Man Beheaded on Greyhound Bus

[eyeball]

A bus is pretty crowded would be hard to wield off a couple of men with a knife.

On the contrary, I would think it would be easy to defend yourself from a mob within the narrow confines of a bus. The mob would be in single file after all and I'd hate to be the first in line.

I don't know, I wasn't there, but I just hate to think that he died wondering why no one was helping him.

Exactly, you weren't there and you have the luxury of all the time in the world to provide a hindsight that is weighted with your own biases and imagination.

Edited August 1, 2008 by eyeball

[White Doors]

On the contrary, I would think it would be easy to defend yourself from a mob within the narrow confines of a bus. The mob would be in single file after all and I'd hate to be the first in line.

Exactly, you weren't there and you have the luxury of all the time in the world to provide a hindsight that is weighted with your own biases and imagination.

Yes, you are correct - I am biased because I wish there was a way that he could have been saved.

The same as you are for saying that there was no way.

Congratulations.

[Wild Bill]

Yes, you are correct - I am biased because I wish there was a way that he could have been saved.

The same as you are for saying that there was no way.

Congratulations.

Doesn't appear to me that you are biased in the same way at all!

One way is biased from understanding what can work and what can not.

The other is biased according to a wish.

[myata]

I am biased because I wish there was a way that he could have been saved.

And that makes a huge deal of difference, for sure.

But wait, here's something what actually does, something that you previously used to address, sarcastically. Imagine if the guy, before going crack was legally entitled to accumulating a bunch of powerful guns. Imagine some passengers took out a few of their own. How would the wishful thinking play out in this case, in the confined space full of panic stricken people? Your (wishful) guess.

That's the problem with the ideological folks like Harper, Bush and such. They just can't (i.e won't) connect two obvous truths together. Some people will always go nuts and some people will always turn to violence. The more chance they'd have their hands on more powerful guns, the greater (in the destructive sense) will be the outcome.

2+2. Confirmed by all kind of statistics (places with higher gun ownership also have higher gun death and crime rates). But not to Harper/Bush. Talk to them about gun control, and they aren't interested. Plain and simple. Restriction of freedom. I.e. one of the freedoms they actually care about. Talk about longer sentences and they're all in! As if it would make any difference to the crackpot in question (as well as hundreds of other crackpots), whether he'll be sent in for 27 years, as opposed to 22.5. Or, even fried alive (just wait for a statistical coincidence of a few episodes like this in a short time frame, and you may yet see Harper's folks bringing out this all time favourite from their crime control arsenal). Who cares that it goes against all logic, and experience. All that matters to these folks is their unquestionnable beliefs. A second before you go crack you're a respected owner and entitled to fill your caserne to your hearts desire. You go crack, and they'll make a serious example of you, for everybody to take in and remember. What, to not own guns? No, that's sacred! Not to go nuts. Here, legislated, and the problem's all solved. Who cares about those numbers, one'd have to tear one's bum away from TV to read and understand them, anyways.

Edited August 1, 2008 by myata

[Argus]

In 2006, an Ottawa man was stabbed to death on one of our city buses.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2006...s-stabbing.html

As a result of this murder, undercover constables started patrolling some bus routes on January 2007.

Somalian

BTW, news reports yesterday said over half of all street gang members in Ottawa are foreign born. Most of the remainder are first generation "canadians".

As for the "alleged" killer (as CTV refers to him) we'll spend thousands of taxpayer dollars studying his brain and his background down to his infancy.

His name is Vince Weiguang Li which suggests he is another sterling product of our wondrous immigration system.

[capricorn]

I heard some people's say that the guy suddenly cracked, which led to the gruesome murder. I don't buy it. This creep prepares to take a bus and packs a rambo-type knife for the trip. Why? For what purpose?

Doesn't the fact that he carried that type of knife indicate that there was premeditation to commit some type of violent crime?

Another puzzling aspect is the choice of victim. The killer was initially seated at the front of the bus then moved to the very back of the bus. Could it be that he thought the back of the bus would be a better place to ensure the attack on the unsuspecting victim would more likely be uninterrupted and successful? As it happened, all other bus passengers faced away from the attacker and his victim.

It looks to me he was deliberate in his actions.

We now know the identity of the victim. Tim McLean, age 22, appears to have been a regular guy going about his life. My condolences to his family and friends.

http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/story....1d-66563d16ec9f

[GostHacked]

Fortuna

That's crazy. By your logic then, we wouldn't let anyone skydive because of the possibility of a chute not opening,

This is in the top 5 of the most insanely fun things I have done in my life.

Doesn't the fact that he carried that type of knife indicate that there was premeditation to commit some type of violent crime?

Not at all. It means he carries a knife. If he had a fork this guy would have done something anyways. I know people that carry knives on them. Hell, I carry a box cutter in my backpack most of the time. Large scissors are just as deadly.

It looks to me he was deliberate in his actions.

It was deliberate and methodical.

American Woman

But how could someone be this disturbed without showing any sign of it? And how does one "calmly" stab someone "50 or 60 times?" Sounds as if this guy is as nuts as Manson.

Military personelle are trained to do just that. Kill with no remorse and to show no emotion. What I do not get is how he managed to get to 60 times before someone noticed. Only after the fact he removed the head did people notice?

Wild Bill

It must have been only a second or two later when I heard a series of clicks. I looked around and there were at least a half dozen other guns trained on the rowdy guy! One gentleman said "I suggest you put that away and settle down!"

The offender looked around and instantly wilted, putting away his gun. He quietly left, without even finishing his drink. The rest of the patrons resumed their conversation as if nothing had happened.

That is 100% awesome.

Eyeball

There's always gun control.

Wild Bill's experience is a perfect example of gun control.

Blubbler

Yes, perhaps the devil weed.

Devil weed??

[Fain]

Link

When I read about an incident like this, it makes me wonder if drivers of public transportation should be armed. Also, I haven't traveled by bus since 9-11 so I'm wondering what kind of security, if any, passengers must go through.

A man was stabbed to death then beheaded on a Greyhound bus in an apparent random act of violence, according to an eyewitness

Garnet Caton, one of 37 passengers on the bus, said he witnessed the attack.

"We all heard this scream, this like blood-curdling scream," Caton told CBC Newsworld.

He alleged the suspect had a "large hunting knife" and repeatedly stabbed the victim "like 50 or 60 times."

"The attacker was calmy over top of the victim continually cutting him. I think the victim was gone at that point," Caton told the CBC.

He said the victim appeared to be sleeping before the attack and the suspect was not acting out of the ordinary.

The bus was evacuated, but Caton said he was one of a handful of witnesses who saw the suspect allegedly trying to behead the body.

The suspect later appeared at the front of the bus, he said.

"He calmly walked up to the front (of the bus) with (the victim's) head in his hand and the knife and then dropped the head in front of us," Caton said, adding he believes the suspect later returned to the back of the bus and was seen later "taunting police with the head in his hand out the window."

I find it difficult to believe that such a deliberate and vicious act could have been random. At any rate, what's the worst sentence he can be given in Canada? OR will he most likely be taking the insanity plea? And if he does, what's the worst that could happen in Canada-- anyone know? I would have to say one would have to be insane to commit such an act, especially if it was random. But how could someone be this disturbed without showing any sign of it? And how does one "calmly" stab someone "50 or 60 times?" Sounds as if this guy is as nuts as Manson.

It's a disgusting and warped story for sure. However arming low-educated people with firearms just to transport people wouyld be disasterous.

[Guest American Woman]

It's a disgusting and warped story for sure. However arming low-educated people with firearms just to transport people wouyld be disasterous.

Like I said, I wasn't necessarily referring to firearms. There's stun guns and tasers and pepper spray, but when it comes right down to it, it's not the bus driver's job to have to confront nuts like this as he/she could be putting his/her life in danger by doing so.

To those who are critical of the passengers' non-interference -- it sounds as if the man had already been fatally stabbed by the time people realized what was going on and would have had a chance to react in a group with any kind of plan. No single person could be expected to take on an obviously crazed killer. As has been pointed out already, his strength may have been pumped up by drugs and it sounds as if he were a big guy to begin with. I think there would have been more casualties if anyone would have tried to prevent it. Furthermore, all the accounts I've read said the people at the front of the bus weren't even sure what was going on. Most were sleeping, so I'm sure they didn't even immediately totally have their wits about them. The RCMP praised the reaction of the drivers and the passengers, saying their actions prevented more tragedy. I do know this. If I were on a bus and the driver stopped and said 'get off!' I would get off. If any in front would have tried to elbow their way into the back in the narrow bus isle that was filled with people, likely more people in back would have been killed as the killer's attention was drawn to them. So an attempt to stop him, when it could have very well been too late anyway, may have resulted in other innocent people's deaths; and not necessarily those who were trying to aid the victim.

As for the claim that he had tried to attack others, that it wasn't isolated to just the victim, I'd appreciate a source to back that up. Every witness account I've read says just the opposite-- that he paid no attention at all to anyone else. It was as if they weren't even there.

I've read that Day wants to go to the limits in this case, so time will tell.

Edited to add:

As for the comment that military training teaches one to kill methodically without emotion, I had never thought of that possibility. Also, I know other horrific random crimes have been committed, but to kill with a gun takes a different mindset than actually physically sticking a knife in someone over and over again and then cutting off their head. I think it would be much easier to kill with a gun than with a knife.

Edited August 1, 2008 by American Woman

[Wild Bill]

2+2. Confirmed by all kind of statistics (places with higher gun ownership also have higher gun death and crime rates). But not to Harper/Bush. Talk to them about gun control, and they aren't interested. Plain and simple. Restriction of freedom. anyways.

Interesting. I've never seen such statistics. In fact, those I have seen say the opposite.

Since it's your point, how about defending it with a link or two giving those statistics?

I would truly be interested.

[myata]

Wikipedia: Gun ownership rates

Navigate lower in the page for "List of countries by firearm-related death rate ".

Note that all countries with high gun ownership rate (e.g Switzerland) also have higher gun death rates (homicides and suicides). To dispell popular myth propagated by gun lobby. The exception of Canada (average ownership rate, higher homicide rate) can probably be explained by illegal guns flowing from south. Ie. the actual, "real terms" gun ownership rate, including illegal guns in Canada would be higher than that indicated in the table. Bringing it on par with other high ownership countries (Finland, Switzerland, ~0.6-0.8 / 100,000) but nowhere as high as the all time leader down south (3.7 / 100,000).

Now it would be interesting to examine those stats that you mentioned. I suggest to continue this discussion in the "Crime" thread though, as it isn't directly related to this topic.

[bush_cheney2004]

That's the problem with the ideological folks like Harper, Bush and such. They just can't (i.e won't) connect two obvous truths together. Some people will always go nuts and some people will always turn to violence. The more chance they'd have their hands on more powerful guns, the greater (in the destructive sense) will be the outcome.

2+2. Confirmed by all kind of statistics (places with higher gun ownership also have higher gun death and crime rates). But not to Harper/Bush. Talk to them about gun control, and they aren't interested. Plain and simple.

This is an irrelevant rant....the perp used a knife, not a gun. Do you have a link for knife ownership rates?

[bk59]

For those who think someone with a gun could have prevented this tragedy:

The first sign that people had that something was wrong was when this person stabbed the victim in the neck. He then continued to stab him multiple times. Realistically, someone with a gun could not have saved the victim in this case.

[myata]

This is an irrelevant rant....the perp used a knife, not a gun. Do you have a link for knife ownership rates?

No, it's relevant because while bizzare crackpots will always be with us, the results of their acts can be linked very closely to their chance of getting more or more powerful guns. As any number of similar incidents will demonstrate. This time it's a knife. Next, it could be a semi. Or a bunch of them. One can't control people going crack, it just happens. One can control access to guns. But in some minds the two just aren't connected.

[bush_cheney2004]

No, it's relevant because while bizzare crackpots will always be with us, the results of their acts can be linked very closely to their chance of getting more or more powerful guns. As any number of similar incidents will demonstrate. This time it's a knife. Next, it could be a semi. Or a bunch of them. One can't control people going crack, it just happens. One can control access to guns. But in some minds the two just aren't connected.

WTF? The 9/11 hijackers used simple razor blade box cutters and jet airliners, not "more powerful guns". Let 'em go "crack"....we kill more people each day with motor vehicles in North America.

Where was Bernie Goetz when we needed him?

[AngusThermopyle]

No, it's relevant because while bizzare crackpots will always be with us, the results of their acts can be linked very closely to their chance of getting more or more powerful guns. As any number of similar incidents will demonstrate.

Okay, how about providing a cite or two that will show how your previous statement is not in fact pure speculation. Also could you explain just what "the results of their acts can be linked very closely to their chance of getting more or more powerful guns" means? Do you mean the killing of someone will cause the killer to have access to more powerful guns? If that is so then I have to tell you I haven't heard anything quite so absurd in quite some time. If that is not what you meant then your statement can only be described as meaningless drivel.

Personally, without something to verify it, I think your whole statement is pure speculation, rather incoherent and very juvenile. As such it should be given as much consideration as the rantings of Pee Wee Herman.

[Wild Bill]

Wikipedia: Gun ownership rates

Navigate lower in the page for "List of countries by firearm-related death rate ".

Note that all countries with high gun ownership rate (e.g Switzerland) also have higher gun death rates (homicides and suicides). To dispell popular myth propagated by gun lobby. The exception of Canada (average ownership rate, higher homicide rate) can probably be explained by illegal guns flowing from south. Ie. the actual, "real terms" gun ownership rate, including illegal guns in Canada would be higher than that indicated in the table. Bringing it on par with other high ownership countries (Finland, Switzerland, ~0.6-0.8 / 100,000) but nowhere as high as the all time leader down south (3.7 / 100,000).

Now it would be interesting to examine those stats that you mentioned. I suggest to continue this discussion in the "Crime" thread though, as it isn't directly related to this topic.

Here's a good one:

http://homepage.usask.ca/~sta575/cdn-firea...un-control.html

So how does this work? Do we now try to amass more links than the other guy? The most links wins

[jdobbin]

When I read about an incident like this, it makes me wonder if drivers of public transportation should be armed. Also, I haven't traveled by bus since 9-11 so I'm wondering what kind of security, if any, passengers must go through.

It certainly has been a horrible incident and I feel very sad for the family that learned of the death of their son through the media.

As far as security goes, I have no problem with improvements but buses, streetcars and subways by their very nature are fairly accessible. Even the Israelis have had trouble securing buses. Even when they secure the buses, the lines waiting for buses are had to secure.

I don't know that arming drivers brings more security either. It would take only one incident of a crazy driver shooting someone to change people's thinking about the practice.

[myata]

Here's a good one:

http://homepage.usask.ca/~sta575/cdn-firea...un-control.html

So how does this work? Do we now try to amass more links than the other guy? The most links wins

Did you have a point to make?

[AngusThermopyle]

Did you have a point to make?

In the same vein, are you going to answer my questions about your unintelligible post?

[eyeball]

Eyeball

Wild Bill's experience is a perfect example of gun control.

I suspect there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of imperfect examples for every one that's perfect. If it sounds too good to be true it probably is.

[Wild Bill]

I suspect there are hundreds, perhaps thousands of imperfect examples for every one that's perfect. If it sounds too good to be true it probably is.

Actually, "eyeball" has confused me. Does he mean gun control would have prevented a gun being pulled in the first place? Or is he being sarcastic towards the idea of gun control as being impractical and ineffective in the real world.

Myself, I would like to see gun control that works to keep guns out of the hands of criminals. But then, I also always wanted a pony and to get to drive a fire engine.

[eyeball]

I think gostHacked was implying that having an armed and ready populace is the best way to control guns and the story you told apparently exemplifies this.

Edited August 1, 2008 by eyeball

[Guest American Woman]

It certainly has been a horrible incident and I feel very sad for the family that learned of the death of their son through the media.

As far as security goes, I have no problem with improvements but buses, streetcars and subways by their very nature are fairly accessible. Even the Israelis have had trouble securing buses. Even when they secure the buses, the lines waiting for buses are had to secure.

I agree that security on buses and streetcars and subways would be difficult to enforce. It would slow these forms of transportation down to a crawl, which would make them useless, really. I guess that's why I was thinking maybe some form of a weapon might be a consideration. I suppose that isn't really the answer, but I sure can understand why people do want to be armed. I think I would like to at least have something like mace or pepper spray, but don't know how effective that would really be, I have to admit.

I don't know that arming drivers brings more security either. It would take only one incident of a crazy driver shooting someone to change people's thinking about the practice.

And there likely would be an incident of a crazy driver abusing the taser, stun gun, pepper spray, or whatever it is they'd be allowed to carry (I'm not really suggesting that the drivers carry handguns). But in retrospect, I have to agree with bk59 regarding this particular incident:

For those who think someone with a gun could have prevented this tragedy:

The first sign that people had that something was wrong was when this person stabbed the victim in the neck. He then continued to stab him multiple times. Realistically, someone with a gun could not have saved the victim in this case.

Edited August 1, 2008 by American Woman

[mikedavid00]

Myself, I would like to see gun control that works to keep guns out of the hands of criminals.

He Immigrant?