Anonymous Report This Comment Date: September 14, 2006 10:31PM
Yeah. I think he lives in Montreal.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: September 14, 2006 10:55PM
this mother fucker is DEAD
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: September 14, 2006 11:25PM
more people like this live in the US
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 02:04AM
Not with that haircut they don't.
Palley Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 04:29AM
Another guy with a tiny dick.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 01:03PM
You people are retarded.
etx125 Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 01:58PM
its ok guys they are toys, a plastic blade and a cap gun
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 02:14PM
Needs to comb his fucked-up wirey (curly sue)hair.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 05:58PM
Two FAGS!!
etx125 Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 06:16PM
its the same bloke but he is dead now anyway, the cops shot him
kirstyuk Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 06:29PM
this was the self-proclaimed angel of death kimver gill. a canadian gunman who
killed one person and wounded 19 others, 6 of the victims are fighting for there
lives. this man was nothing but SCUM!
TEE323 Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 06:35PM
whats the story behind this guy? why did the cops have to shoot him down?
kirstyuk Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 07:03PM
this 25yrs old man went on the rampage with a gun at dawson collage in
montreal. it was a copycat killing as to the columbine high school killings
which left 13 people dead in april 1999. he also had more than 50 photo`s of
himself with other guns and knives on a web site called vampirefreaks.com he is
known as trench. he must have been still armed when the police got there an
they felt under threat.
mrkim Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 08:40PM
Sounds like he saved the taxpayers a lot of $$. Dead wackos don't require a
lengthy expensive trial or years of incarceration afterwards either. And ...
they never harm nor infect another soul with their madness :>
aDCBeast Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 09:10PM
MrsKim
Are you sure you aren't a Limbaugh listener ?
His listeners have a list of issues that they get pissed off when talking
about.
Murders who spend life in prison or go through the long but necessary appeals
process is just one of those hot button issues.
People who do that prove they are retarded.
mrkim Report This Comment Date: September 15, 2006 11:11PM
Sorry Bman, don't think I've ever listened to Limbaughs program, though I have
heard it in passing from time to time, so I do know who he is.
Seems to me that liberals get all wound up when some "poor, misguided and
misunderstood" wacko goes on a murderous spree and kills or injures
innocents and then winds up dead from having done so.
I am well aware of the concept of innocence until proven guilty in a court of
law and certainly agree with it wholeheartedly. However, when a wanted criminal
on the lamb for some such heinous acts refuses to surrender peacefully or puts
the arresting officers in personal jeapordy are they really supposed to allow
the fucker to add another death or injury to his toll or simply do their job and
protect themselves and the rest of the public from further harm by them ?
The public outcry for a criminals rights typically gets more attention than
those for their victims and you seemingly applaud that concept with your
statements.
I on the other hand feel otherwise :>/
Seems to me the cat made a choice about his own destiny and outcome in a
judicial setting that just made the process much more timely and less costly by
not peacefully surrendering while saving a lot of trouble and $$ in the process.
Even if they popped 20 caps on him it cost less than even one day guarding,
feeding and housing his worthless ass ... so I applaud his resolve to do so
:>
aDCBeast Report This Comment Date: September 16, 2006 12:06AM
MrKim
did you happen to take american history? I'll assume you did if you are really
an american.
What did the british do to quiet political dissent by the colonists?
and this shows where most americans perceptions have been misdirected by
unscrupulous people in the revenge rights movement.
The British brought false charges against victims. People who had done nothing
against the law but were creating a change in public opinion about english rule
in the colonies.
These people is modern day american would be called a criminal right by those
who have forgotten american history.
The Bill of Rights are Victims Rights.
You and many americans need to relearn what you think you know.
What too many people want today is REVENGE rights. That is BS. And it is
unamerican to want such a thing.
It is my belief that too many americans think they know what being american is
about and don't.
madbull Report This Comment Date: September 16, 2006 03:42AM
yea i know someone like this wacko....his screen name that he's hiding behind
is aDCBreast.
we need to wake up and report this wacko aDC, he is a major terrorist, and needs
to be stopped.
mrkim Report This Comment Date: September 16, 2006 06:41AM
Beast, what being American means is that you and I have the right to hold
whatever opinion in this matter we so choose to as we have equal freedom in
doing so.
The loose rope you're throwing over this situation is quite a stretch, even by
your standards. To associate someone having gone on a killing spree as a
political dissenter or to speak of them as if this is even relevant in such a
discussion is really a bit too far fetched to make the connection.
I feel I understand the point you're attempting here and agree that this is a
tactic that's been used since man became able to speak. Unfortunately lies are
a big part of the spoken and written realm, but Americans and seemingly American
politicians are the ones your attempting to affiliate with such deeds in this
discussion surely have no lock on mistruths and misplaced suspicions.
My point, and what seems to be the "revenge rights" you alluded to, is
that a person attempting to be apprehended by officers of the law have 2 choices
to make in the matter. 1. Surrender and prove their innocence in a court of law
or .. 2.Refuse to surrender and if armed at the time of their attempted arrest
.... die.
These choices, when made by a suspected criminal, have consequences, as do all
choices in life, by all people. So how is it so wrong for law officers to make
the necessary choices required in their work to simply carry out the wishes
exercised by the criminals choice ?
There's a great line from "Road House" that seems particularly
relevant here "When a man points a gun at you, you only have 2 choices.
You can either die, or you can kill the motherfucker!"
Though I can't say I have enough details to say I know everything to be known
about this particular situation, it would seem the cops made the 2nd choice and
he died, so be it.
shaDEz Report This Comment Date: September 16, 2006 08:47AM
wow, for someone constantly attacking me for smoking marijaunna, you sure sound
like a reall asshole potheaded hippie mr.b
when someone and anyone is acting a fool like this piece of shit was then they
desserve to executed on the spot
and for that matter, this shit went down in canada, so what the fuck does this
have to do with the fake ass bill of rights? bonehead
aDCBeast Report This Comment Date: September 16, 2006 10:44PM
shaDEz
Read the fucking thread ass.
MrsKim made the ignorant comment of "criminals" rights. The founding
fathers refer to the Bill of Rights as "Victims Rights".
The scumbag in the picture is secondary to our converation.
MrKim
There are too many dumbass people in america to allow such free use of guns.
Cops included.
Most situations can be resolved with a killing solution. Too many police
jurisdictions are taught to focre a situation which leads to greater injury and
loss of life.
aDCBeast Report This Comment Date: September 16, 2006 10:45PM
Most situations can be resolved with OUT a killing solution. Too many police
jurisdictions are taught to focre a situation which leads to greater injury and
loss of life.
mrkim Report This Comment Date: September 16, 2006 11:14PM
Dunno where you get that the Bill of Rights is considered either v ictims or
criminals rights. They apply to all citizens regardless of which side of the
law they're on.
When a criminal pushes the police in a life or death type encounter the likely
outcome is understood by all parties to the situation and in essence the
criminal has chosen to loose their life by their own actions. How then does
that become a guilt call for the cops ?
Logic seems to be slipping further and further from your grasp Bman.
aDCBeast Report This Comment Date: September 17, 2006 01:42AM
MrKim
"Dunno where you get that the Bill of Rights is considered either v ictims
or criminals rights. They apply to all citizens regardless of which side of the
law they're on."
Funny you didn't share those same sentiments the guy in the image.
Maybe you should reread why the Bill of Rights was added to the US Constitution
by George Mason.
These rights were written to help the "victims" of government.
Would you have requested your rights be respected during WW2 or would you have
accepted being put in a camp?
aDCBeast Report This Comment Date: September 17, 2006 01:43AM
MrKim
Cops are taught to escalate situations to life and death. Even on simple traffic
stops. What a fucking joke.
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: September 17, 2006 02:02AM
aDCBeast, you are WRONG and obviously quite delusional! Cops are taught to
always use MINIMUM FORCE necessary to apprehend suspects -- up to and including
deadly force. It's the suspects who escalate situations to life and death by
not responding to verbal commands, fighting with police, brandishing weapons,
etc.
Deadly force is NEVER authorized to conduct a traffic stop. In fact, cops often
break off high speed chases in order to protect the public from reckless idiots.
(By the way, EVERY serial killer ever apprehended alive was caught during a
traffic stop -- Dahmer, Gacy, Son of Sam, Manson, ect. -- all of them.)
Let's just hope that you never need the cops to prevent someone from beating,
raping or killing you or someone else you care about.
festus Report This Comment Date: September 17, 2006 05:39AM
I like Mr.Kims' argument about how his death saves
time and bundles of money(good point)
As for Beasts' argument,well it sucked!(as usual)
Autopsy shows that the "loser" died from a self
inflicted gunshot wound.The cops had hit him in the
arm and conflicting reports said that the cops had
killed him.Either way the cops most likely would have killed him anyway.
Beast how can you be such a retard?
I can see defending someone on death row for murder
whom has a case and judgement against him with poor evidence&facts etc.
But how on earth can you defend a madman in the middle of a shooting rampage and
not prosecute him
to the fullest extent of the law on the spot.There is no evidence needed,no
trial needed,no bleeding
heart he was just misunderstood bullshit needed.
To me the only crime would be not putting a bullet
in this fuckers head given the situation.
Thankfully he is dead and I don't have to hear how
it was societys fault.It is always somebody elses fault,it's never their own
fault.I am 100% sure that if this dude was Beasts son it would be Hollywoods
fault,the videogame makers fault,the makers of Goth music&websites fault,the
gun manufacturers fault,the guy who cut his hair 's fault and last but not least
GEORGE BUSHS' FAULT!
Anonymous Report This Comment Date: September 17, 2006 10:03PM
I honestly feel dumber for having read this entire thread.
aDCBeast Report This Comment Date: September 18, 2006 03:14AM
Anonymous@228144
BS. Cops are taught institutionally to escalate confrontations to a life and
death situation.
what do I mean? When you proceed up to a vehicle with your gun drawn or your
hand on on your gun then you are a split second from a life and death situation.
Cops are taught to either have their gun drawn or hands on their gun for simple
traffic stops.
that is BS.
The "were protecting you from these dangerous people" argument is 100%
bullshit. It is made by every security group but it assumes people are going to
commit further crime. that is why this argument is BS.
Festus
But your not bright so your analysis means nothing.
Anonymous@79222
Plus613 can turn a Phd into rainman in 6 months.
aDCBeast Report This Comment Date: September 18, 2006 03:19AM
Festus
Only conservatives blame exterior objects for the wrong doings of their
children.
You happened to pick conservatives first chioce in Hollywood.
mrkim Report This Comment Date: September 18, 2006 03:58AM
Have to disagree again Bman. Liberalocrats are the ones always trying to place
blame on their environment, TV, a bad home life, or whatever other BS excuse
they can try to use instead of just facing the fact that a crazy fucker like the
one in the pic above just made insane choices that ultimately led to his
demise.
Sadly for every lunatic like this cat that gets caught and killed by their own
hands or by the cops, there are a hundred like them that wind up incarcerated
for years and serve to continue robbing the tax paying citizens because the
damned limp wristed whiny left wingers feel it's inhumane to give them the
justice they truly deserve .... death.
festus Report This Comment Date: September 18, 2006 10:46AM
Lmao@rainman
woberto Report This Comment Date: May 25, 2023 12:12AM
We miss you Beast.
