Moncton NB shooting

[Big Guy]

Incorrect. SOME current rules of law disagree with me.

Yes. Murder. Maybe not pre-meditated murder, but murder.

Then, in the case of murder, they should be in a permanent state in incarceration. Unless it was pre-meditated, in which case, capital punishment should be applied.

Correct, but only due to current legal state. They are legally considered not responsible, but in my opinion, they absolutely are.

You have a very interesting and minority point view. Thanks for sharing.

[On Guard for Thee]

 

You have a very interesting and minority point view. Thanks for sharing.

 

I think "eyeball" summed it up more accurately as well as succinctly with "just plain sick"

[jbg]

I'll give you an example; A person is having lunch in a restaurant. When he/she is not looking, someone puts a hallucinogenic like LSD or whatever into their drink. The person drinks the solution, goes berserk and kills another patron. Is that person guilty of anything?

Is this first reaction of most people on an unexpected drug high to kill someone?

[Hydraboss]

I think "eyeball" summed it up more accurately as well as succinctly with "just plain sick"

...and your opinion of someone with a BAC of 0.24 driving over a pedestrian? Surely THAT person can't be held responsible?!? And the guy who, in a fit of blind rage, shakes his newborn to death? Surely THAT person can't be held responsible?!? And the woman, in a fit of depression, drowns her three children in the bathtub? Surely THAT person can't be held responsible?!?

Sick, my ass.

[On Guard for Thee]

...and your opinion of someone with a BAC of 0.24 driving over a pedestrian? Surely THAT person can't be held responsible?!? And the guy who, in a fit of blind rage, shakes his newborn to death? Surely THAT person can't be held responsible?!? And the woman, in a fit of depression, drowns her three children in the bathtub? Surely THAT person can't be held responsible?!?

Sick, my ass.

Nothing of what you describe is mental illness.

[Hydraboss]

Nothing of what you describe is mental illness.

But that is what is used in court to relieve these people of responsibility. The drunk was "incapable", the guy with the baby was "temporarily disassociated" from reality, and the woman suffers from "manic depression". Arguably, the drunk may not fall under the heading of "mental illness", but the other two would by definition.

It makes no difference that you find it "distasteful" that I don't pray at the altar of 2nd, 5th, 8th, and 19th chances for rehabilitation or believe that making excuses for people who commit heinous crimes is of any value to society. I submit that the larger problem is that there is no accountability left in our legal system (yes, I purposely did not use the word "justice").

[On Guard for Thee]

But that is what is used in court to relieve these people of responsibility. The drunk was "incapable", the guy with the baby was "temporarily disassociated" from reality, and the woman suffers from "manic depression". Arguably, the drunk may not fall under the heading of "mental illness", but the other two would by definition.

It makes no difference that you find it "distasteful" that I don't pray at the altar of 2nd, 5th, 8th, and 19th chances for rehabilitation or believe that making excuses for people who commit heinous crimes is of any value to society. I submit that the larger problem is that there is no accountability left in our legal system (yes, I purposely did not use the word "justice").

So, just go ahead and string 'em up? And I wouldn't get drunk and run over someone and try to use that defense you speak of. Look and see how often that has worked in the last 20 years or so. Or any of the other one's come to think of it. A defence lawyer may try to argue it, but how successful that argument is is the true test.

Edited June 10, 2014 by On Guard for Thee

[bush_cheney2004]

Doesn't everybody know that "Hug-a-Thug" policies cure mental illness and anti-social behaviour ?

[Hydraboss]

So, just go ahead and string 'em up?

If they committed pre-meditated murder? Absolutely. Although lethal injection will work fine. If not first degree, then the exact same punishment meted out to any other member of the public.

[On Guard for Thee]

Doesn't everybody know that "Hug-a-Thug" policies cure mental illness and anti-social behaviour ?

Nah! Much better to throw their asses in jail where Dick Cheney can make a boatload of money off the taxpayer keeping them for a few years, making them REALLY crazy and then throw 'em back on the street. Yep, that makes sense.

[On Guard for Thee]

If they committed pre-meditated murder? Absolutely. Although lethal injection will work fine. If not first degree, then the exact same punishment meted out to any other member of the public.

Well hopefully here in Canada we'll never backpedal into that mess.

[Hydraboss]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/doctor-found-not-criminally-responsible-of-killing-his-kids-returns-to-court/article14589228/

http://www.timslaw.ca/page/5/ <--- This one is 23 pages of NCRs. Vince Li was a perfect example of what I am talking about. The "man" should not be breathing any longer.

[guyser]

The "man" should not be breathing any longer.

Even though he has been a model citizen?

Even though he admitted guilt, vowed to always be on his meds (so far so good) , never very far away from his PO?

I find it better that some get let out versus the state killing the wrong person.

[Hydraboss]

Even though he has been a model citizen?

Even though he admitted guilt, vowed to always be on his meds (so far so good) , never very far away from his PO?

I find it better that some get let out versus the state killing the wrong person.

Someone actually cares about how he's acted since he killed and ate a young man? Seriously??? Model citizens do not eat other citizens. At least not in Canada.

And there is zero chance that Li did not murder Mclean. Zero. That is why he should have been executed upon his conviction. Immediately.

[guyser]

Yes, since he was found NCR he has been watched closely to see if he is ok on his meds, and apparently he is.

There is no such thing as a model citizen.

No one doubts that Li murdered the young man. Not a single doubt anywhere.

But of course they whys were very important. It would appear he has been behaving and showing great signs of progress.

Im glad we cannot craft a death penalty law that fits for some but not all. So for now we will live (me happily) with no chance of being put to death.

[Argus]

...and your opinion of someone with a BAC of 0.24 driving over a pedestrian? Surely THAT person can't be held responsible?!? And the guy who, in a fit of blind rage, shakes his newborn to death? Surely THAT person can't be held responsible?!? And the woman, in a fit of depression, drowns her three children in the bathtub? Surely THAT person can't be held responsible?!?

Sick, my ass.

Far be it for ME to be the voice of reason on sentencing of violent criminals but -- you aren't responsible for being mentally ill. You ARE responsible for getting drunk or taking drugs.

Insofar as we hold people responsible for their actions, we need to take into account the degree to which their actions flow from ignorance, meanness, cruelty, greed, or a medical condition beyond their control.

We have horribly bad mental health systems in both in Canada and in the US. We closed down the mental hospitals and sent all the loonies out into the street because it was cheaper. So perhaps we should bear a lot of the blame ourselves.

[On Guard for Thee]

Just look at the death penalty laws in the US. They tend to "fit" you more if you're black and poor. And you don't have to be a math genius to figure out the stats and conclude that a number of innocent poor blacks have been put to death by the state. And that's something you can't take back.

[Argus]

Nah! Much better to throw their asses in jail where Dick Cheney can make a boatload of money off the taxpayer keeping them for a few years, making them REALLY crazy and then throw 'em back on the street. Yep, that makes sense.

There was a Sixty Minute piece on last week, on the US mental health system. Some people ought to have a look at it. One particularly interesting piece of note was an interview with the Sheriff of Cook County in Chicago, at the Cook County Jail, which he termed the largest "mental health treatment center" in the United States. Yes, the jail. Because that's where the mentally ill seem to be winding up given the lack of treatment.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/untreated-mental-illness-an-imminent-danger-2/

[On Guard for Thee]

There was a Sixty Minute piece on last week, on the US mental health system. Some people ought to have a look at it. One particularly interesting piece of note was an interview with the Sheriff of Cook County in Chicago, at the Cook County Jail, which he termed the largest "mental health treatment center" in the United States. Yes, the jail. Because that's where the mentally ill seem to be winding up given the lack of treatment.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/untreated-mental-illness-an-imminent-danger-2/

Thanks, I will give that a look this evening.

[Hydraboss]

Yes, since he was found NCR he has been watched closely to see if he is ok on his meds, and apparently he is.

And he was supposed to be on his meds when he ate another person. Gee, I sure hope he takes them this time.

There is no such thing as a model citizen.

But there are citizens who don't murder and eat other citizens. I prefer them.

No one doubts that Li murdered the young man. Not a single doubt anywhere.

Exactly. Should have been executed as his guilt was "beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt".

But of course they whys were very important. It would appear he has been behaving and showing great signs of progress.

So you're saying he may not murder and eat any more Canadians? That's reassuring.

Im glad we cannot craft a death penalty law that fits for some but not all. So for now we will live (me happily) with no chance of being put to death.

Unfortunately, that also means that killers will have that exact same lack of fear.

[guyser]

And he was supposed to be on his meds when he ate another person. Gee, I sure hope he takes them this time.

So do his PO's . From all accounts it looks promising.

Exactly. Should have been executed as his guilt was "beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt".

Not at all, he was found NCR

So you're saying he may not murder and eat any more Canadians? That's reassuring.

Im reassured you may not murder and eat any CDN's. Im reassured and hope the guy sitting next to me at the Jays game wont do the same.

Unfortunately, that also means that killers will have that exact same lack of fear.

Well we both know that the death penalty has absolutely ZERO impact on the murder crime stats, so not sure why you would bother with that load of hoeey

[jbg]

And he was supposed to be on his meds when he ate another person. Gee, I sure hope he takes them this time.

<sarcasm begins>How about appetite suppressant? It may impact more directly on the problem of those inclined to eat other people.

But there are citizens who don't murder and eat other citizens. I prefer them.

They're boring. </sarcasm>

Exactly. Should have been executed as his guilt was "beyond the shadow of a reasonable doubt".

On a more serious note there are some people who just don't believe individuals need to take responsibility for their actions.

So you're saying he may not murder and eat any more Canadians? That's reassuring.

<sarcasm begins>I hope you're not directing them to non-Canadians.</sarcasm> Edited June 10, 2014 by jbg

[cybercoma]

"No person is criminally responsible for an act committed or an omission made while suffering from a mental disorder that rendered the person incapable of appreciating the nature and quality of the act or omission or of knowing that it was wrong. "

It's important to note that it's not all mental illnesses that are legal defences, but very specific illnesses that result in the bolded condition. Someone could suffer a mental illness, but still understand the gravity of their crimes and the nature of their actions. Someone who suffers a mental illness that causes them to break from reality, or where they might suffer auditory or visual hallucinations, might genuinely believe they were doing something good when they kill someone or commit some other crime. That person is incapable of understanding their actions or the nature of their crime. As a result, they can't be held criminally responsible because they're incapable of understanding their actions due to their illness. It's in those cases that a person is not criminally responsible, but that does not mean the person is "not guilty." It means the person can't be held responsible for their crimes and as a result will likely be under mental health care and supervision for the rest of their lives. They require care to keep them from having episodes again and there are many instances where these kinds of illnesses can be treated with the proper care. The problem is that mental health care is a serious problem in Canada. It's sorely lacking.

The other problem is that we continue to stigmatize mental health issues by being sloppy with our language. Saying anyone who kills must be mentally ill is wrong. You don't have to suffer from a mental illness to kill someone. There are many people who feel justified in killing. In this case, Bourque probably felt justified killing police because he saw them as an oppressive force that wouldn't allow him the freedom to own stockpiles of weapons. He felt justified defending what he saw as his "rights." That's not mental illness. That's rationalization of a terrible act. That's not someone who doesn't understand the nature of what he's doing. He understands it very well and he knows it's wrong to kill people, but he probably felt justified in doing it.

This is why we shouldn't just drop the "mental illness" tag whenever someone kills. There are situations where it's completely valid. A guy on a bus snaps, thinks someone's an alien, decapitates him and tries eating his eyeballs--that's a mental illness problem. He had no idea what he was doing and could not possibly understand that it was wrong. His mental illness created an entirely different perception in his mind of the situation than what we know as reality. That sure as hell isn't the case with Bourque. That wasn't the case with Bernardo. People can be "sick" in the pejorative sense without actually suffering a perception-altering mental illness that would make them not criminally responsible.

[bush_cheney2004]

We have horribly bad mental health systems in both in Canada and in the US.

Say it ain't so...Canada has the CHA and all people get health care regardless of ability to pay. No "American style" mental health care for Canada...no sirreeee !

[eyeball]

On a more serious note there are some people who just don't believe individuals need to take responsibility for their actions.

That would be you two, doing your best to keep societal attitudes towards mental illness moored in the dark ages.