttal to your statement, _"Like it or not, I think a country's mode of operation is a reflection of the majority of it's people." _My comments were merely to highlight and point out that even in a democracy (where people can vote) it is not necessarily true that "a country's mode of operation is a reflection of the majority of it's people." Even less likely to be true in totalitarian states.



MACenstein'sMonster said:


> Lastly, you say Canadian law is flawed because the system failed to find a man guilty of committing a crime even though at the time he may have been completely out his mind due to a mental illness that is believed to be beyond his control? This verdict thing bothers you despite the fact he may still spend the remainder of his life in a mental institution?


Yes because as I pointed out if YOU CARED TO READ it absolutely fails to take into consideration the victims and the family of the victims. Punishment, retribution, restitution, denunciation and rehabilitation are all appropriate factors for sentencing, according to the law. It seems that the only factor given any consideration in this case is rehabilitation. Mr. Li's victim and the family of the victim are absolutely not being taken into consideration because there is not even a factor of denunciation in this verdict quite the opposite, he is *not criminally responsible*. Therein lies the flaw. As I have already said, there is absolutely no reason why the justice system should not be able to find him criminally responsible (a guilty verdict) and at the same time allow for the provisions to provide Mr. Li with the treatment that he needs in an institution outside of the mainstream penal system.

Again, for there to be justice, the victim and the victim's families should also be considered at the time of sentencing and not just the convict, wait, no he isn't a convict, the patient. 



MACenstein'sMonster said:


> Here's some advice that might help you deal with this situation - read "_Of Mice And Men_". After you're done reading it try and draw some parallels to the case involving Vincent Li. During this process you may discover that although we would like life to be a series of simple choices based on simple ideas it can be rather complex at times with difficult choices to be made and sometimes not everyone is happy with the final decisions. Ultimately, you may come back and see that Canada's legal system is just fine as it is and as it will be or at least as good as the people who shape it who in turn come from the ranks of the same people who...wait for it...bitch about it  Ah, we've come full circle again, but do you understand, yet? At least read the book - it's a gooder.


And here is some advice for you to deal with this situation. Lay off your pretentious, presumptuous and arrogant comments!!!!! Do you really think that I haven't read a book that is part of just about every grade 9 curriculum!?!?! How pompous!! YOU don't understand yet and clearly we are not going to come to any sort of common ground, so rather than continue to flog a dead horse let's just leave it alone.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

screature said:


> And here is some advice for you to deal with this situation. Lay off your pretentious, presumptuous and arrogant comments!!!!! Do you really think that I haven't read a book that is part of just about every grade 9 curriculum!?!?! How pompous!! YOU don't understand yet and clearly we are not going to come to any sort of common ground, so rather than continue to flog a dead horse let's just leave it alone.


So then, if you can remember back to grade 9, what is the connection between the book and the manner in which Vincent Li's case was handled by the court? I believe that it's the one element that is often missing when situations like this are discussed and comments are made regarding how humans should be treated. At least it was certainly missing here by most of the members who commented.

BTW the only reason I've even taken this conversation as far as I have is because you and a few others on this forum pretty much have the market cornered when it comes to "pretentious, presumptuous and arrogant comments". If you can't handle it then don't dish it.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

Macfury said:


> *Uh, do you seriously know people who haven't read it?* That's pretty scary.


For the most part no, but reading and comprehending are sometimes world's apart for some people.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MACenstein'sMonster said:


> So then, if you can remember back to grade 9, what is the connection between the book and the manner in which Vincent Li's case was handled by the court? I believe that it's the one element that is often missing when situations like this are discussed and comments are made regarding how humans should be treated. At least it was certainly missing here by most of the members who commented.
> 
> BTW the only reason I've even taken this conversation as far as I have is because you and a few others on this forum pretty much have the market cornered when it comes to "pretentious, presumptuous and arrogant comments". If you can't handle it then don't dish it.


Like the justice system, the only human being and how they should be treated in this case you seem to considering is the culprit and not the victim and the family member's lives who have been ruined. 

I have fully read over my comments contained in this thread and the only one's that can be construed as being pretentious, presumptuous or arrogant were in response to your provocations. Despite that fact, I am offering you an apology for my retaliatory insinuations as it does take two to tango.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

MACenstein'sMonster said:


> For the most part no, but reading and comprehending are sometimes world's apart for some people.


Can't leave the attitude alone eh? I guess like Mr. Li you just can't help yourself.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

screature said:


> Like the justice system, the only human being and how they should be treated in this case you seem to considering is the culprit and not the victim and the family member's lives who have been ruined.
> 
> I have fully read over my comments contained in this thread and the only one's that can be construed as being pretentious, presumptuous or arrogant were in response to your provocations. Despite that fact, I am offering you an apology for my retaliatory insinuations as it does take two to tango.


(1) Apology accepted and returned.

(2) The answer I was looking for is "compassion".

(3) I see all sides of this discussion but only one was being represented with any great vigor at the time when I decided to join in.

(4) I'm done.


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)




----------



## Macfury (Feb 3, 2006)

Now that's the scariest motion avatar I've seen in some time.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

MACinist said:


> The speeding ticket will stick but you'll get off on the murder.


Speeding tickets are about the worst offense possible, since it gives them a reason to crank up the car insurance rates - something that one pays until they give up driving.

At least with butchery, one gets a decent place to live with free food, lots of drugs, and all the free prison sex one can want. Oh wait, the dude isn't even going to prison - he will be dumped off at a half-way house in a neighbourhood near you, like the places in the Hammer where the guys leave and attack innocent people at Copps Colosseum or at Jackson Scare on a frighteningly regular basis.

Perhaps they should put a restraining order on him, preventing him from ever taking the Greyhound again. That will give some of the other bus lines a fair chance at much free advertising because fair is fair...


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Macfury said:


> Now that's the scariest motion avatar I've seen in some time.


It's very provocative...


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

*Speaks the truth*



EvanPitts said:


> Speeding tickets are about the worst offense possible, since it gives them a reason to crank up the car insurance rates - something that one pays until they give up driving.
> 
> At least with butchery, one gets a decent place to live with free food, lots of drugs, and all the free prison sex one can want. Oh wait, the dude isn't even going to prison - he will be dumped off at a half-way house in a neighbourhood near you, like the places in the Hammer where the guys leave and attack innocent people at Copps Colosseum or at Jackson Scare on a frighteningly regular basis.
> 
> Perhaps they should put a restraining order on him, preventing him from ever taking the Greyhound again. That will give some of the other bus lines a fair chance at much free advertising because fair is fair...


Hey EvanPitts:
Kudos to you for saying what many only think. not many people are actually willing to post in public, their cynicism. I actually feel much like you do. I do not want him in any place on this earth. I feel that way about Bernardo, Olsen, Homolka, et al. As far as my medical knowledge spans (and it actually has spanned two university degrees), schizophrenia can't be CURED, only CONTROLLED. And while there are many in our society who do suffer from this horrid disease, they suffer in silence. FOR THEM, I have compassion and want to assist in any manner possible. I have not seen this level of violence in over 3 decades of my life. I do not find the defense of schizophrenia a reasonable logic. If it is, then the law must be reviewed and amended to reflect that there are various levels of schizophrenia - some of which are extremely violent. I do not believe that mental illness can be quantified and as such, still do not support the Li verdict. There are however, far too many people who suddenly spout compassion in cases such as this. Compassion is also sought for the family of the slain. Where in the posts that claim to understand Li's stand, is there any mention of the compassion we need to show to the victim's family? So for those people who consistently defend the court's decision, how biased are your views? What then, was the point of even bringing Li to trial? I believe that you can see the domino effect this sort of action would have on the justice system. Clearly, anyone raised in today's NA society would have to be insane to do what Li did - so then, if this happens again - why bother arresting the murderer? Why not just assume he's insane and forgo the costly criminal trial? 

Please, for all those who expound 'understanding and compassion' for the criminal, please list the corollary for the victim's family plus the 'fix' that should be in place within our justice system.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

ciaochiao said:


> As far as my medical knowledge spans (and it actually has spanned two university degrees), schizophrenia can't be CURED, only CONTROLLED.


There is also a major difference between suffering from some schizophrenia and being entirely nuts, like this dude. In the "old days", people like this would be locked up in an asylum, a system which carried it's own peculiar abuses.

But as in everything, we tend towards overreaction, rather than correcting systemic problems. So because of the abusive and barbaric nature of the asylums, we ended up trashing them instead of actually fixing the problems. We now have all of these people with various mental issues out rambling around the streets, abusing drugs, acting violent and entirely without any kind of real treatments - all in order to avoid systemic abuses and lack of real treatments within the asylum system which had become perverted by the same means that all public institutes are corroded by excess luxury, glad handling, and nepotism.

Instead of the old system where those with mental impairments were obviously abused and victimized by the system - we how have a system were victims are obviously abused by an alternate system that can not make any rational decisions. We have lost all sense of real justice, of any sense of where to draw a line when it comes to administering what is the spirit of the law.

We had a system that doled out capital punishment, and it was found that the system was abused, and that many innocent people were incarcerated and put on death row. So instead of addressing the very real systemic problem, which is that people who are guilty should be the only ones subject to the death penalty (which requires actual proof to be demonstrated in a court of law in front of a panel of citizens), they abolished the ultimate penalty, and thus, cheapened the quality of life for all citizens.

Politics becomes this beast that is a game of popularity, rather than of establishing and maintaining a system of equality for all under the law. And this system is particularly abused. For instance, the penalty for speeding, lets say, is fairly steep financially, even though that the fine is dished out to those who perhaps broke the law by speeding, but had not endangered lives or property. Compare that to, say, the very real crimes of corruption, like Conrad Black ripping off his employees retirement funds for millions of dollars, and who gets off with nothing.

We have other examples. Lets say, Ernst Zundel, who publishes his "literature", and is punished by decades of legal wranglings, bankruptcy and punishments. All the while, his "literature", though obviously fraudulent, hate filled, and erroneous, does not cause "harm", does not cause "death". Surely he is a freak, a fraud, probably a mental case himself. 

Compare those deeds to say, Paul Bernardo, who not only was convicted on two cases of murder, but who desecrated those victims. In addition, it wa she who stalked and raped at least fifty (and probably many more) victims, and who knows what else that dude did, next to smuggling and other crimes. Needless to say, he got off very easily, with a cushy life with free lodgings and free food.

And that is the point, that the system has no merit because it is strictly ad hoc. We have one guy who is persecuted like crazy (and I am not saying that he shouldn't be punished for his "hate", but that it has dragged on for far too long); while the other one, who has committed very real crimes, gets of in a disproportionate manner, thus, cheapening the "value" of life.

With Li, we see the system gone berzerk. Mental issues or not, this guy killed another, then ate the skull and carried body parts around on a bus for hours. And the system is going to "let him off" because of "mental issues" - while the same system goes ahead and completely drops the ball on some other issue.

Here in Hamilton, there is a recent case which has caused outrage. There was a dude that was parked on a road out by the airport, where he found a quiet place to study. Entirely legal, a parking zone at the end of a dead end road. And some chick, entirely drunk after drinking entire bottles of vodka (and probably smoking dope) rams into this dudes car and kills him. And guess what the verdict was? Not guilty because the Crown could not prove that she was driving her own car - even though it was her own car, and that she was covered in glass and debris from the wreck. Oh, and the judge "felt sorry" because of her "mental state" which caused this outrageous bit of barbarity.

Just as Gibbons pointed out, the excesses of luxury and liberality corrode a society from within, perverting the institutions from within until it is a shell that is ready to collapse at a moments notice. And that is what we have, a system that has lost all sense of justice or common sense - all because the system has been perverted in some lust to become "popular", rather than to establish and maintain a civilized society where people are protected against crimes.

It is one thing when someone had a mental problem and can not gain the help needed - for providing that care is what compassion is about. It is another thing to release everyone that is "mental" from their social responsibilities - which is not compassion but plain old glad handling. When the system obviously fails, those in charge are no longer punished for their failings, but are provided with ample soap and water in order to cleanse themselves of all responsibilities for their acts of malfeasance. And this is what had turned our society into a collective of victims that are continually preyed upon by evil, and the victims of crime are in turn, victimized by an obscene system where injustice is doled out at a frighteningly high rate.

I do not see any real solution to this back slide, liberality is an establishment of it's own in our "civilization", and will be the one thing that dooms our society in the end.


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

*You are...*

EvanPitts:
Your thoughts are very disheartening because, you are quite correct. I feel much as you do. There is a systemic issue in our manner of assessing criminal actions and I also don't know how we would correct it. Nonetheless, I must feel that it can be corrected or I couldn't continue mentoring my children into a future. I admit, that there are times I do wonder why the hell I brought them into this world. Then I do see, from time to time, sensational acts of humanity and feel assuaged. Yet last evening, I was discussing the Li case with my 21 yr old, who unfortunately wants to become a lawyer :lmao: but was abhorred by the verdict in the Li case. After our discussion, I silently hopes that he becomes the 'hollywood version' of lawyers-almost a pariah, if necessary. I wonder how long it will take him to become disillusioned with the system, as I have become, and I more vehemently, although still silently hope, that he does become that icon. And although you have said it is almost too far gone, I am interested to know, where do we start?
Ciaochiao


----------



## eMacMan (Nov 27, 2006)

Another scary thought here. 

Is it possible that the meds he was taking and then stopped taking actually contributed to the rampage. If this should be proven to be so, should the big phramassy pushers be held criminally responsible?


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

*Societal responsibility*



eMacMan said:


> Another scary thought here.
> 
> Is it possible that the meds he was taking and then stopped taking actually contributed to the rampage. If this should be proven to be so, should the big phramassy pushers be held criminally responsible?


Ok, you've got a point eMacman in the sense that all of society needs to become involved when it comes to the community. Your words reflect the 'it takes an entire village to raise a child'. I admire that and as a public education advocate, endorse the principle. If, and only if, the entire system is overhauled, then perhaps pharmacists can also take part in the doling out and monitoring of meds. But when you think about it, the disease is diagnosed. The docs write the 'scripts, then the patient goes to the pharmacy to fill it. Once the meds are in the hands of the patient, there is nothing the medical professionals can do to ensure the patient continues the meds. This is what makes the Li case so absurd. Everyone wants to point the fingers at another source. I live in Toronto (not a boast, just a fact) and I saw posts stating that Toronto could have prevented this when he ran a red light while living here way back in the day. Apparently Li told the cops that he ran the red because someone was chasing him. There was no one chasing him, his deluded thoughts were a fact of his mental illnesses. Apparently the cops here didn't arrest him and thus, he graduated to what he did on the bus. This to me is an excellent example of several fallacies of logic. Nonetheless, the thought is put out there for society to nod or nay. I would have to agree that there is mental illness which can be controlled and treated and there is something, call it whatever you'd like, that a person has which makes them 'unfit' to live in this society. There are communities who would exact their own form of justice just as there is for the child molesters and rapists in our own NA societies. Personally, I would allow these 'silent judicial punishments' to affect humans like Li and Bernardo, Picton and Olsen, and a host of others. Everyone remember Dahmer? He 'died' in prison. I suspect that Li is, as EP says, a genuine nut case. He will likely hurt someone in the 'home for the infirm'. This will be hushed up by the systemic silence that has brought our justice system to its current state, and hopefully, Li will never be released into any living community. What really strikes me is that AFTER THE MURDER, Li apologized to the police. What gets me BEFORE that is that Li's comment is this: "...if I didn't kill him (the victim), God said I would die." This indicates that Li DOES want to preserve his own life. Then, upon confronting the police, he 'apologized and asked the cops to kill him.' So Li did want to survive but understood that he had done something very, very wrong. The operative word here is 'understood'. As far as I'm concerned, if I have the financial means, I will go to help the vic's family to keep this piece of garbage off the streets. Aside from that, I will write letters. I still maintain that garbage like Li, if kept alive, must contribute to humanity by becoming one of the test subjects for clinical trials of various meds and products. Leave the rats/mice/dogs/monkeys alone. The products aren't made for them-they are for human consumption. So what better test subject than another human?

Just an aside but I despise Li even more because I too, am Chinese. I am a 5th gen Chinese Canadian but I simply can't fathom what Tim's family would feel every time they look at an Asian. Li is an embarrassment to our people and humanity.


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

eMacMan said:


> Another scary thought here.
> 
> Is it possible that the meds he was taking and then stopped taking actually contributed to the rampage. If this should be proven to be so, should the big phramassy pushers be held criminally responsible?


Yeah, you can blame immigration as well. For a man to have a life time rendezvous with mental illness I would think that should of been an alarm during screening/application for landed status.


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

*Start at the beginning*



MACinist said:


> Yeah, you can blame immigration as well. For a man to have a life time rendezvous with mental illness I would think that should of been an alarm during screening/application for landed status.


I couldn't agree with you more. I also believe that the federal gov't should have reviewed his application more carefully. It seems that the criterion for passage into Canada is so vague, broad, and injudicious that it allows everyone in that should be kept out. I can think of many more situations where immigration did not bother doing background checks or even reading the applicant's file. I hope that the victim's family pursues this angle and sues everyone, right down to the bottom.
Ciaochiao


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

ciaochiao said:


> I still maintain that garbage like Li, if kept alive, must contribute to humanity by becoming one of the test subjects for clinical trials of various meds and products. Leave the rats/mice/dogs/monkeys alone. The products aren't made for them-they are for human consumption. So what better test subject than another human?
> 
> Just an aside but I despise Li even more because I too, am Chinese. I am a 5th gen Chinese Canadian but I simply can't fathom what Tim's family would feel every time they look at an Asian. Li is an embarrassment to our people and humanity.




I know someone else who isn't taking their meds.

EDIT: I tried to get out but this was so revolting that I got pulled back in


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

*Not a sportsman huh?*



MACenstein'sMonster said:


> I know someone else who isn't taking their meds.
> 
> EDIT: I tried to get out but this was so revolting that I got pulled back in


Rather than address the statements with a solution, you find it far easier to attack the poster. Interesting. Never heard of 'hitting below the belt'. And I must wonder, is your avatar an indication of who you are as well? Not the creator but the created? 'Velllee intelesting, but not too funny' I'm assuming you recall the old Get Smart series. Offer something more than armchair coaching. You may not like my ideas but they're mine and non-invasive to others with a varied idea. While you're expounding the horrors of individual thought, please sign up to be Li's babysitter and provide a map to your home/community so that when he is released, he can have the comfort of living near his supporter (note singular)


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

ciaochiao said:


> Rather than address the statements with a solution, you find it far easier to attack the poster. Interesting. Never heard of 'hitting below the belt'. And I must wonder, is your avatar an indication of who you are as well? Not the creator but the created? 'Velllee intelesting, but not too funny' I'm assuming you recall the old Get Smart series. Offer something more than armchair coaching. You may not like my ideas but they're mine and non-invasive to others with a varied idea. While you're expounding the horrors of individual thought, please sign up to be Li's babysitter and provide a map to your home/community so that when he is released, he can have the comfort of living near his supporter (note singular)


I never knew Li was getting out. I'll save my over-reaction for when the day comes.

In the meantime, let's get back to your intelligent offer for a solution - subjecting mentally disturbed individuals who have committed murder to experimentation for the benefit of the "so-called" sane. Are you going to volunteer to conduct those tests? Or is this typical "internet tough-guy talk" that's just meant to get applause from the herd? 

BTW, do you even know anything about schizophrenia? Maybe you should read up on it before you start condemning people otherwise you might embarrass yourself, too.


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

*Media knowledge*



MACenstein'sMonster said:


> I never knew Li was getting out. I'll save my over-reaction for when the day comes.
> 
> In the meantime, let's get back to your intelligent offer for a solution - subjecting mentally disturbed individuals who have committed murder to experimentation for the benefit of the "so-called" sane. Are you going to volunteer to conduct those tests? Or is this typical "internet tough-guy talk" that's just meant to get applause from the herd?
> 
> BTW, do you even know anything about schizophrenia? Maybe you should read up on it before you start condemning people otherwise you might embarrass yourself, too.


I see your sarcasm and raise you one. Are you POSTIVE that Li has schizophrenia??? Are you his psychiatrist? I know a fair amount about mental illness and I also know a fair amount about people who put themselves forward as pariahs for the cause. As for the tests. Let me see: put myself forward to conduct these test: YES. Typical internet 'tough-guy talk' getting 'applause from the herd', Uh, no. I have discovered, over the years as an ehMac member, that NO ONE in this forum, has anything resembling a 'herd mentality'. Condemning people and reading: Unfortunately, I have lost the vision in one eye and am at the age whereby ease of reading is no longer a given. Still reading to educate myself, 'Always'. I feel like I'm a Mastercard commercial here. 

I have enormous desires to assist persons and people affected by the disease. IMHO, mainstream schizophrenia is a regulatory disease that can be controlled with medication. That is what our pharmaceutical industries have been working on. What Li has is something totally unknown to you and me. Unless you have medical testing that I know nothing about. How certain are you - that his actions/behavior are truly the result of schizophrenia? i would suggest that "YOU DO SOME READING, BTW". When you have exhausted all avenues of testing, then please DO POST, the results of your assays, and please include your methods and materials. 

Do not assume - you SURELY MUST KNOW WHAT ASSUME REPRESENTS?? I have no problem being open to solutions. you however, have not offered one aside from attacking the thinker. I'm going out on a limb here but 'ASSUME' that your avatar represents something far deeper than a creature created by a creator. Please correct me should I be in error. Having said this, I'm still perusing your posts for an alternate idea??


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

ciaochiao said:


> I see your sarcasm and raise you one. Are you POSTIVE that Li has schizophrenia??? Are you his psychiatrist? I know a fair amount about mental illness and I also know a fair amount about people who put themselves forward as pariahs for the cause. As for the tests. Let me see: put myself forward to conduct these test: YES. Typical internet 'tough-guy talk' getting 'applause from the herd', Uh, no. I have discovered, over the years as an ehMac member, that NO ONE in this forum, has anything resembling a 'herd mentality'. Condemning people and reading: Unfortunately, I have lost the vision in one eye and am at the age whereby ease of reading is no longer a given. Still reading to educate myself, 'Always'. I feel like I'm a Mastercard commercial here.
> 
> I have enormous desires to assist persons and people affected by the disease. IMHO, mainstream schizophrenia is a regulatory disease that can be controlled with medication. That is what our pharmaceutical industries have been working on. What Li has is something totally unknown to you and me. Unless you have medical testing that I know nothing about. How certain are you - that his actions/behavior are truly the result of schizophrenia? i would suggest that "YOU DO SOME READING, BTW". When you have exhausted all avenues of testing, then please DO POST, the results of your assays, and please include your methods and materials.
> 
> Do not assume - you SURELY MUST KNOW WHAT ASSUME REPRESENTS?? I have no problem being open to solutions. you however, have not offered one aside from attacking the thinker. I'm going out on a limb here but 'ASSUME' that your avatar represents something far deeper than a creature created by a creator. Please correct me should I be in error. Having said this, I'm still perusing your posts for an alternate idea??


Okay, so after all "that" you still fail to address why torturing somebody like Vincent Li who has a mental illness that, for arguments sake you and I know nothing about, is a good idea. Would you care to explain that? While you're doing that ask yourself how it differs for example, from those who did tests/experiments on people in Germany and Japan during WWII (btw, I realize it happened/happens the world over but those are 2 well-known examples)? Those dudes thought their actions were justified too.


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

*I knew it!!*



MACenstein'sMonster said:


> Okay, so after all "that" you still fail to address why torturing somebody like Vincent Li who has a mental illness that, for arguments sake you and I know nothing about, is a good idea. Would you care to explain that? While you're doing that ask yourself how it differs for example, from those who did tests/experiments on people in Germany and Japan during WWII (btw, I realize it happened/happens the world over but those are 2 well-known examples)? Those dudes thought their actions were justified too.


Call me, whatever you want, but I suspected you'd bring the 1ewish/german holocaust in as an example. This is nothing like that. As for responding to your general inquiries, i can do that in a post addressing the matters within this post. 

you state that you did not know the full extent of Li's alleged incarceration. You don't seem like a stupid individual, in fact if anything, you've demonstrated the proof of your IQ in your posts. I don't believe that you can be a silent witness to Li's release from whatever he's being incarcerated for. As such, are you willing to put your family and friends at risk for the principle of 'humanitarian causals'? 

More interestingly, what would you suggest as a remedy? I'm 'listening'. 
Ciaochiao


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

ciaochiao said:


> Call me, whatever you want, but I suspected you'd bring the 1ewish/german holocaust in as an example. This is nothing like that. As for responding to your general inquiries, i can do that in a post addressing the matters within this post.
> 
> you state that you did not know the full extent of Li's alleged incarceration. You don't seem like a stupid individual, in fact if anything, you've demonstrated the proof of your IQ in your posts. I don't believe that you can be a silent witness to Li's release from whatever he's being incarcerated for. As such, are you willing to put your family and friends at risk for the principle of 'humanitarian causals'?
> 
> ...


Getting back to what I asked which is why we, you and I, are having this back-and-forth - please explain how this post of YOURS.........



> I still maintain that *garbage like Li*, if kept alive, *must contribute to humanity by becoming one of the test subjects for clinical trials of various meds and products.* Leave the rats/mice/dogs/monkeys alone. The products aren't made for them-they are for human consumption. *So what better test subject than another human*?


...........differs from, for example, the Nazis who used humans as test subjects for various experiments? I'll explain in 2 words how they are alike and then you do the rest. How they are alike - FEAR/HATE. Now, your turn. Show how your mentality towards Li is different than the mentality that Nazi's showed towards their victims.


----------



## EvanPitts (Mar 9, 2007)

Looks like Godwin's Law has been fulfilled!

The "system" is broken simply because we have allowed technicalities and procedures to overtake the criminal act in the first place. We have wandered to far from the precept of "you did it - this is the punishment", and have degraded The System" by layering on all kinds of craziness that entirely detracts from the root of the problem. And The System has degenerated so that punishments are no proportional to the crimes.

Someone like Li can be "mental", and let free, even after his degenerate spectacle because we allow the crime to go unanswered by not imposing a penalty; in the same way that we allow The System to avoid the embarrassing revelations of police malfeasance in say, the Bernardo case, or of political corruption in the case of Pickton. These people can get away with the most brutal of crimes with little punishment, while proportionatly speaking, the "crime" of parking in a no stopping zone is far more brutal and rigourous. The System has lost it's focus.

As for the Nazi's - it was easy for them, their "victims" were viewed at as nothing different from any verminous animals that needed to be eliminated. I do not think that we need to convert criminals to being test rats - we just need to get back to a basic set of laws where punishments are proportional to crime - and that the penultimate crimes, that of murder and high treason, are punishable with the ultimate penalty. No need for Naziism - we just need to fulfill the visions and precepts of a civilized society as embodies within our Constitutional Instrumment, our most basic law, and do it without prostituting The System in some dysfunctional service to the special interests.


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

*Eloquent*

This, EvanPitts, is why I absolutely love ehMac. The eloquence within posts, even those which I find erroneous, is par excellence. 

Yes, you are correct with your statement that we need not revert to Nazism and yes, you're correct regarding Godwin's law. All I can say is that every time I've brought up the issue of using the Picton's, Bernardo's, etc. as "lab rats", I get the parallel to Nazism. The Jews did not do anything"wrong" aside from being Jews. That's similar to the Chinese and Blacks doing nothing more than being their culture. In this case, Li, Bernardo, Olsen, are all creatures of a different manner. I will never stop thinking that creatures like these need to be useful in today's society. I frankly don't care how heinous it sounds because quite candidly, it can't be any worse than the explanation (defense) used to argue their behavior. I do not and will never 'buy' whatever their 'defense' states. So you too, can stop with the analogies. The jewsih people were victims of a very, very sick creature. Li et al are not. Rather, they are victims of a very sick system. How is this unlike....Well, first of all, these creatures (Li et al) are not what I would consider, 'mainstream criminals'. i will not argue that I both fear and hate these 'things'. I cannot call them animals because quite frankly, there us no animal on this planet that kills for 'fun' and 'personal assuage'. As such, I have no category within which to place individuals such as Li et al. Hitlerian antics were far different. Anyone who was a 'jew' according to Hitler, were subjected to his form of justice. You can't classify Li or Bernardo. Oh, but since you've 'looped me in' with Hitler, perhaps you can draw some form of parallel? Regardless however, of your faulty paradigm, i'm wondering what you believe the system can do for these individuals? Could you please explain what our current judicial system will do in order to correct the mental deficiencies these creatures have? That's really all I want to know. Is there something better out there, that will assist criminals towards a life far better? Or are you 'one of those' who can suggest but merely scrutinize?


----------



## MACinist (Nov 17, 2003)

MACenstein'sMonster said:


> While you're doing that ask yourself how it differs for example, from those who did tests/experiments on people in Germany and Japan during WWII (btw, I realize it happened/happens the world over but those are 2 well-known examples)? Those dudes thought their actions were justified too.


Those "dudes" were murdering innocent people for the sake of genocide and Nazi science. In this case, I'm pretty sure the poster intended to use testing/research as a form of punishment (an eye for an eye if you will) that helps finding a cure. Not that I agree any person should be a lab rat as I don't believe in torture leading to death. Just keep the analogies on the same path ..


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

EvanPitts said:


> Looks like Godwin's Law has been fulfilled!
> 
> The "system" is broken simply because we have allowed technicalities and procedures to overtake the criminal act in the first place. We have wandered to far from the precept of "you did it - this is the punishment", and have degraded The System" by layering on all kinds of craziness that entirely detracts from the root of the problem. And The System has degenerated so that punishments are no proportional to the crimes.
> 
> ...


The poster that I was responding to referred to Li as "garbage" hence my comparison to the situation in Nazi Germany. In both cases the hate/fear comes before rational thinking - what little there is.

As for your suggestions - the best system for mankind to live his life within went out with the unicorn.


----------



## MACenstein'sMonster (Aug 21, 2008)

MACinist said:


> Those "dudes" were murdering innocent people for the sake of genocide and Nazi science. In this case, I'm pretty sure the poster intended to use testing/research as a form of punishment (an eye for an eye if you will) that helps finding a cure. Not that I agree any person should be a lab rat as I don't believe in torture leading to death. Just keep the analogies on the same path ..




So when he first referred to Li as "garbage" and then suggests using him for testing you get the idea that this was a well thought out plan without hate and fear being at the base of his ideas? Those powerful emotions are the common denominator between the analogies which gets people started on the same path.


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

*leaps of logic*



MACenstein'sMonster said:


> So when he first referred to Li as "garbage" and then suggests using him for testing you get the idea that this was a well thought out plan without hate and fear being at the base of his ideas? Those powerful emotions are the common denominator between the analogies which gets people started on the same path.


i did indeed suggest that the Li's of this world need to have a form of punishment befitting their crime. i would never apply this form of 'justice' to those who rob stores, break and enter, etc. These are petty crimes that can either be corrected with the introduction of a set of coping skills that many of these law-breakers do not have. Then there are those who prey violently on other members of our society without fear of impunity. I have no problem gathering these creatures, there lumps of garbage, into finally HELPING the human race which they have no regard for. As such, their best use, since our justice system insists upon keeping them around, is to atone for their deeds but finally becoming something of use in our society,. I do not apologize for my remarks and never will. I have seen far too many lab rats,mice/monkeys/dogs/ sacrificed in the name of research. The products aren't for them, they're for us. Or, Macenstein, are you a person who NEVER uses products tested on animals? 

As for your consistent reference to 'fear and hate' and their parallel to the jews and nazis. You are really exhibiting a leap of logic that simply does not compute. What are you suggesting, with your cornucopia o of compassion?


----------



## screature (May 14, 2007)

*Panel hears that Vince Li should get more freedom*

Panel hears that Vince Li should get more freedom


Well we all knew this would come to pass didn't we...



> Vince Li, who violently beheaded a young passenger and ate his flesh on a Greyhound bus four years ago, could soon be given temporary passes away from a Manitoba mental hospital.
> 
> On Monday, a criminal review board heard that Li has made great progress over the past few years, and has responded well to medication prescribed since the horrific incident.
> 
> ...


----------



## Kosh (May 27, 2002)

I was discussing this with someone yesterday, whether we could see Li ever on his own and I think the answer was almost no. I really think that he should be in some sort of halfway house if he's let out. Somewhere where they can keep an eye on him for at least part of the day. Someone should be monitoring him to make sure that he's taking his meds. I'm assuming he's stable on his meds, but I can only trust the doctors and nurses for that analysis. His employer if he ever gets employment should also know of his medical situation.

But he's not close to being let out yet on his own. From what I had heard on the news, they would let him out for 30 minute trips in a town, monitored by an officer and health worker.

I couldn't even see any town or city feeling safe with him living there.


----------



## MazterCBlazter (Sep 13, 2008)

.


----------



## ciaochiao (Apr 21, 2005)

screature said:


> Panel hears that Vince Li should get more freedom
> 
> 
> Well we all knew this would come to pass didn't we...


yes, I guess we did but didn't want to say much at the time since it was so sensitive. I've read the entire thread again and it's still sensitive. I feel as if it's yesterday and that the incident happened well, yesterday. In another 5-7 years, it will quietly be written that Vincent Li will be released into some type of halfway house. Then some years after that, he'll be released into the community. Since he's not a sex offender, I don't know if we'd be privy to knowing where he was living. There really is no such thing as justice. I recently refused to read anything connected to the Tori Stafford murder because it was just too much and I knew that nothing more than life sentences would be given for the heinous acts of violence the murderers committed. What is the point? Without something more, there really is no deterrent.


----------

