Who or what is to blame?

Posted on the blog “The Vanishing American”

Oddly, there were two mass slayings in the news today, one of them at a school in Germany and another in Alabama, where 11 died.
I can only offer sympathies and prayers for the bereaved surviving family members and friends.

After such incidents, there is always the soul-searching in the media, with endless questions about ‘why’ the killer did what he did, as if any explanation really suffices. Inevitably, there are likely to be calls for stricter gun controls, although the German incident seems to undermine the liberal idea that strict gun laws prevent such occurrences. But nonetheless, there will be laments about the ease with which Americans can obtain guns, and there will be blanket condemnations of ‘society’ and its guilt in incidents like this. There is always disparaging talk about the South or heartland America in general, and its ‘gun culture’, as if that is the problem rather than simply human evil.

Why is it that so many people today have a problem identifying evil? If somebody kills most of their own family members, as the Alabama shooter did, is that act not evil? The German shooter apparently targeted mostly girls. Nowadays, what with feminism and with even many conservatives regarding women as more or less the same as men, it is not particularly seen as cowardly to target women or girls, though the code of chivalry would see it as such.

Most of all, though, incidents like these mass slayings always provoke more discussion of ‘mental illness’, as it is accepted by almost 100 percent of society that anyone who commits such crimes is automatically ‘sick’ or a victim of a mental disorder. Again, this obscures questions of good and evil, and individual responsibility.

That problem was also evident in the story I blogged on the other day, about the Chinese immigrant in Canada who savagely killed a Canadian bus passenger, in a particularly gruesome fashion.

On the discussion thread following that blog entry, reader and commenter Fed Up Canuck posted this link to the blog of Canadian radio commentator Charles Adler, who wrote about the court decision: Canada – Guilty of Gullibility in the First Degree.

Yes, it’s been a bit of a rough week. Not nearly as rough for me, as for the family of Tim McLean. But one of the reasons I sounded a bit rough yesterday, was because I was trying as hard as possible to be restrained, out of respect for the event that was fresh and raw. The event being a judge rendering a verdict of not guilty of criminal responsibility, in the case of the beheading of a young Canadian named Tim McLean. To me, it felt like he had just laid down a guilty verdict on all of us.

The Canadian people found guilty of allowing an elite group of experts, who do business in the legal system, telling us what is right and what is wrong.

The Canadian people found guilty for allowing themselves to believe that confining a mentally ill person for life is the equivalent of condemning all people suffering from any kind of mental illness.

The Canadian people found guilty for supporting a public school system where REASON is not taught and so vile arguments are presented in courts of law, and courts of public opinion go unchallenged by many members of the public who should know better, but have never been given the tools by an education system because it’s more about indoctrination than education.

The Canadian people have been found guilty for allowing their country to be stolen from them by the jackals of political correctness and moral equivalence and baffle gab.”

Adler’s commentary is sound, and it applies to America almost as much as Canada, and most of those who left comments agreed with him and shared his outrage. However there are a few typically obnoxious and piously self-righteous liberals who leave typically nasty comments.

Like this commenter:

Brilliant Charles. Do as the US does. Shoot the guy on site. Lovely. Vigilante justice. Won’t be accused of being ‘elite’ then! Why don’t you move to the states if you find their style of justice so soothing to your scared self. You can take comfort in the fact that they imprison more people than any other country in the world, yet still have the worst crime rates.” (more…)

Does belief in God Constitute a Mental ilness

I think Dr Yaren made a complete mockery of the adversarial process that is the heart and soul of the Canadian criminal court system. If he agreed with the defence, he should have walked the floor and let someone who actually understands the role of prosecution do their job. This was no trial. Ironically, the only 2 witnesses called were never there despite having: the greyhound worker that sold him the ticket, the busload of permanently scarred passengers, the RCMP, and most importantly family. The outcome of the trial was determined well in advance of March 5th and the purposeful deletion of witnesses and a turncoat Psychiatrist is proof of that.

As well, no one can give me a straight answer about my question of faith. “Does belief in God constitute a mental illness?” My fury over the conduct of Dr Yaren lies in his VERY faulty logic used to determine Li’s mental “illness.” I believe the direct quote used in the papers is, “God made me do it.” God making you do something defaults you as schizophrenic? Or is it only when you take his name in murder? Who on Earth has the qualifications necessary to determine who gets to believe in God and who doesn’t? Where in Medical school is it taught that you can disprove one’s faith in God? Is it because God told you to kill? There is a religious text that espouses that very notion: it is called the Qu’ran. The 6th pillar of Islam is Jihad, the declaration of Holy War against those who sully the faith or names of Allah or Muhammad. Are 1.5 billion Muslims all schizophrenics? I would think that a religious cleric is infinitely more qualified than a Psychiatrist to determine one’s true faith in God. To disavow Li’s belief in God is to violate his religious freedoms so enjoyed by others in this country. I wonder if a rich, suburban, well read run of the mill Christian white person who commits a similar act would earn the same expedience of a predetermined NCR like Li? Is he or she mentally ill or just a cold blooded, sane killer b/c of a lack of historical hardships?

History proves time and again that murder is justifiable so long as God gives the green light. Examples? The Crusades led by King Richard that sacked Byzantium, then became Constantinople at the cost of many lives. Ironic that Constantinople fell to the same violence of the Ottomans (Muslims) in 1453. The Spanish pogroms that killed thousands of Jews by Muslim mobs in 11th century AD. The Spanish Inquisition led by Ferdinand and Isabella that saw people burned at the stake for refusing to covert to Christianity. The Salem witch hunts that tossed “witches” to their deaths as they were deemed servants of Satan. Modern day terrorists that are led by fanatical Imams to Jihad…9/11 ring a bell?

Were all the aforementioned murderers schizophrenics? I am not contesting that Li is mentally sick. I am sickened by how there was zero attempt by the prosecution to even consider challenging he was possibly sane at the time of the murder. And, he may have well known that what he did was wrong. I’d like someone ( a COMPETENT prosecutor) to explain how: writing a goodbye letter, using a fake name to buy a bus ticket, and walking on a bus with a hunting knife constitutes “not knowing what he was doing?”

I believe that Li would have shared a similar fate to that of Jeffrey Dahlmer if he had went to prison. And, since the definition of being Canadian is showing the world how un-american we are, that mentality carries over into our “coddle the criminal” court systems which are definitely the antithesis of American justice. At least there, the prosecution knows their responsibilities are NOT to collude with the defence.

A Mother’s Perspective on Tim’s Law

While I agree that prevention is the best cure,understand that it is not a matter of vengeance rather it is an issue of safety and accountability. The fact is that he is a very dangerous individual with an incurable disease. He has proven himself to be non- compliant with medication, that is how this tragedy came about. He left the treatment facility where he was diagnosed schizophrenic,catatonic state, against medical advice and refused to take his meds, he decided he was not ill and decided to listen to the voices in his head. Why was there no follow up on this “very disturbed” individual by the psychiatric community? They all certainly have a lot to say about how he should be treated now, after the fact. Why does the system give control of a “very disturbed”individuals care and treatment to that individual, when clearly they are not in a proper state of mind to make those decisions. I believe more in-put from the mentally ill persons family and friends needs to be considered in their treatment in order to prevent something as atrocious as this from happening. That being said, UNPROVOKED..INCURABLE..possibility of relapse even while medicated. I think the most humane thing that we as a society can do is treat Mr Li in a locked facility for the rest of his natural life for his safety and for our own. This man ate my sons eyes and approx 1/3 of his heart after cutting his head off his body,and removing many other body parts. Do I really need to explain that Mr Li, having my sons tongue nose and ear in a bag in his pocket absolutely screams to me NEVER FREE!! The only thing more insane than Mr Li’s illness would be for us as a society, to do nothing and allow him to one day be free to have the opportunity to do it again. Let me be clear here as well.. These people DO get out more often than you’d care to believe in often VERY short time(1-5 yrs for crimes this heinous), and thats wrong. In the verdict of NCR in this case, the issue of mental illnes is addressed but what about the issue of murder? if not Mr Li, who is accountable for the loss of my son’s life?? psychologically not accountable perhaps but absolutely criminally responsible. A crime was still committed here, negating that fact negates that my son had a life. Mr Li arrived in Canada in 2001 but did not obtain citizenship until 2005, the same year he was diagnosed Schizophrenic in Ontario, and the way the system works that diagnosis ceases once he crosses the border to another Province??? does any of this make sense???

Not Criminally Responsible

What is NCR…
The notion that an individual who suffers from mental disorder may not bear the full weight of responsibility for their actions dates back to ancient times. Although various approaches to a legal test for criminal responsibility date back centuries in the Anglo-American tradition, some major historical trials during the 19th century in Britain culminated in the enunciation of the so-called McNaughten Rules (1843) in which the Law Lords of Great Britain indicated that for an individual to be found Not Responsible for their act or omission, their mental disorder must render them unable to know the nature and quality of the act or that it was wrong.

In the years following, courts on both sides of the Atlantic struggled with the meaning of the individual words of this rule. At the present time in Canada the Criminal Code dictates a test, derived from McNaughten, stating that for an individual to found “Not Criminally Responsible”, they must have been unable, by virtue of mental disorder, to appreciate the nature and quality of the act or know that it is wrong. Within Canadian jurisprudence, these individual words have been subject to judicial interpretation.

http://www.forensicpsychiatry.ca/

Canada – Guilty of Gullibility

exert from column by Charles Adler

Folks, I want to ask you a question. In the so-called trial held in a Canadian court room, a trial to determine whether the defendant was guilty or not guilty of murdering Tim McLean, do you know how many witnesses were called? Two. Both of them psychiatrists, who both agreed that the defendant was not criminally responsible because he was ill. None of the testimony was challenged by the Prosecution because the Prosecution agreed with the Defence on everything of substance and there was no point in challenging testimony they agreed with. So who was representing the victim’s family and the family known as the Canadian people? Were there eyewitnesses to the crime? Dozens of them. The passengers and the bus driver. Why weren’t any of them called? The so-called witnesses who were called, weren’t witnesses of anything. They were two doctors who talked to the accused, who under medication told a story of God and voices. We have no evidence that he is telling the truth, but we are told that he is a sick man, obviously a sick man. Jefferey Dahmer was a sick man. Charles Manson was a sick man. Paul Bernardo was a sick man. Because the man who killed Tim McLean and presumably ate his victim’s eyeballs – because he was sick and is sick – the rest of us are forced to be sickened by the notion that he is saved from a permanent incarceration by his sickness, which the witnesses say can be medicated away.

And so the family of Tim McLean will have to deal with a yearly review, a yearly report on their son’s killer. They will spend the rest of their lives praying that psychiatrists keep on giving Vincent Li’s mind a failing grade. But the system this week was all about feeling good, instead of doing good. It helped the “feel good” to not call any eyewitnesses to the crime. Eyewitness testimony of that July night, on that bus, would have left nobody feeling good. The truth of what happened does not contain a speck of “feel good” and the public would have gotten very, very angry. Instead we got two shrinks. Feel good practitioners telling us that Vincent was a good guy, had always been a good guy, had a bad night and doesn’t really know what he did that night. All he knows is that he heard the voice of God telling him to kill the passenger next to him. He knew enough to buy a knife, and carry it on a bus. He knew enough to butcher a relatively small man, a vulnerable man. He doesn’t really know what he did, but he knows what he was instructed to do by the voices. No need to challenge this testimony???? No, this is really as solid as the rock of Gibraltar. No one would think of challenging a doctor who deals with mental illness and has done hours and hours of interviews with a person who has murdered and cannibalized. (more…)