GREYHOUND BUS POSABLE 10 DEAD MAYBE MORE

[PG]

From CNN:

The driver told Bard that the man was "5-foot-10 or 5-foot-11 and 150 to 160 pounds." Bard said the man was "foreign" and spoke with an accent.

Bard said the driver never lost consciousness. He said the driver was able to climb out of the wrecked bus and go for help. Bard said the driver, a Greyhound veteran from Marietta, Georgia, is in good condition after surgery to treat the laceration on his neck.


The bus company halted service nationwide as a precaution, a Greyhound Lines representative said.

A government official said the man was carrying Croatian identification.

 

[BlueApple]

A government official said the man was carrying Croatian identification.

In Washington, federal officials told CNN they believe the crash to be an isolated incident and not terrorism.

Dr. Ralph Bard, a surgeon at the Medical Center of Manchester who treated the bus driver, quoted the driver as saying the man who attacked him had asked several times about the route of the bus.

EDIT - Looks like PG Beat me

 

[Amused]

<< This is just sickening. What has our country come to? Man, there's too many loonies out there. I grew up in NYC; Homeless Person Capital of The United States. Every single streetcorner has multiple bums begging money. You can't go to a park in NYC and expect to sit on a bench, because every bench has a homeless person sleeping on it.

This is just a reflection of our society. Especially over the last 2 decades. In my state, they closed down the public "mental institution" because the state refused to pay for it - cost cutting. Those people then became homeless and were put out on the streets.

What are these people supposed to do? They're out of their minds, can't get the medication they need, and have no place to go.

On this incident, I would think by now if someone is on any form transportation and sees someone making a commotion, they would rush to take them out fast. Obviously, there are still a lot of people who haven't learned from the 9/11 attacks. >>



Now one NEEDS to remember that the left liberal wing DEMANDED that the state no longer house the mentally ill if they were not a danger to themselves or others. One Flew Over the Coocoo's Nest was the battle cry for these folks.

While I agree the conditions in these places were bad, at least they kept the loons off the street. It was NOT cost cutting that shut down our ability to house these people. It was liberal advocacy.

As for wondering why they didn't rush him, the description of the attack pretty much sums up why. He suddenly rushed forward, drew the knife, and slit the driver's throat before anyone could even think. (according to the account of one witness who told CNN)

 

[Amused]

<< Those who yearn for "simpler times" in the past when we "didn't have to worry about this stuff" - grass is greener. I think that for us at least the world is a better place to live than it ever has been before

I disagree. In the past, there were often certain rules in warfare. Even in the American Revolution, I think only 1 woman was killed. In the Civil War, only a few woman and children were killed. The Battle of Gettysburg, the bloodiest battle in American history, only saw 1 woman shot by accident.

Since the 20th century, anyone is considered fair game in warfare. Mass annihilation can take place whereas in the past, wars were localized in cities or certain areas.

In my mind, clearly technology has not been a panacea for mankind.

I saw a quote somewhere from Janes Intelligence saying that the last 50 years leading up to the present have been THE most dangerous time, but the public just doesn't realize it. >>



Yet, in the Crusade of 1099, every Muslim man, woman and child was slaughtered in Jerusalem by Catholic Crusaders.

Six of one, a half dozen of another.

 

[StageLeft]

I disagree. In the past, there were often certain rules in warfare. Even in the American Revolution, I think only 1 woman was killed. In the Civil War, only a few woman and children were killed. The Battle of Gettysburg, the bloodiest battle in American history, only saw 1 woman shot by accident.

Seperate events. The terrorist attacks that happened have happened in the past, just not to such a great degree. We had two world wars over a mere 3 decades earlier in the last century. Now that sucks!

 

[CinderElmo]

Now is the most dangerous time BY FAR. In the past mankind has been controlled in his use of force for fear of retaliation. Hell even Hitler, probably hands down the most evil dictator ever, refrained from using chemical weapons because he feared retaliation. The Soviet-Amerian Cold war was a stand off for that reason as well.

Now, our enemies are acting independent of national boundaries and are free to attack at will, and without regard for conventions, because they are largely immune to retaliation. Therefore the gloves are now off and all of Civilization is in mortal danger. These truly are the new barbarians and they will have no regard for any human life, including their own. As it becomes easier and easier to kill more people with smaller and more deadly weapons...the threat will only increase.

For anyone who thinks we must use peaceful means to stop these people - they are smoking grass and living in the past.

 

[21Jumper]

<< oh god... this is horrible >>



I agree. People can't even spell POSSIBLE correctly.

 

[shifrbv]

It was NOT cost cutting that shut down our ability to house these people. It was liberal advocacy.

Not in my state and I come from one of THE most conservative states in the US. We've gone Republican for as many years as I can remember. Anyway, the building where these people were housed was in bad shape, it took a lot of funding, and the state was just looking for a way to shut it down. This was when states were on a binge to limit/get rid of welfare. Finally, there was a case of abuse against one of the workers there against 1 patient. The state then had the mandate to do it after that. I think around 2500 people were just put out. There was a big news story about how many of them had absolutely no arrangement by the state on where they would go. Immediately, the homeless population in the downtown area shot up. You couldn't go to a fast food restaurant without seeing them sitting in there talking to themselves or a public library. You couldn't walk down the street without them asking for change.

Later downtown was revitalized and now they are dealt with by the police because it looks bad to see homeless on the streets. The state didn't get rid of them, it just transferred them to another institution, jail.

There are no liberals where I am at. Sadly, just the opposite.

 

[Amused]

<< It was NOT cost cutting that shut down our ability to house these people. It was liberal advocacy.

Not in my state and I come from one of THE most conservative states in the US. We've gone Republican for as many years as I can remember. Anyway, the building where these people were housed was in bad shape, it took a lot of funding, and the state was just looking for a way to shut it down. This was when states were on a binge to limit/get rid of welfare. Finally, there was a case of abuse against one of the workers there against 1 patient. The state then had the mandate to do it after that. I think around 2500 people were just put out. There was a big news story about how many of them had absolutely no arrangement by the state on where they would go. Immediately, the homeless population in the downtown area shot up. You couldn't go to a fast food restaurant without seeing them sitting in there talking to themselves or a public library. You couldn't walk down the street without them asking for change.

Later downtown was revitalized and now they are dealt with by the police because it looks bad to see homeless on the streets. The state didn't get rid of them, it just transferred them to another institution, jail.

There are no liberals where I am at. Sadly, just the opposite. >>



What state is this?

Most (if not all) state laws say an individual must pose "an immediate danger to self or others" before medical intervention can occur. Civil libertarians have made it almost impossible to treat psychotic individuals who refuse care.

These laws were passed in the early seventies.

Now, I'm not saying I don't believe you, but I've had a bit of history with this. My oldest brother suffers from paranoid schizophrenia, and it was impossible to have him comitted against his will unless he posed a danger to himself, or others. If we did get him committed, they would hold him only long enough until the drugs kicked in, and they deemed him "fit" to be released.

We had this trouble in five states, and researched many others in an attempt to find a state in which we could commit him against his will. In fact, until we hired a full time nurse for him, the only way to keep him medicated was to keep him in jail... a short term thing at best.

Sad to say, but because of the liberal left wing, non-dangerous, non-compliant mentally ill people are more likely to get treatment in jail, than in any hospital.

Finally, if the hospital you're talking about housed people who AGREED to be committed, we're talking about two different things. People who agree to be committed are not the problem here.

 

[StormRider]

While I think the attacker was probably just a crazy man, the latest report from CNN said the attacker was carrying Croatian identification. This makes me wonder...

CNN Report




<< Dr. Ralph Bard, a surgeon at the Medical Center of Manchester who treated the bus driver, quoted the driver as saying his attacker had asked several times about the route of the bus.

"The man came up this last time and cut his throat with what he described as either a razor or a box cutter and then he actually grabbed the wheel and forced the bus across the median to the oncoming traffic," Bard quoted the driver as saying.

The driver told Bard that the man was "5-foot-10 or 5-foot-11 and 150 to 160 pounds." Bard said the driver told him the man was "foreign" and spoke with an accent. A government official said the man was carrying Croatian identification.
>>

 

[shifrbv]

AmusedOne - You're right about the laws of the 70's. That cleared out the place somewhat, but it was still needed for the next decade for legitimate patients. After the event which I spoke of, the state sought means to get rid of it (Central State Hospital in Indiana). But the need was still there so a few years ago they began trying to privatize some of it out to area hospitals. Now the private costs are escalating and they are looking at reopening parts of the previously closed state facility. I just saw a study on the effects of it and it was reported that 3 years after the patients were discharged, 40% of the patients had to be rehospitalized after the closing and 10% were in jail. The remaining 50% were being cared for at home or in group home settings.

 

[b0mbrman]

Jeez...I was supposed to fly home sometime within the past month but I cancelled the flight out of fear...I rescheduled what I needed to do and planned on using greyhound to get home.

Damn, is there any safe way to travel anymore?