Crazy Cannibal

[Jyn]

Yet another of these whackos.

http://www.comcast.net/articles/news...Bus.Beheading/

There are so many points of discussion that could spawn from this story, I don't know where to start.

-Reasons to carry a gun. You simply never know when some BS like this will happen. If the victim or any of the other passengers on the bus had been carrying a weapon, this man could be alive right now.

-Why banning guns isn't going to stop people committing atrocities like this (Committed with a knife).

-Should, as the victim's family wants, people who are found guilty but not criminally responsible (i.e. deemed *too* insane to be a criminal?!) be put into prison anyway?

-The age-old claim of "God told me to do it"

I'm going to address point 3 for now. No, people like this shouldn't be put into prison. They should be summarily executed. This guy should have gotten a bullet to the brain the moment he stepped off the bus.

If he is found to be too insane, he'll get locked in an asylum. Then what? A few years go by, he'll miraculously improve, and they'll let him out.

This man, after committing an act like this, is beyond redemption. There is no cure for someone like him. Tax dollars should not be wasted on trying to treat him. Tax dollars should not be wasted trying to keep him imprisoned (he'd be a time-bomb waiting to go off on guards, other prisoners, or himself, and so no resources should be wasted on his upkeep at all).

[Dalaena]

I don't know what to say about this. On one hand, someone loves this Li guy and raised him until he got to adulthood. He obviously has someone else who loves him because he has a wife. If he really is mentally ill, shouldn't everything be done to try to fix him first?

On the other hand, he's caused irreparable damage to people who loved his victim. Allowing it to happen again would be a crime against humanity. I do believe the guy is insane and knows it. I think that's why he begged to be killed. I'm not sure this case is very black and white for me.

[Snrrub]

Originally posted by Jyn
Yet another of these whackos.
-Reasons to carry a gun. You simply never know when some BS like this will happen. If the victim or any of the other passengers on the bus had been carrying a weapon, this man could be alive right now.

The victim's injuries suggest that he would have died after the initial one or two blows, meaning that even if the passengers had firearms, they wouldn't have been able to react in time to prevent the killing. As well, Li himself could have had a firearm, in which case the victim's death would have been even more immediate. In any case, I don't think there's any correlation whatsoever between firearm legality and crime rates.

Originally posted by Jyn
-Why banning guns isn't going to stop people committing atrocities like this (Committed with a knife).

I've personally never heard anyone - including people who advocate firearm bans - make the argument that a firearm ban would prevent all crimes.

Originally posted by Jyn
I'm going to address point 3 for now. No, people like this shouldn't be put into prison. They should be summarily executed. This guy should have gotten a bullet to the brain the moment he stepped off the bus.

He did ask officers to kill him at that very moment.

Originally posted by Jyn
If he is found to be too insane, he'll get locked in an asylum. Then what? A few years go by, he'll miraculously improve, and they'll let him out.

If he is suffering from a mental illness, and subsequently is cured, there's no reason why he shouldn't be released. I'm not sure what you're reasoning is, but I'm guessing it's one of the following:
1) People should be held criminally liable for their actions regardless if they're truly insane
2) People can convince the court, and psychiatrists, that they are truly insane when they are not
3) People who are truly insane will be able to convince psychiatrists that they are cured sometime after they've been committed.

I disagree with the first point, and have more faith in the skills of psychiatrists to buy into #2 or #3.

Originally posted by Jyn
This man, after committing an act like this, is beyond redemption. There is no cure for someone like him.

And you got your psychiatry degree from where?

[Malacasta]

Originally posted by Jyn
There are so many points of discussion that could spawn from this story, I don't know where to start.

Maybe, but I don't think I'd be asking any of the questions you were. In general I probably wouldn't comment on these one off, out of nowhere horror stories.
But since we've started, I'd say that - especially in Australia - not enough is done to assess and assist mentally ill people. I don't think much can be concluded, without knowing more, in this case though because this guy HAD been assessed but didn't want to take his meds.
I don't think anyone would want to make the case that people who don't take their meds should be isolated from society.

[Jyn]

Snrrub, you apparently have a lot more faith in psychiatrists (and humanity in general) than I do. That's fair enough. I do not need a psychiatry degree, however, to determine that a man who randomly kills someone, hacks off body parts, and then swallows said body parts (all under the impression that said actions were a command from God) should never again be allowed to be a part of human society.

Originally posted by Malacasta
Maybe, but I don't think I'd be asking any of the questions you were. In general I probably wouldn't comment on these one off, out of nowhere horror stories.
But since we've started, I'd say that - especially in Australia - not enough is done to assess and assist mentally ill people.

There are definitely a ton more issues that could pulled from this story (you've just named a couple more). I see what you're saying about not commenting on "out of nowhere horror stories" (vs a story about a longstanding issue/ongoing tragedy, etc.), but there is a connection to it being out of nowhere and the assessing/assisting of mentally ill people that you brought up.

First off, you said it's especially a problem in Australia... I'd say it's definitely a problem in the US as well... and probably worldwide. In my opinion, this is the longstanding issue that made this "out of nowhere" story comment worthy, because the results that get attention tend to be these types of stories.

Originally posted by Malacasta

I don't think much can be concluded, without knowing more, in this case though because this guy HAD been assessed but didn't want to take his meds.
I don't think anyone would want to make the case that people who don't take their meds should be isolated from society.

Again, I see what you're saying here. Isolating every person who didn't want to take their meds would blanket a lot of people who don't deserve to be isolated. On the other side, not isolating the people who need to be isolated results in stories like this one. This goes back to the need for better assessment/assistance of people like this. Maybe this guy would have led a perfectly normal (non-homicidal/cannibalistic) life if he had just taken some pills. But he didn't. So, how can we prevent out of the blue stories like this? Is it possible without government mandates (potentially leading to a whole lot of power a government shouldn't have)?

[Malacasta]

So, how can we prevent out of the blue stories like this? Is it possible without government mandates (potentially leading to a whole lot of power a government shouldn't have)?

I have no idea, and would be interested to hear from someone who has given this some considered thought. Some gut reactions are:

1. These things are uncommon and I think it's sick at some level the way the media feeds us these stories in this voyeuristic and salacious way and just as sick the way we love to consume them (I'm not having a go at you alone here Jyn, I read about this story heaps when it first occurred). But the thing is we have huge societies of millions or even billions of people living cheek to cheek. In this context, the number of deaths by murder, road accident, disease etc, are unbelievably low and speak strongly to the idea that humans, in general, are socially altruistic and considerate. For that reason I think it's a bad idea to make these stories part of the public consciousness and moreover to make extremely punitive laws in reaction to these one off horror events (where the person is obviously insane) as this would then create the precedents to punish less repulsive crimes.

2. Releasing mentally ill patients onto the street who had volunteered to be cared for in state institutions was a decision that lead to the death of many mentally ill people in Victoria in the 1990's. I would argue that cutting funding to mental health care increases the likelihood of incidents like this occurring.

3. It probably is possible to keep making incremental changes to areas where deaths and injuries occur (for example, making it law for people to wear bicycle helmets or seat belts, making it compulsory for cars to have air bags, making immunizations free and 'opt out'). But often these things lead to - at some level - a reduction of individual rights. Personally, I support laws for seat belts and immunizations and not driving through red lights, they make sense to me - but there are people out there who campaign against these laws.
These are issues we used to talk about a lot in the anarchist and socialist groups I was involved in (obviously over beers at the pub, it's silly to make blue prints for utopia). One of the things we used to discuss was the phenomenon where insane asylums were emptied in various revolutions - things like legalizing homosexuality, freeing women to enter the workplace etc, affect social mental health (I would guess this is obvious, I haven't got a psych degree though) and so I imagine that revolutionary changes to the way society is organized would impact heavily on the mental health of its citizens and have a lot of hope that it would be possible to have a society where mental illness was a lot less common that it is now.

Lots of sci-fi covers this sort of stuff too, there was as Niven story about the last adventure anyone ever had because they'd solved all problems of pain and misery etc. The Ian Banks 'culture' books explore these questions, as does LeGuin's 'The Lathe of Heaven' (in fact a lot of Le Guin discusses this).

Mmm, that was a ramble wasn't it!

[Rosuav]

Originally posted by Malacasta
3. It probably is possible to keep making incremental changes to areas where deaths and injuries occur (for example, making it law for people to wear bicycle helmets or seat belts, making it compulsory for cars to have air bags, making immunizations free and 'opt out'). But often these things lead to - at some level - a reduction of individual rights. Personally, I support laws for seat belts and immunizations and not driving through red lights, they make sense to me - but there are people out there who campaign against these laws.

I'm not so sure about immunizations, as there's so many of them, and I don't trust that every single thing touted as "This will stop you from getting X disease" is necessarily worthwhile; but seat belt laws I wholeheartedly agree with - especially the way they are here, which puts the onus on the manufacturers to install them, first, and if they're not installed, we the passengers aren't obligated to use them (eg buses; and classic vehicles aren't required to be altered before they can be driven). Not driving through red lights isn't so much a safety issue as an orderliness one. You're most welcome to drive out onto the freeway in front of a semi, and get yourself killed that way. Red lights are there to ensure that everyone gets a turn at driving over the middle of the intersection, and they do a good job at that so long as nobody ignores them.

Specifics aside, though, I completely agree with your concern that safety laws restrict freedom. We seem to have a society that's begging the government to put us all in little padded cells, to allow us to do nothing that could possibly hurt us... I don't really know why, but I'm actually imagining people in little Matrix capsules, as the ultimate result of this. The trouble is, people won't be voluntarily entering them; they'll be lobbying to have everyone forced into them. Restrict your own freedom if you like, but don't restrict mine!

[Snrrub]

Originally posted by Jyn
Snrrub, you apparently have a lot more faith in psychiatrists (and humanity in general) than I do. That's fair enough. I do not need a psychiatry degree, however, to determine that a man who randomly kills someone, hacks off body parts, and then swallows said body parts (all under the impression that said actions were a command from God) should never again be allowed to be a part of human society.

I haven't said that an individual such as the accused should necessarily be released into society. Rather, I think that they should be released into society only after review by mental health professionals. You seem to think that - with presumably no education in area - you know more about mental ilness than professionals, and come to the conclusion that the accused will be a danger to society for the rest of his life. Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

[Jyn]

Originally posted by Snrrub
I haven't said that an individual such as the accused should necessarily be released into society. Rather, I think that they should be released into society only after review by mental health professionals. You seem to think that - with presumably no education in area - you know more about mental ilness than professionals,...

And I said that I think he should have been shot on the spot. Even if he had an all clear from all of the best professionals in the world, that does not redeem him. The worth of a human life in society is not a matter of professionalism (as there is no actual expertise on "humanity"). It is an opinion that varies from person to person, and we differ in this instance. Also, while I do not have a degree in psychiatry, you do presume too much to assume I have 0 education in it.

Originally posted by Snrrub

...and come to the conclusion that the accused will be a danger to society for the rest of his life. Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

Evidence... as in studies? Now you're just being ridiculous, and you know it. Given the fact that we are discussing a particular individual, there are no studies in the world that would serve as the valid scientific evidence you request unless the experiments were performed on him specifically.

Now, my degree isn't in psychology, as we've already established, but I'm pretty sure schizophrenia can't be cured by therapy (/end sarcasm). This means that his good behavior (not murdering people) is ENTIRELY dependent on his ability to reliably take his medications.... and of course there is currently plenty of "evidence" that he is not inclined to do so.

Now, seriously, are you trying (and failing) to be funny? The fact that you seem to be saying you think it would be okay to release this particular man back into society after any amount of treatment is incredibly disturbing. You would put the lives of everyone around this man in danger because of your faith (in psychiatrists)?

Are you saying that, if this man got the green light from every renowned doctor in the world and was eventually released, you would knowingly get on a bus with him (because he's obviously no longer a danger to society)?

[Snrrub]

Originally posted by Jyn
Evidence... as in studies?

Studies, or for that matter, any clinic evidence whatsoever that supports your claim that mental illnesses that can lead to violence are impossible to cure or manage with treatment.

Originally posted by Jyn
Given the fact that we are discussing a particular individual, there are no studies in the world that would serve as the valid scientific evidence

(emphasis mine)
Oh really?

Originally posted by Jyn
No, people like this shouldn't be put into prison. They should be summarily executed ... There is no cure for someone like him

You made this generalization implying that people with mental illnesses that are prone to violence cannot be cured. Either you can support that with evidence, or you pulled it out of your ass. At this point it's obvious that it's the latter.

Originally posted by Jyn
but I'm pretty sure schizophrenia can't be cured by therapy (/end sarcasm).

And the doctors who have authority over his release take into account his progress while making their decisions, i.e. still crazy = still committed.

Originally posted by Jyn
This means that his good behavior (not murdering people) is ENTIRELY dependent on his ability to reliably take his medications.... and of course there is currently plenty of "evidence" that he is not inclined to do so.

By your logic, any schizophrenic who doesn't reliably take medication should be "summarily executed" pre-emptively for fear they might commit a terrible and violent act.

Originally posted by Jyn
You would put the lives of everyone around this man in danger because of your faith (in psychiatrists)?

You mean just like how people put their lives in danger when getting on a plain because of their faith in the skills of the pilot? Or likewise with surgeons during surgery? Our lives depend on the skills of professionals all the time.

Originally posted by Jyn
Are you saying that, if this man got the green light from every renowned doctor in the world and was eventually released, you would knowingly get on a bus with him (because he's obviously no longer a danger to society)?

Yes I would get on the bus with him if he got the green light from every renowned doctor in the world. Those doctors know more about psychiatry than I do, and I realize that. Apparently you don't.