A couple months ago I posted about Vince Weiguang Li, the Cananian bus cannibal. You can read the original post here on Wordpress. Although it still gets hits, a few every day in fact, after two months a comment came in from Mother. Here it is:
cannibal did not kill with a gun. he killed with a knife. even if that tool was intended for other uses. all here have very good opinions. do not take what i write next personally as i am not applying it to any one here. i am simply reminded of some observations i have made in the past and given much thought to. i would like to say this:compassion is a great and noble gift. please make sure that you are not waving it around like a flag to show how enlightened and politically correct you are while spending it all on killers who lack that very thing you hold dear, ie. compassion. i have noticed a tendency from people who have great feeling for the criminals among us do not usually hold those sentiments for the victims and other people these crimes impact. in fact, many times those espousing compassion will have a lot of detail of the criminal’s names and vital statistics, but will not know much about the victims’. the criminals names will be mentioned ad nauseum during the compassion speeches but the victim’s may only be mentioned at the insistence of other’s. this is a grave disservice. i have also noticed (this was not done here in any of the comments) that compassion is not extended to an opposing view of the stated purveyor of that grace. how many times have we all seen a bleeding heart liberal protect a violent sociopath to the public, and at the same time viciously attack any one who dares to question the judgement of that advocate? you will hear ‘do not judge’ no ‘casting the first stone’ until the defender is questioned. then those convenient parables and contextually inaccurate phrases go out the window. anyone witnessed what i have?as applied to these comments, you are all giving this horrendous, violent trend in our society great thought. one thing, though. that poor canadian boy was not safely in a university level philosophy course able to banter and discourse in an enlightened, well-fed intellectual forum. he was dealing with a real life psychopath and all the inherent danger that goes with it. he was helplessly asleep and much smaller than the cannibal. reality bites not just in theory. all of the sane and safe rationalizations on criminality, spectrum, psychoses and reaction/remedies for the good of the hegemenical ladder fly out the window when you are walking in the dust outside of the barrier of walls and locked doors. unfortunately, i know this up front and personal. born and raised in a violent dark hole with 2 very mentally ill individuals. no poor me, that is not what i am saying. i love life. i am able though to tell you about impact, effect and personal responsibility from a 1st hand experiential perspective. along with rights and compassion comes responsibility. and that is true of the criminals and society in their support and reactions to the victims.this was a ramble of my OHP. forgive misapplied generalizations and run on paragraphs. i am tired. i will leave with this thought. this is for america. do not kick the bodies of the victims laying on the floor as you step over them in your self aggrandizing dash to spout to the world how compassionate you are toward the aggressors. the victims just might be alive to feel that final kick to their rights and dignity.
Some of these are familiar arguments. How do you feel about them? I responded in the comments.
Dear Mother, This post continues to get hits, but you’re the first to comment on it in a couple months. I hear what you’re saying about the compassion for criminals not being extended to their victims in many cases. I guess that’s true, not in my case I honestly feel, but perhaps in some others. Yet, I wonder if it’s often just a simple question of what is it we’re talking about at the time. I mean, when I’m writing about the criminal whose rights are being ignored, I’m talking about the criminal. I’m not talking about the starving children in Africa, nor am I talking about the victim of this particular criminal’s crime. That doesn’t mean I don’t also have compassion for that victim any more than it means I don’t care about the starving children in Africa.
ReplyDeleteI’ve noticed that instead of responding to my questions about rigged trials, unfair treatment in jail, about mitigating circumstances like childhood abuse, about capital punishment itself, some of my antagonists say I’m not compassionate towards the victims but only towards the killer. Whether I am or not is besides the point, if the point is about the criminal, and besides I say it’s just not true in my case.
Mike,
ReplyDeleteWe talk about the rigged trails, unfair treatment and such but in the end I see two things.
First, mitigating circumstances doesn't change the fact a person is responsible for their behavior. Unless you are claiming we are all robots programmed by our youth/circumstances; shouldn't each person take the consequences for what s/he does?
Second, it seems to me that you are selective on who you show compassion about.
I remember the conversations about your post "Road Rage- Pistol Drawn". You didn't seem to show much compassion toward the person who brandished a gun but how much compassion did you show for the Canadian cannibal. Spent a bit of time talking about his childhood, possible abuse, insanity, etc.
Why did those two people get different treatment from you? Shouldn't we talk about the road rage guy's childhood, possible abuse? Or should we just ask to hold both of them accountable to the same standard?
I find the biggest difference in compassion expressed in your views on gun control. Weer'd, Tom, Nomen, and I have shown facts, figures, statistics, anecdotes, personal stories of how firearms saves lives, prevent crimes but are you showing compassion for the people who just want to protect themselves? Or are you still advocating laws and regulations that make it harder for the average person to get that protection?
this story made the world papers... we spoke about it here in my office at great length..
ReplyDeleteMike,
ReplyDeleteFrom Foxnews
FREDERIKSTED, U.S. Virgin Islands — Police say a U.S. Virgin Islands woman with a history of mental problems killed her 16-month-old son by stabbing him repeatedly with a pair of scissors.
Oakland Benta is the acting police chief on St. Croix. He told reporters a distraught 22-year-old island woman was found Thursday half-clothed and spattered with blood in her yard.
Benta says detectives later discovered bloody scissors and the stabbed body of her infant son inside the house. He was pronounced dead at the scene by paramedics.
Police did not immediately disclose the woman's name or any other details.
Comments?
Bob, About what you say is an inconsistency in my treatment of the road rage guy and convicted murderers, I say you're comparing apples and oranges. The point of the road rage incident, as I saw it, is that some people shouldn't be licensed to carry firearms. That idea led to the next one which is what percentage of you guys does that apply to. That was the point, not, like in some of the other posts, how culpable are some of these criminals for their acts. They're two different arguments, both of which we may disagree, but you're clouding that disagreement by mixing them up.
ReplyDeleteMike,
ReplyDeleteI'm trying to point out the differences in sympathetic treatment.
At no time during the road rage post did you ask if maybe he had an abused childhood, had a bad day, etc. It was whether or not some people should have guns.
Did you call for a treatment program to avoid jail time for the road rage guy? You've opined that is a good thing for drug abusers, right.
I see the difference as this; for many criminals you want to try to restore as many rights as you can to them but for gun owners you want to try to restrict their rights before they commit a crime.
Check me on this, by your own reasoning some people because of mental illness, anger issues, etc shouldn't have the right to possess a deadly weapon right?
But is it only limited to firearms? Or should be put people to psychological testing to find out who is fit to drive, own baseball bats, etc.
I've asked before, here and at Weer'd's journal; are not cars by your definition also deadly weapons, can't they be wrongly used, innocents hurt?
So, do you advocate restrictive controls over cars?
I posted the story about the mom who stabbed her son for a reason. I didn't see your call for people to be tested for soundness before they have children. No calls for draconian knife control.