You are jumping to extremes to make your position.
I'm not talking about implementing a Turkish prison system.
I'm saying that given what Li has done, I'm not in favour of throwing a ton of cash to try and integrate him into mainstream society.
I'm saying the resources we commit to people such as Li are excessive. Especially when we look at the resources we fail to provide to, say, abused children.
Once again, we are apart on this issue. I can accept where you are at as much as I am comfortable with my stance.
Remember that I am in full support of providing help to those in need. Just not after the fact. You carve a guy up and eat him, well, that's taking things a little too far. The capacity of such an individual places him inside an institution where he needs to remain so that another mother will not have to experience something similar.
I didn't jump to any extremes. This is what you and others have suggested.
This is part of the issue: you say "given what Li has done....". Being not criminally responsible means that when you are deciding the man's fate, you can't take what he has done into consideration, since he was found not guilty due to mental disease or defect. There are probably as many people in that institution that had the same voices and same insanity as he did, but maybe he had family or friends that had them committed before they did similar acts. We can't treat those people differently than we do Li. That's against the law. In the eyes of the law, Vince Li did nothing criminal since he wasn't capable of understanding that he was. He didn't have the capacity to know that what he di was "taking things a little too far".
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I'm saying the resources we commit to people such as Li are excessive. Especially when we look at the resources we fail to provide to, say, abused children.
this is very subjective. it's obvious that you'd state that you think those resources used for Li are excessive when it is your position that any resource used on him is wasted.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I'm saying the resources we commit to people such as Li are excessive. Especially when we look at the resources we fail to provide to, say, abused children.
this is very subjective. it's obvious that you'd state that you think those resources used for Li are excessive when it is your position that any resource used on him is wasted.
Fair enough.
But this doesn't necessarily mean I am wrong.
You keep thrusting your position at me so it's safe to say you feel the efforts made towards Li have been worthwhile and that we should be doing all we can to get him straightened out so he can become a productive member of society.
If James Holmes is found by the law to be not guilty because he was incapable of understanding what he was doing that we should spend just as much effort rehabilitating him for reintegration as well?
Sorry Hugh. I just am not there with you. And never will be.
I'm saying the resources we commit to people such as Li are excessive. Especially when we look at the resources we fail to provide to, say, abused children.
this is very subjective. it's obvious that you'd state that you think those resources used for Li are excessive when it is your position that any resource used on him is wasted.
Fair enough.
But this doesn't necessarily mean I am wrong.
You keep thrusting your position at me so it's safe to say you feel the efforts made towards Li have been worthwhile and that we should be doing all we can to get him straightened out so he can become a productive member of society.
If James Holmes is found by the law to be not guilty because he was incapable of understanding what he was doing that we should spend just as much effort rehabilitating him for reintegration as well?
Sorry Hugh. I just am not there with you. And never will be.
one of my first posts resurrecting this thread was how uncomfortable it made me that this guy might someday get more freedom in the public. I have never said I want Li to be reintegrated into society. I made that very clear.
"thrusting my position"? I'm merely responding to your posts. How is that "thrusting"?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
people are worried about this guy(who is an abberation) being out in public... but its the normal guy next door with the girls in his basement you should be worried about.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
one of my first posts resurrecting this thread was how uncomfortable it made me that this guy might someday get more freedom in the public. I have never said I want Li to be reintegrated into society. I made that very clear.
"thrusting my position"? I'm merely responding to your posts. How is that "thrusting"?
I'll try to be really succinct here and tell me what I have gotten wrong from our dialogue or what you may have missed:
Hugh says:
* Li is not criminally responsible for the crime he committed- his illness is.
* Li needs the support he is getting: he is a human being worthy of such an effort on the part of society.
* You oppose the idea of changing funding formulas to benefit (using my example) abused children if that comes at the expense of less care for people such as Li.
30 Bills says:
* Li is criminally responsible for the crime he committed- if he's not... then one would be suggesting that no crime was committed. The parents of Tim McLean and people such as I think there was.
* I can accept some reasonable treatment for Li, but have a problem with the extra efforts being made on his behalf to try and integrate him into mainstream society.
* I wonder why we have our priorities in such a manner that a fellow like Li would receive so much in terms of legal defence and medical treatment when abused children under our care (or even homeless people for that matter) receive much less.
one of my first posts resurrecting this thread was how uncomfortable it made me that this guy might someday get more freedom in the public. I have never said I want Li to be reintegrated into society. I made that very clear.
"thrusting my position"? I'm merely responding to your posts. How is that "thrusting"?
I'll try to be really succinct here and tell me what I have gotten wrong from our dialogue or what you may have missed:
Hugh says:
* Li is not criminally responsible for the crime he committed- his illness is.
* Li needs the support he is getting: he is a human being worthy of such an effort on the part of society.
* You oppose the idea of changing funding formulas to benefit (using my example) abused children if that comes at the expense of less care for people such as Li.
30 Bills says:
* Li is criminally responsible for the crime he committed- if he's not... then one would be suggesting that no crime was committed. The parents of Tim McLean and people such as I think there was.
* I can accept some reasonable treatment for Li, but have a problem with the extra efforts being made on his behalf to try and integrate him into mainstream society.
* I wonder why we have our priorities in such a manner that a fellow like Li would receive so much in terms of legal defence and medical treatment when abused children under our care (or even homeless people for that matter) receive much less.
I guess you don't fully understand what "not criminally responsible" means. It means that the person who committed the crime didn't have the capacity to form the intent nor to understand the difference between right and wrong. it's part of our justice system, and until now, I've never heard any rational person argue that it has no place in it.
and I never opposed your idea of changing funding formulas to benefit abused children instead of funding for Li. I just think it's something that can't really be debated, since you can say that about just about anything that politicians decide what should get funding and what should not. I'd love it if more funds went to homeless people or abused children. I'd also love it if more funding went to child care. But none of that has any bearing on whether I think human beings in Canada should receive the medical care they require. Whether it's their liver (which people destroy themselves), their lungs (which people destroy themselves), their heart (which people destroy themselves), or their brain (which, in this case, was of no fault of the brain's owner). Everyone deserves the care they need. That's the foundation of our country's medical system.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
if you have any actual data on how the mentally insane are overly funded, then I'd love to see it. All I can tell so far, is that you just believe it's over funded because you don't believe in its cause. a monster is a monster is a monster in your eyes.
I just don't see it that black and white. And I never will.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I guess you don't fully understand what "not criminally responsible" means. It means that the person who committed the crime didn't have the capacity to form the intent nor to understand the difference between right and wrong. it's part of our justice system, and until now, I've never heard any rational person argue that it has no place in it.
No. I do fully understand what "not criminally responsible" means. I just don't buy in to such a concept regardless of its position in our justice system. Realistically, an argument could be made that anyone who commits a crime shouldn't be held criminally responsible because they are sick. Who in their right mind commits some of the offences we have spoken on over the last couple of years? Whether they heard voices or not... the bottom line is in this case, a rather serious offence has occurred and some measure of justice is warranted without people feeling too badly for the fact that there might have been some circumstances leading to the event.
if you have any actual data on how the mentally insane are overly funded, then I'd love to see it. All I can tell so far, is that you just believe it's over funded because you don't believe in its cause. a monster is a monster is a monster in your eyes.
I just don't see it that black and white. And I never will.
I can tell you that the programming and funding for abused children is in serious need of help. I can tell you that any funding outside of meals, television, and basic medications is too much for a person such as Li.
We had a person move into our community from a neighbouring province. He was arrested and rehabilitated for plotting to kidnap, rape and kill some co-eds from a university. Deemed mentally ill (of course) no identity was released to protect his integrity as he was to get his fresh start that the awesome therapists thought he needed. He- you guessed it- kidnapped a girl in our community and raped her at knife point. At least he never killed her, eh? This story is not unique and you know it's not.
Well done doctors and lawyers that insisted he was a changed man who had made so much progress. Well done. Now go push the next violent offender to the streets as you pat yourselves on the back and marvel at your fantastic therapeutic work. "What a session! Did you see him nod his head when I asked him if he thought it was wrong to eat the guy next to him on the bus?"
if you have any actual data on how the mentally insane are overly funded, then I'd love to see it. All I can tell so far, is that you just believe it's over funded because you don't believe in its cause. a monster is a monster is a monster in your eyes.
I just don't see it that black and white. And I never will.
I can tell you that the programming and funding for abused children is in serious need of help. I can tell you that any funding outside of meals, television, and basic medications is too much for a person such as Li.
We had a person move into our community from a neighbouring province. He was arrested and rehabilitated for plotting to kidnap, rape and kill some co-eds from a university. Deemed mentally ill (of course) no identity was released to protect his integrity as he was to get his fresh start that the awesome therapists thought he needed. He- you guessed it- kidnapped a girl in our community and raped her at knife point. At least he never killed her, eh? This story is not unique and you know it's not.
Well done doctors and lawyers that insisted he was a changed man who had made so much progress. Well done. Now go push the next violent offender to the streets as you pat yourselves on the back and marvel at your fantastic therapeutic work. "What a session! Did you see him nod his head when I asked him if he thought it was wrong to eat the guy next to him on the bus?"
as I've stated countless times in this thread, I don't necessarily agree (depending on circumstances) with reintegration into society. so you're preaching to the choir here.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
if you have any actual data on how the mentally insane are overly funded, then I'd love to see it. All I can tell so far, is that you just believe it's over funded because you don't believe in its cause. a monster is a monster is a monster in your eyes.
I just don't see it that black and white. And I never will.
I can tell you that the programming and funding for abused children is in serious need of help. I can tell you that any funding outside of meals, television, and basic medications is too much for a person such as Li.
We had a person move into our community from a neighbouring province. He was arrested and rehabilitated for plotting to kidnap, rape and kill some co-eds from a university. Deemed mentally ill (of course) no identity was released to protect his integrity as he was to get his fresh start that the awesome therapists thought he needed. He- you guessed it- kidnapped a girl in our community and raped her at knife point. At least he never killed her, eh? This story is not unique and you know it's not.
Well done doctors and lawyers that insisted he was a changed man who had made so much progress. Well done. Now go push the next violent offender to the streets as you pat yourselves on the back and marvel at your fantastic therapeutic work. "What a session! Did you see him nod his head when I asked him if he thought it was wrong to eat the guy next to him on the bus?"
as I've stated countless times in this thread, I don't necessarily agree (depending on circumstances) with reintegration into society. so you're preaching to the choir here.
The Manitoba Review Broad has granted Greyhound bus killer Vince Li additional escorted day passes from the Selkirk Mental Health Centre.
In a decision issued this morning the four-member panel said Li will able to go on the escorted trips to Lockport and Winnipeg as of May 24.
The board also said has taken into consideration both the need to protect the public from dangerous persons and the Li’s reintegration in society.
Li was found not criminally responsible for the beheading of Tim McLean on a Greyhound bus in July 2008 near Portage la Prairie. A judge later found Li was suffering hallucinations from untreated schizophrenia at the time of the unprovoked attack and ordered him held at the Selkirk Mental Health Centre.
The boarded ordered that Li continue to reside at the locked forensic ward at the Selkirk centre and continue to take his medication.
It also said based on the recommendations of his treatment team, that he begin to be allowed unsupervised hospital ground passes beginning at 15 minutes and increasing incrementally to a maximum of a full day.
He will also be allowed supervised passes to Selkirk and the Lockport area to a maximum of a full day, plus one-to-one supervised visits to Winnipeg up a maximum of a full day.
"The treatment team is of the opinion that his condition is stable and that it would be appropratie and safe for him to leave the locked ward," the board said in its order.
The board also said that security staff at the hospital be told when each pass is to occur and its estimated duration.
Plus, for any passes off hospital grounds, the supervising staff member is to be equipped with either a two-way radion or a cell phone. Li is also to to be escorted at all times by a security officer.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
WINNIPEG, Manitoba - A man who beheaded and cannibalized a fellow passenger on a Greyhound bus in Canada won his bid to leave the grounds of the mental hospital where he is being kept, a criminal review board ruled Thursday.
The Criminal Code review board said Vince Li's treatment team may grant him short escorted trips into the central Canadian city of Selkirk, Manitoba. The review board said the passes will start at 30 minutes and increase incrementally to a maximum of full days.
Li was found not criminally responsible for the July 2008 death of Tim McLean, a young carnival worker who was sitting next to Li on a bus near Portage la Prairie.
The board said the passes should only be granted if Li's treatment team believes his condition is stable and that it would be "appropriate and safe for him to leave the locked ward." He will have to be escorted at all times by a staff member and a security officer.
"It's terrible. It's disgusting," Nadine McLean, the victim's stepmother, said Thursday after she learned about the decision. "It's kind of a waste going to the review board every year when he's going to get whatever he asks for."
Carol DeDelley, the victim's mother, also called it unacceptable and vowed to continue her efforts to fight the law dealing with people found not criminally responsible.
"My son died this way to shed light on the issue," DeDelley told reporters. "I'm not stigmatizing mental issues. If he's doing well in a controlled environment with regularly administrated medications leave him there ... but freedom for him? I don't think that should ever be an option."
The passes can be issued starting May 24.
Li was initially confined to a locked wing of the Selkirk Mental Health Centre, but in 2010 was given the right to escorted walks on the hospital grounds.
Li's psychiatrist said the 44-year-old has responded well to treatment and asked the review board earlier this week to let Li take trips into town.
McLean had his eyes closed and was listening to music on his headphones when Li, a stranger who was sitting beside him, suddenly stood up and started stabbing him. As the bus stopped and horrified passengers fled, Li carved up McLean's body and ate portions of it.
A judge was was told at Li's trial four years ago that Li was an untreated schizophrenic.
As part of this year's review, Li's psychiatrist, Dr. Steven Kremer, described Li as a model patient, who has shown no security risks and who has participated in treatment programs and taken up odd jobs at the hospital.
Justice Minister Rob Nicholson announced he asked officials to review the Criminal Code section dealing with people found not criminally responsible. He said public safety must come first.
Li emigrated from China in 2001 and worked menial jobs in Canada.
WINNIPEG, Manitoba - A man who beheaded and cannibalized a fellow passenger on a Greyhound bus in Canada won his bid to leave the grounds of the mental hospital where he is being kept, a criminal review board ruled Thursday.
The Criminal Code review board said Vince Li's treatment team may grant him short escorted trips into the central Canadian city of Selkirk, Manitoba. The review board said the passes will start at 30 minutes and increase incrementally to a maximum of full days.
Li was found not criminally responsible for the July 2008 death of Tim McLean, a young carnival worker who was sitting next to Li on a bus near Portage la Prairie.
The board said the passes should only be granted if Li's treatment team believes his condition is stable and that it would be "appropriate and safe for him to leave the locked ward." He will have to be escorted at all times by a staff member and a security officer.
"It's terrible. It's disgusting," Nadine McLean, the victim's stepmother, said Thursday after she learned about the decision. "It's kind of a waste going to the review board every year when he's going to get whatever he asks for."
Carol DeDelley, the victim's mother, also called it unacceptable and vowed to continue her efforts to fight the law dealing with people found not criminally responsible.
"My son died this way to shed light on the issue," DeDelley told reporters. "I'm not stigmatizing mental issues. If he's doing well in a controlled environment with regularly administrated medications leave him there ... but freedom for him? I don't think that should ever be an option."
The passes can be issued starting May 24.
Li was initially confined to a locked wing of the Selkirk Mental Health Centre, but in 2010 was given the right to escorted walks on the hospital grounds.
Li's psychiatrist said the 44-year-old has responded well to treatment and asked the review board earlier this week to let Li take trips into town.
McLean had his eyes closed and was listening to music on his headphones when Li, a stranger who was sitting beside him, suddenly stood up and started stabbing him. As the bus stopped and horrified passengers fled, Li carved up McLean's body and ate portions of it.
A judge was was told at Li's trial four years ago that Li was an untreated schizophrenic.
As part of this year's review, Li's psychiatrist, Dr. Steven Kremer, described Li as a model patient, who has shown no security risks and who has participated in treatment programs and taken up odd jobs at the hospital.
Justice Minister Rob Nicholson announced he asked officials to review the Criminal Code section dealing with people found not criminally responsible. He said public safety must come first.
Li emigrated from China in 2001 and worked menial jobs in Canada.
sick ass story what about the victims family? crazy shit
Not only are the victim's family trying to erase the awful images they must live with in the aftermath... they also must busy themselves to try and prevent an injustice from occurring. Regardless of circumstances... a horrific crime of unspeakable magnitude occurred at the hands of Li.
The full capacity of his nature has been revealed and it is severe. He is dangerous and to suggest that he might be okay with his medications is to take a pretty bold risk in the name of brotherly love.
The pendulum has swung too far towards criminals' rights in my country. We really seem to do our best to ensure violent criminals are treated with the upmost care, while at the same time we dismiss victims and their survivors as insignificant when pursuing justice. This is wrong in my opinion. Regardless of whether Li is mentally ill- or if someone else is: impaired because the bartender served him too much/ enraged with anger over an affair/ just fired from his job/ driven to despair over a poor quality of life/ failing at university/ had a poor upbringing/ or whatever- some tend to look past the crime and rationalize it with whatever explanation might best be offered to explain the outburst. I think that if you have crossed the line in such a way... you have crossed the line in such a way.
It is my opinion that to suggest rehabilitation in the form of escorted day passes to the mall, coffee shop, and book store is tantamount to pissing on the memory of Maclean and his surviving family members with cold disregard. It is not fair that the family members are subject to opposing Li's advocates.
Regardless of whether Li is mentally ill- or if someone else is: impaired because the bartender served him too much/ enraged with anger over an affair/ just fired from his job/ driven to despair over a poor quality of life/ failing at university/ had a poor upbringing/ or whatever- some tend to look past the crime and rationalize it with whatever explanation might best be offered to explain the outburst.
I'll say this one last time: mental illness is not a fucking excuse. it's a condition. you can NOT lump mental illness in with the other situations you mentioned. you are doing nothing but minimizing the condition and further perpetuating the stigma that people like me are trying so hard to erase.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Regardless of whether Li is mentally ill- or if someone else is: impaired because the bartender served him too much/ enraged with anger over an affair/ just fired from his job/ driven to despair over a poor quality of life/ failing at university/ had a poor upbringing/ or whatever- some tend to look past the crime and rationalize it with whatever explanation might best be offered to explain the outburst.
I'll say this one last time: mental illness is not a fucking excuse. it's a condition. you can NOT lump mental illness in with the other situations you mentioned. you are doing nothing but minimizing the condition and further perpetuating the stigma that people like me are trying so hard to erase.
I'll say this one last time: I can lump every vicious, savage, horrific and brutal murder together if I choose. Murder is murder. I don't give a shit what circumstances have contributed to someone carving up, mutilating and eating an unsuspecting kid on a bus. Neither do the kids' parents. You never spoke to that aspect of my post. Do you think it's fair they should be subjected to appearing before boards to oppose full day passes? Remember they are to start at 30 minutes and if it appears he has lost his cannibalistic ways... they will increase to full days?
Get over yourself. I'm not minimizing mental illness as much as you are minimalizing murder and consequences. Keep trumpeting the horn for Li. I'll do the same for McLean and his parents.
Regardless of whether Li is mentally ill- or if someone else is: impaired because the bartender served him too much/ enraged with anger over an affair/ just fired from his job/ driven to despair over a poor quality of life/ failing at university/ had a poor upbringing/ or whatever- some tend to look past the crime and rationalize it with whatever explanation might best be offered to explain the outburst.
I'll say this one last time: mental illness is not a fucking excuse. it's a condition. you can NOT lump mental illness in with the other situations you mentioned. you are doing nothing but minimizing the condition and further perpetuating the stigma that people like me are trying so hard to erase.
I'll say this one last time: I can lump every vicious, savage, horrific and brutal murder together if I choose. Murder is murder. I don't give a shit what circumstances have contributed to someone carving up, mutilating and eating an unsuspecting kid on a bus. Neither do the kids' parents. You never spoke to that aspect of my post. Do you think it's fair they should be subjected to appearing before boards to oppose full day passes? Remember they are to start at 30 minutes and if it appears he has lost his cannibalistic ways... they will increase to full days?
Get over yourself. I'm not minimizing mental illness as much as you are minimalizing murder and consequences. Keep trumpeting the horn for Li. I'll do the same for McLean and his parents.
get over myself? how nice. nice to see that's where you've taken this. next thing you know you'll be advocating for the death sentence for the mentally challenged too. good for you. glad you enjoy vengeance over justice. you clearly don't understand the difference.
I'm done with debating this with you.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I'll say this one last time: I can lump every vicious, savage, horrific and brutal murder together if I choose. Murder is murder. I don't give a shit what circumstances have contributed to someone carving up, mutilating and eating an unsuspecting kid on a bus. Neither do the kids' parents. You never spoke to that aspect of my post. Do you think it's fair they should be subjected to appearing before boards to oppose full day passes? Remember they are to start at 30 minutes and if it appears he has lost his cannibalistic ways... they will increase to full days?
Get over yourself. I'm not minimizing mental illness as much as you are minimalizing murder and consequences. Keep trumpeting the horn for Li. I'll do the same for McLean and his parents.
get over myself? how nice. nice to see that's where you've taken this. next thing you know you'll be advocating for the death sentence for the mentally challenged too. good for you. glad you enjoy vengeance over justice. you clearly don't understand the difference.
I'm done with debating this with you.
Justice and vengeance are the same- don't mistake that, Hugh. And speaking of justice... you think it is justice for McLean and his parents that four years after his crime, Li begins to receive day passes with state funded Starbucks and mall trips? You haven't really responded to anything I have said regarding how the system is failing them given the fact they must actively oppose the board hearings which seem determined to have Li enjoy some of the things his victim can no longer enjoy. I know why though: I mean how does one say, "Fuck them. That incident is in the past. Let's move on to making Li better."
It hasn't been lost on me that your feelings towards this case at a minimum seem to be generated from a personal perspective where you have shared with everyone the first hand difficulties one might have with a mental illness. Has it ever occurred to you that some on this board might have first hand difficulties with the pain of being a survivor of a violent murder? Do you think these people should 'buy in' to your mentality because yours is fluffy and warm compared to cold and barbaric (the obvious point you were trying to make casting me as callous for likely wanting the death penalty for Li)?
Justice and vengeance are the same- don't mistake that, Hugh. And speaking of justice... you think it is justice for McLean and his parents that four years after his crime, Li begins to receive day passes with state funded Starbucks and mall trips? You haven't really responded to anything I have said regarding how the system is failing them given the fact they must actively oppose the board hearings which seem determined to have Li enjoy some of the things his victim can no longer enjoy. I know why though: I mean how does one say, "Fuck them. That incident is in the past. Let's move on to making Li better."
It hasn't been lost on me that your feelings towards this case at a minimum seem to be generated from a personal perspective where you have shared with everyone the first hand difficulties one might have with a mental illness. Has it ever occurred to you that some on this board might have first hand difficulties with the pain of being a survivor of a violent murder? Do you think these people should 'buy in' to your mentality because yours is fluffy and warm compared to cold and barbaric (the obvious point you were trying to make casting me as callous for likely wanting the death penalty for Li)?
the reason I'm done debating this issue with you is because the above post shows you have listened to nothing I have said. When have I ever been "fluffy and warm" to Vince Li? I am not advocating for his release. EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE. You even acknowledged that a page or two back, but now you, whenever is convenient, paint me as a Vince Li sympathizer. You have to understand the difference between me feeling for the man and understanding the situation.
I haven't addressed your "how the system if failing them" questions because I addressed them. There's no easy answer. For anyone. You paint it as black and white, I think this case stinks of grey. Had Vince Li been drunk or high or just raging but in a frame of mind where he knew what he was doing was wrong, yes, lock him up and throw away the key. But mental illness is a whole different animal, and the justice system obviously agrees, since those safeguards have been in place for decades.
Justice and vengeance are NOT the same. I am not mistaken.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Justice and vengeance are the same- don't mistake that, Hugh. And speaking of justice... you think it is justice for McLean and his parents that four years after his crime, Li begins to receive day passes with state funded Starbucks and mall trips? You haven't really responded to anything I have said regarding how the system is failing them given the fact they must actively oppose the board hearings which seem determined to have Li enjoy some of the things his victim can no longer enjoy. I know why though: I mean how does one say, "Fuck them. That incident is in the past. Let's move on to making Li better."
It hasn't been lost on me that your feelings towards this case at a minimum seem to be generated from a personal perspective where you have shared with everyone the first hand difficulties one might have with a mental illness. Has it ever occurred to you that some on this board might have first hand difficulties with the pain of being a survivor of a violent murder? Do you think these people should 'buy in' to your mentality because yours is fluffy and warm compared to cold and barbaric (the obvious point you were trying to make casting me as callous for likely wanting the death penalty for Li)?
the reason I'm done debating this issue with you is because the above post shows you have listened to nothing I have said. When have I ever been "fluffy and warm" to Vince Li? I am not advocating for his release. EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE. You even acknowledged that a page or two back, but now you, whenever is convenient, paint me as a Vince Li sympathizer. You have to understand the difference between me feeling for the man and understanding the situation.
I haven't addressed your "how the system if failing them" questions because I addressed them. There's no easy answer. For anyone. You paint it as black and white, I think this case stinks of grey. Had Vince Li been drunk or high or just raging but in a frame of mind where he knew what he was doing was wrong, yes, lock him up and throw away the key. But mental illness is a whole different animal, and the justice system obviously agrees, since those safeguards have been in place for decades.
Justice and vengeance are NOT the same. I am not mistaken.
Hugh, grey doesn't work very well for the McLeans. I'm all the way in their corner with their position. You are somewhere in between: this fact doesn't make me an ogre and it doesn't make you a softy. The poignant question I asked you that you never responded to was, "Do you think it is fair that McLean's parents must actively oppose and protest rehabilitation treatment for Li given what happened to their child?" This question I would like to hear your response to and if you already did respond to it... please show me where so I may apologize for goading you.
We'll have to agree to disagree to the last statement which contrasted mine. I stand by my assertion that justice and vengeance are ultimately the same. Any form of retribution when responding to a crime can be viewed as both depending on how one would like to frame it.
Hugh, grey doesn't work very well for the McLeans. I'm all the way in their corner with their position. You are somewhere in between: this fact doesn't make me an ogre and it doesn't make you a softy. The poignant question I asked you that you never responded to was, "Do you think it is fair that McLean's parents must actively oppose and protest rehabilitation treatment for Li given what happened to their child?" This question I would like to hear your response to and if you already did respond to it... please show me where so I may apologize for goading you.
We'll have to agree to disagree to the last statement which contrasted mine. I stand by my assertion that justice and vengeance are ultimately the same. Any form of retribution when responding to a crime can be viewed as both depending on how one would like to frame it.
no, it doesn't. it rarely does for the family of the victims. but, the justice system is not set up entirely to appease the masses. and rightly so. there are different facets to the reasons of incarceration: punishment, rehabilitation, and public safety. there are many criminals that are not able to be rehabilitated. Vince Li's doctors think he is a very good candidate for rehabilitation. I don't know if I agree. I always assumed that someone who is that far gone mentally took a LONG time to come back from it. and to come far enough away from it as to not be at risk of slipping again.
again, he will likely never be free like you and I. He will always been under some supervision.
as to your question: yes, it is right that they have to do this. this is what happens in a free society. if they feel wronged, they are allowed to appeal and oppose any position they feel is incorrect. see, they aren't the victims of a stalker. they aren't opposing his release because they feel they'd be in any danger themselves. they just want him locked up for what he did to their son. and sure, of course I'd be of the same mind as them. I kind of still am. but it also wouldn't be just to keep someone locked up merely for the fact that someone is uncomfortable with them being released. that's why we have juries, and not lynch mobs. that's why we have judges, not executioners who play all 3.
let me ask you: keeping in point where the justice system does not punish those who are found not criminally responsible, what is the point of keeping someone locked up if a TEAM of respected health professionals believe he is rehabilitated?
if he's not to be punished, he is rehabilitated, and he's not a danger to society, how is it just to keep him locked up?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Hugh, grey doesn't work very well for the McLeans. I'm all the way in their corner with their position. You are somewhere in between: this fact doesn't make me an ogre and it doesn't make you a softy. The poignant question I asked you that you never responded to was, "Do you think it is fair that McLean's parents must actively oppose and protest rehabilitation treatment for Li given what happened to their child?" This question I would like to hear your response to and if you already did respond to it... please show me where so I may apologize for goading you.
We'll have to agree to disagree to the last statement which contrasted mine. I stand by my assertion that justice and vengeance are ultimately the same. Any form of retribution when responding to a crime can be viewed as both depending on how one would like to frame it.
no, it doesn't. it rarely does for the family of the victims. but, the justice system is not set up entirely to appease the masses. and rightly so. there are different facets to the reasons of incarceration: punishment, rehabilitation, and public safety. there are many criminals that are not able to be rehabilitated. Vince Li's doctors think he is a very good candidate for rehabilitation. I don't know if I agree. I always assumed that someone who is that far gone mentally took a LONG time to come back from it. and to come far enough away from it as to not be at risk of slipping again.
again, he will likely never be free like you and I. He will always been under some supervision.
as to your question: yes, it is right that they have to do this. this is what happens in a free society. if they feel wronged, they are allowed to appeal and oppose any position they feel is incorrect. see, they aren't the victims of a stalker. they aren't opposing his release because they feel they'd be in any danger themselves. they just want him locked up for what he did to their son. and sure, of course I'd be of the same mind as them. I kind of still am. but it also wouldn't be just to keep someone locked up merely for the fact that someone is uncomfortable with them being released. that's why we have juries, and not lynch mobs. that's why we have judges, not executioners who play all 3.
let me ask you: keeping in point where the justice system does not punish those who are found not criminally responsible, what is the point of keeping someone locked up if a TEAM of respected health professionals believe he is rehabilitated?
if he's not to be punished, he is rehabilitated, and he's not a danger to society, how is it just to keep him locked up?
I guess this is where we cannot agree. I can accept your position and understand why you have come to it, but I find it difficult to accept the justice system not finding Li criminally responsible. A horrific crime was committed and Li was responsible- there was nobody else with blood on their hands.
I fully understand the spectrum of mental illness. I am completely in favour of helping those in need and to whatever degree necessary to keep themselves from hurting themselves or others. I am not in favour of helping those beyond help. Teams of professionals have been deadly wrong countless times before. This guy's capacity for extreme violence has manifested itself in macabre fashion- there is no need to tempt fate here. If these professionals had to stake their professional licences on their belief that Li was good to go... would they be so confident?
And do we owe McLean and his family no measure of relief? I never asked if it was right that they had to oppose Li's conditional releases... I asked you if it was fair. As I said before, I am in the corner of the wronged and although Li might be ill... I cannot find it within myself to excuse him for the offence he committed. I feel rotten for the pain the surviving family members must feel, the agony McLean must have realized that fatal night, and for the horror society (not marginalizing the other people on the bus that night by any means) has been subjected to.
Li is ill. Li also committed one of the sickest homicides in Canada's history. As I said before, I'm okay with you leaning a bit towards Li and his rehabilitation... but given my rationale... I'm not sure why you cannot understand why I position myself the way I do. I'm a good guy... you're a good guy... we think differently about these things... but we're not the problem. We've butted heads once again, but I still value your opinions on this forum.
I think I can safely say we will likely do it again. Please continue to continue to challenge my thought process, but please also accept my position when we find ourselves at a standoff. This is my way of saying this discussion should be put to rest between you and I.
I guess this is where we cannot agree. I can accept your position and understand why you have come to it, but I find it difficult to accept the justice system not finding Li criminally responsible. A horrific crime was committed and Li was responsible- there was nobody else with blood on their hands.
I fully understand the spectrum of mental illness. I am completely in favour of helping those in need and to whatever degree necessary to keep themselves from hurting themselves or others. I am not in favour of helping those beyond help. Teams of professionals have been deadly wrong countless times before. This guy's capacity for extreme violence has manifested itself in macabre fashion- there is no need to tempt fate here. If these professionals had to stake their professional licences on their belief that Li was good to go... would they be so confident?
And do we owe McLean and his family no measure of relief? I never asked if it was right that they had to oppose Li's conditional releases... I asked you if it was fair. As I said before, I am in the corner of the wronged and although Li might be ill... I cannot find it within myself to excuse him for the offence he committed. I feel rotten for the pain the surviving family members must feel, the agony McLean must have realized that fatal night, and for the horror society (not marginalizing the other people on the bus that night by any means) has been subjected to.
Li is ill. Li also committed one of the sickest homicides in Canada's history. As I said before, I'm okay with you leaning a bit towards Li and his rehabilitation... but given my rationale... I'm not sure why you cannot understand why I position myself the way I do. I'm a good guy... you're a good guy... we think differently about these things... but we're not the problem. We've butted heads once again, but I still value your opinions on this forum.
I think I can safely say we will likely do it again. Please continue to continue to challenge my thought process, but please also accept my position when we find ourselves at a standoff. This is my way of saying this discussion should be put to rest between you and I.
to your last statement: fair enough. so I won't "debate" this any longer, just a few points to answer to your post above:
I do understand why you position yourself the way you do. Just because I disagree doesn't mean I don't get it. I do. Most people who have read this story also would agree with you.
no, it is not fair to the McLean's. it was never fair to Tim or his family. none of this will ever be fair. but nothing will bring him back. nothing will stop their horror. I can't imagine the thought of one of my kids being cannibalized and decapitated. it's fucking unimaginable. This story actually threw my mental state over the edge with anxiety as I was so disturbed by it. i sat in my cubicle at work shaking and crying reading the details of it, wondering if it was real. it was so close to my home, but it wasn't only that, it was so goddamn horrific, not even the stuff written in movies. it was the straw that broke me and and made me seek professional help for my own issues. people who were on the bus and saw him holding Tim's head are still having mental issues because of it. how could they not?
edit: but I will add one question, and this may be hard for some to digest: you say it is not fair to the McLeans. you are absolutely correct. but is it fair to Li that he is being punished for having a disease beyond his control? that's not such an easy answer.
and to answer your question about the doctors.........one of them actually stated about a year ago that he would completely comfortable having Li as a guest in his own home. That reeks confidence of his position.
believe it or not, as I've said countless times, whether it is obvious to others or not, I'm also in the corner of the wronged. all of the wronged.
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
edit: but I will add one question, and this may be hard for some to digest: you say it is not fair to the McLeans. you are absolutely correct. but is it fair to Li that he is being punished for having a disease beyond his control? that's not such an easy answer.
and to answer your question about the doctors.........one of them actually stated about a year ago that he would completely comfortable having Li as a guest in his own home. That reeks confidence of his position.
believe it or not, as I've said countless times, whether it is obvious to others or not, I'm also in the corner of the wronged. all of the wronged.
Li's illness certainly complicates things, but not enough to have me change where I'm at with this.
I would encourage that doctor to put his money where his mouth is: I talk tough a lot of times too, but when push comes to shove... we'd see how comfortable he truly is.
As I said, Hugh, I recognize where your heart is at- it's nice that you can become sympathetic with people such as Li. We can't all think the same or feel the same: how would that type of society work out?
I'll say this one last time: I can lump every vicious, savage, horrific and brutal murder together if I choose. Murder is murder. I don't give a shit what circumstances have contributed to someone carving up, mutilating and eating an unsuspecting kid on a bus. Neither do the kids' parents. You never spoke to that aspect of my post. Do you think it's fair they should be subjected to appearing before boards to oppose full day passes? Remember they are to start at 30 minutes and if it appears he has lost his cannibalistic ways... they will increase to full days?
Get over yourself. I'm not minimizing mental illness as much as you are minimalizing murder and consequences. Keep trumpeting the horn for Li. I'll do the same for McLean and his parents.
So in your mind is there any difference between murder and manslaughter? Because my understanding is that murder requires intent. And how can you have any intent if you have an illness? Like I said to me it is no different than if someone gets into a car accident and kills someone because they have an illness. We don't charge them with murder either.
I'll say this one last time: I can lump every vicious, savage, horrific and brutal murder together if I choose. Murder is murder. I don't give a shit what circumstances have contributed to someone carving up, mutilating and eating an unsuspecting kid on a bus. Neither do the kids' parents. You never spoke to that aspect of my post. Do you think it's fair they should be subjected to appearing before boards to oppose full day passes? Remember they are to start at 30 minutes and if it appears he has lost his cannibalistic ways... they will increase to full days?
Get over yourself. I'm not minimizing mental illness as much as you are minimalizing murder and consequences. Keep trumpeting the horn for Li. I'll do the same for McLean and his parents.
So in your mind is there any difference between murder and manslaughter? Because my understanding is that murder requires intent. And how can you have any intent if you have an illness? Like I said to me it is no different than if someone gets into a car accident and kills someone because they have an illness. We don't charge them with murder either.
In your mind we should tell the McLean's that they should suck it up because accidents happen?
So in your mind is there any difference between murder and manslaughter? Because my understanding is that murder requires intent. And how can you have any intent if you have an illness? Like I said to me it is no different than if someone gets into a car accident and kills someone because they have an illness. We don't charge them with murder either.
In your mind we should tell the McLean's that they should suck it up because accidents happen?
why go that route?
Gimli 1993
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Comments
I didn't jump to any extremes. This is what you and others have suggested.
This is part of the issue: you say "given what Li has done....". Being not criminally responsible means that when you are deciding the man's fate, you can't take what he has done into consideration, since he was found not guilty due to mental disease or defect. There are probably as many people in that institution that had the same voices and same insanity as he did, but maybe he had family or friends that had them committed before they did similar acts. We can't treat those people differently than we do Li. That's against the law. In the eyes of the law, Vince Li did nothing criminal since he wasn't capable of understanding that he was. He didn't have the capacity to know that what he di was "taking things a little too far".
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
this is very subjective. it's obvious that you'd state that you think those resources used for Li are excessive when it is your position that any resource used on him is wasted.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Fair enough.
But this doesn't necessarily mean I am wrong.
You keep thrusting your position at me so it's safe to say you feel the efforts made towards Li have been worthwhile and that we should be doing all we can to get him straightened out so he can become a productive member of society.
If James Holmes is found by the law to be not guilty because he was incapable of understanding what he was doing that we should spend just as much effort rehabilitating him for reintegration as well?
Sorry Hugh. I just am not there with you. And never will be.
one of my first posts resurrecting this thread was how uncomfortable it made me that this guy might someday get more freedom in the public. I have never said I want Li to be reintegrated into society. I made that very clear.
"thrusting my position"? I'm merely responding to your posts. How is that "thrusting"?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I'll try to be really succinct here and tell me what I have gotten wrong from our dialogue or what you may have missed:
Hugh says:
* Li is not criminally responsible for the crime he committed- his illness is.
* Li needs the support he is getting: he is a human being worthy of such an effort on the part of society.
* You oppose the idea of changing funding formulas to benefit (using my example) abused children if that comes at the expense of less care for people such as Li.
30 Bills says:
* Li is criminally responsible for the crime he committed- if he's not... then one would be suggesting that no crime was committed. The parents of Tim McLean and people such as I think there was.
* I can accept some reasonable treatment for Li, but have a problem with the extra efforts being made on his behalf to try and integrate him into mainstream society.
* I wonder why we have our priorities in such a manner that a fellow like Li would receive so much in terms of legal defence and medical treatment when abused children under our care (or even homeless people for that matter) receive much less.
I guess you don't fully understand what "not criminally responsible" means. It means that the person who committed the crime didn't have the capacity to form the intent nor to understand the difference between right and wrong. it's part of our justice system, and until now, I've never heard any rational person argue that it has no place in it.
and I never opposed your idea of changing funding formulas to benefit abused children instead of funding for Li. I just think it's something that can't really be debated, since you can say that about just about anything that politicians decide what should get funding and what should not. I'd love it if more funds went to homeless people or abused children. I'd also love it if more funding went to child care. But none of that has any bearing on whether I think human beings in Canada should receive the medical care they require. Whether it's their liver (which people destroy themselves), their lungs (which people destroy themselves), their heart (which people destroy themselves), or their brain (which, in this case, was of no fault of the brain's owner). Everyone deserves the care they need. That's the foundation of our country's medical system.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I just don't see it that black and white. And I never will.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
No. I do fully understand what "not criminally responsible" means. I just don't buy in to such a concept regardless of its position in our justice system. Realistically, an argument could be made that anyone who commits a crime shouldn't be held criminally responsible because they are sick. Who in their right mind commits some of the offences we have spoken on over the last couple of years? Whether they heard voices or not... the bottom line is in this case, a rather serious offence has occurred and some measure of justice is warranted without people feeling too badly for the fact that there might have been some circumstances leading to the event.
I can tell you that the programming and funding for abused children is in serious need of help. I can tell you that any funding outside of meals, television, and basic medications is too much for a person such as Li.
We had a person move into our community from a neighbouring province. He was arrested and rehabilitated for plotting to kidnap, rape and kill some co-eds from a university. Deemed mentally ill (of course) no identity was released to protect his integrity as he was to get his fresh start that the awesome therapists thought he needed. He- you guessed it- kidnapped a girl in our community and raped her at knife point. At least he never killed her, eh? This story is not unique and you know it's not.
Well done doctors and lawyers that insisted he was a changed man who had made so much progress. Well done. Now go push the next violent offender to the streets as you pat yourselves on the back and marvel at your fantastic therapeutic work. "What a session! Did you see him nod his head when I asked him if he thought it was wrong to eat the guy next to him on the bus?"
as I've stated countless times in this thread, I don't necessarily agree (depending on circumstances) with reintegration into society. so you're preaching to the choir here.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I know, Hugh.
In a decision issued this morning the four-member panel said Li will able to go on the escorted trips to Lockport and Winnipeg as of May 24.
The board also said has taken into consideration both the need to protect the public from dangerous persons and the Li’s reintegration in society.
Li was found not criminally responsible for the beheading of Tim McLean on a Greyhound bus in July 2008 near Portage la Prairie. A judge later found Li was suffering hallucinations from untreated schizophrenia at the time of the unprovoked attack and ordered him held at the Selkirk Mental Health Centre.
The boarded ordered that Li continue to reside at the locked forensic ward at the Selkirk centre and continue to take his medication.
It also said based on the recommendations of his treatment team, that he begin to be allowed unsupervised hospital ground passes beginning at 15 minutes and increasing incrementally to a maximum of a full day.
He will also be allowed supervised passes to Selkirk and the Lockport area to a maximum of a full day, plus one-to-one supervised visits to Winnipeg up a maximum of a full day.
"The treatment team is of the opinion that his condition is stable and that it would be appropratie and safe for him to leave the locked ward," the board said in its order.
The board also said that security staff at the hospital be told when each pass is to occur and its estimated duration.
Plus, for any passes off hospital grounds, the supervising staff member is to be equipped with either a two-way radion or a cell phone. Li is also to to be escorted at all times by a security officer.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I believe it says security, and I don't think security is armed. not with guns, anyway.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Not only are the victim's family trying to erase the awful images they must live with in the aftermath... they also must busy themselves to try and prevent an injustice from occurring. Regardless of circumstances... a horrific crime of unspeakable magnitude occurred at the hands of Li.
The full capacity of his nature has been revealed and it is severe. He is dangerous and to suggest that he might be okay with his medications is to take a pretty bold risk in the name of brotherly love.
The pendulum has swung too far towards criminals' rights in my country. We really seem to do our best to ensure violent criminals are treated with the upmost care, while at the same time we dismiss victims and their survivors as insignificant when pursuing justice. This is wrong in my opinion. Regardless of whether Li is mentally ill- or if someone else is: impaired because the bartender served him too much/ enraged with anger over an affair/ just fired from his job/ driven to despair over a poor quality of life/ failing at university/ had a poor upbringing/ or whatever- some tend to look past the crime and rationalize it with whatever explanation might best be offered to explain the outburst. I think that if you have crossed the line in such a way... you have crossed the line in such a way.
It is my opinion that to suggest rehabilitation in the form of escorted day passes to the mall, coffee shop, and book store is tantamount to pissing on the memory of Maclean and his surviving family members with cold disregard. It is not fair that the family members are subject to opposing Li's advocates.
I'll say this one last time: mental illness is not a fucking excuse. it's a condition. you can NOT lump mental illness in with the other situations you mentioned. you are doing nothing but minimizing the condition and further perpetuating the stigma that people like me are trying so hard to erase.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I'll say this one last time: I can lump every vicious, savage, horrific and brutal murder together if I choose. Murder is murder. I don't give a shit what circumstances have contributed to someone carving up, mutilating and eating an unsuspecting kid on a bus. Neither do the kids' parents. You never spoke to that aspect of my post. Do you think it's fair they should be subjected to appearing before boards to oppose full day passes? Remember they are to start at 30 minutes and if it appears he has lost his cannibalistic ways... they will increase to full days?
Get over yourself. I'm not minimizing mental illness as much as you are minimalizing murder and consequences. Keep trumpeting the horn for Li. I'll do the same for McLean and his parents.
get over myself? how nice. nice to see that's where you've taken this. next thing you know you'll be advocating for the death sentence for the mentally challenged too. good for you. glad you enjoy vengeance over justice. you clearly don't understand the difference.
I'm done with debating this with you.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Justice and vengeance are the same- don't mistake that, Hugh. And speaking of justice... you think it is justice for McLean and his parents that four years after his crime, Li begins to receive day passes with state funded Starbucks and mall trips? You haven't really responded to anything I have said regarding how the system is failing them given the fact they must actively oppose the board hearings which seem determined to have Li enjoy some of the things his victim can no longer enjoy. I know why though: I mean how does one say, "Fuck them. That incident is in the past. Let's move on to making Li better."
It hasn't been lost on me that your feelings towards this case at a minimum seem to be generated from a personal perspective where you have shared with everyone the first hand difficulties one might have with a mental illness. Has it ever occurred to you that some on this board might have first hand difficulties with the pain of being a survivor of a violent murder? Do you think these people should 'buy in' to your mentality because yours is fluffy and warm compared to cold and barbaric (the obvious point you were trying to make casting me as callous for likely wanting the death penalty for Li)?
the reason I'm done debating this issue with you is because the above post shows you have listened to nothing I have said. When have I ever been "fluffy and warm" to Vince Li? I am not advocating for his release. EXACTLY THE OPPOSITE. You even acknowledged that a page or two back, but now you, whenever is convenient, paint me as a Vince Li sympathizer. You have to understand the difference between me feeling for the man and understanding the situation.
I haven't addressed your "how the system if failing them" questions because I addressed them. There's no easy answer. For anyone. You paint it as black and white, I think this case stinks of grey. Had Vince Li been drunk or high or just raging but in a frame of mind where he knew what he was doing was wrong, yes, lock him up and throw away the key. But mental illness is a whole different animal, and the justice system obviously agrees, since those safeguards have been in place for decades.
Justice and vengeance are NOT the same. I am not mistaken.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Hugh, grey doesn't work very well for the McLeans. I'm all the way in their corner with their position. You are somewhere in between: this fact doesn't make me an ogre and it doesn't make you a softy. The poignant question I asked you that you never responded to was, "Do you think it is fair that McLean's parents must actively oppose and protest rehabilitation treatment for Li given what happened to their child?" This question I would like to hear your response to and if you already did respond to it... please show me where so I may apologize for goading you.
We'll have to agree to disagree to the last statement which contrasted mine. I stand by my assertion that justice and vengeance are ultimately the same. Any form of retribution when responding to a crime can be viewed as both depending on how one would like to frame it.
no, it doesn't. it rarely does for the family of the victims. but, the justice system is not set up entirely to appease the masses. and rightly so. there are different facets to the reasons of incarceration: punishment, rehabilitation, and public safety. there are many criminals that are not able to be rehabilitated. Vince Li's doctors think he is a very good candidate for rehabilitation. I don't know if I agree. I always assumed that someone who is that far gone mentally took a LONG time to come back from it. and to come far enough away from it as to not be at risk of slipping again.
again, he will likely never be free like you and I. He will always been under some supervision.
as to your question: yes, it is right that they have to do this. this is what happens in a free society. if they feel wronged, they are allowed to appeal and oppose any position they feel is incorrect. see, they aren't the victims of a stalker. they aren't opposing his release because they feel they'd be in any danger themselves. they just want him locked up for what he did to their son. and sure, of course I'd be of the same mind as them. I kind of still am. but it also wouldn't be just to keep someone locked up merely for the fact that someone is uncomfortable with them being released. that's why we have juries, and not lynch mobs. that's why we have judges, not executioners who play all 3.
let me ask you: keeping in point where the justice system does not punish those who are found not criminally responsible, what is the point of keeping someone locked up if a TEAM of respected health professionals believe he is rehabilitated?
if he's not to be punished, he is rehabilitated, and he's not a danger to society, how is it just to keep him locked up?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I guess this is where we cannot agree. I can accept your position and understand why you have come to it, but I find it difficult to accept the justice system not finding Li criminally responsible. A horrific crime was committed and Li was responsible- there was nobody else with blood on their hands.
I fully understand the spectrum of mental illness. I am completely in favour of helping those in need and to whatever degree necessary to keep themselves from hurting themselves or others. I am not in favour of helping those beyond help. Teams of professionals have been deadly wrong countless times before. This guy's capacity for extreme violence has manifested itself in macabre fashion- there is no need to tempt fate here. If these professionals had to stake their professional licences on their belief that Li was good to go... would they be so confident?
And do we owe McLean and his family no measure of relief? I never asked if it was right that they had to oppose Li's conditional releases... I asked you if it was fair. As I said before, I am in the corner of the wronged and although Li might be ill... I cannot find it within myself to excuse him for the offence he committed. I feel rotten for the pain the surviving family members must feel, the agony McLean must have realized that fatal night, and for the horror society (not marginalizing the other people on the bus that night by any means) has been subjected to.
Li is ill. Li also committed one of the sickest homicides in Canada's history. As I said before, I'm okay with you leaning a bit towards Li and his rehabilitation... but given my rationale... I'm not sure why you cannot understand why I position myself the way I do. I'm a good guy... you're a good guy... we think differently about these things... but we're not the problem. We've butted heads once again, but I still value your opinions on this forum.
I think I can safely say we will likely do it again. Please continue to continue to challenge my thought process, but please also accept my position when we find ourselves at a standoff. This is my way of saying this discussion should be put to rest between you and I.
to your last statement: fair enough. so I won't "debate" this any longer, just a few points to answer to your post above:
I do understand why you position yourself the way you do. Just because I disagree doesn't mean I don't get it. I do. Most people who have read this story also would agree with you.
no, it is not fair to the McLean's. it was never fair to Tim or his family. none of this will ever be fair. but nothing will bring him back. nothing will stop their horror. I can't imagine the thought of one of my kids being cannibalized and decapitated. it's fucking unimaginable. This story actually threw my mental state over the edge with anxiety as I was so disturbed by it. i sat in my cubicle at work shaking and crying reading the details of it, wondering if it was real. it was so close to my home, but it wasn't only that, it was so goddamn horrific, not even the stuff written in movies. it was the straw that broke me and and made me seek professional help for my own issues. people who were on the bus and saw him holding Tim's head are still having mental issues because of it. how could they not?
edit: but I will add one question, and this may be hard for some to digest: you say it is not fair to the McLeans. you are absolutely correct. but is it fair to Li that he is being punished for having a disease beyond his control? that's not such an easy answer.
and to answer your question about the doctors.........one of them actually stated about a year ago that he would completely comfortable having Li as a guest in his own home. That reeks confidence of his position.
believe it or not, as I've said countless times, whether it is obvious to others or not, I'm also in the corner of the wronged. all of the wronged.
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Li's illness certainly complicates things, but not enough to have me change where I'm at with this.
I would encourage that doctor to put his money where his mouth is: I talk tough a lot of times too, but when push comes to shove... we'd see how comfortable he truly is.
As I said, Hugh, I recognize where your heart is at- it's nice that you can become sympathetic with people such as Li. We can't all think the same or feel the same: how would that type of society work out?
Have a good one!
So in your mind is there any difference between murder and manslaughter? Because my understanding is that murder requires intent. And how can you have any intent if you have an illness? Like I said to me it is no different than if someone gets into a car accident and kills someone because they have an illness. We don't charge them with murder either.
In your mind we should tell the McLean's that they should suck it up because accidents happen?
why go that route?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014