cool.

(June 1, 2012 at 9:27 pm)Annik Wrote:

(June 1, 2012 at 9:24 pm)jackman Wrote: yeah, i realize that's conventional wisdom, but i wonder if they aren't so slick sometimes, but just smart enough to find gullible or helpless victims. btw, thanks, btk and green river ARE different guys.

I have a hobby of studying these kinds of killers. It's not just who they kill, but how little everyone around them picks up on it. BTK was recently caught because he sent a letter to the police from his church, and they were able to track it. The Zodiac was never caught. I don't remember where I heard/read it, but I remember reading that there was an estimated 15-30 serial killers operating at all times in the US. Again, I don't remember where I read it and I could definitely be remembering wrong.

There would be more without Dexter. In Dexter we trust.

Quote:...A homeless man who had a problem with alcohol,...

REF: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/natio...1852.story

Interesting...

So many questions, questions that will never be answered. The victim is the only one who can tell us the story as he saw it, but chances are won't ever. If he avoids sepsis, the bottle'll be next.

Mother of Miami Zombie Wrote:She also criticized police for killing her son instead of trying to find other means of subduing the man that she said faithfully read the Bible and accompanied her to church.

Because going to church somehow means you're automatically not a piece of shit right?

(June 4, 2012 at 12:55 am)Moros Synackaon Wrote:

Quote:...A homeless man who had a problem with alcohol,...

REF: http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/natio...1852.story

Interesting...

So many questions, questions that will never be answered. The victim is the only one who can tell us the story as he saw it, but chances are won't ever. If he avoids sepsis, the bottle'll be next.

It's hard to tell your side of the story without lips....
Can't help feel sorry for the guy, he has his face bitten off by a bath-salt-abusing junkie and is then criticised for being an alcoholic, perhaps he could be cut some slack?

(June 4, 2012 at 5:15 pm)liam Wrote: It's hard to tell your side of the story without lips....
Can't help feel sorry for the guy, he has his face bitten off by a bath-salt-abusing junkie and is then criticised for being an alcoholic, perhaps he could be cut some slack?

Facts cut no slack and I don't see where any value judgements were made of him. However, I do wonder how he survived the trauma -- I wonder if his alcoholism (and the alcohol) provided a pain killer.

Since the hospice has publicly commented that the primary issue is averting sepsis and infection, it would lead me to believe that he has a suppressed immune system.

He lived on the street, which is a very dirty and unsanitary place. If he had a suppressed immune system all the time, I do not believe he would be alive, prior or even now due to the virulence of pre-existing bacteria in a suddenly extremely stressed environment (IE getting your face eaten).

So I wonder if the victims initial state was inebriated, which may explain why he's still alive and not dead from shock.

But please, go on. The victims emotional state and their virtual representation of them in your mind must matter more than what is published.

(June 4, 2012 at 8:01 pm)Moros Synackaon Wrote:

(June 4, 2012 at 5:15 pm)liam Wrote: It's hard to tell your side of the story without lips....
Can't help feel sorry for the guy, he has his face bitten off by a bath-salt-abusing junkie and is then criticised for being an alcoholic, perhaps he could be cut some slack?

Facts cut no slack and I don't see where any value judgements were made of him. However, I do wonder how he survived the trauma -- I wonder if his alcoholism (and the alcohol) provided a pain killer.

Since the hospice has publicly commented that the primary issue is averting sepsis and infection, it would lead me to believe that he has a suppressed immune system.

He lived on the street, which is a very dirty and unsanitary place. If he had a suppressed immune system all the time, I do not believe he would be alive, prior or even now due to the virulence of pre-existing bacteria in a suddenly extremely stressed environment (IE getting your face eaten).

So I wonder if the victims initial state was inebriated, which may explain why he's still alive and not dead from shock.

But please, go on. The victims emotional state and their virtual representation of them in your mind must matter more than what is published.

It seems pretty logical to assume that he was inebriated but the fact of the matter that I am focussing on is that he had his face chewed off by another man, I don't think there is really anything that he could possibly have done to warrant what is widely publicised to be a 'zombie attack'.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that what is published is wrong but when you place a slant on a story of cannibalistic attack whereby you criticise the victim for being an alcoholic (which, admittedly, he was) and portray the attacker as a bible-reading christian (which is, in context, supposed to mean he was a moral person, for some obscure reason) it hardly seems right to me.

Perhaps I'm speculating too much but the emotional state of the man must be pretty fucked up about now, being sans visage and receiving less sympathy than perhaps he deserves. Yes, being an alcoholic is bad, but eating another man's face is worse.

If you recall in the original "Day of the Dead" there is a specific area of the brain that must be destroyed. In the movies any head shot will kill a zombie...this is misleading. Also you can smell a zombie infestation long before you can see them so you always want to stay downwind. Zombies can run, but like a Romulan cloaking device, in order to attack it must slow down and drag one leg. All zombies have teeth that can rip through three feet of flesh. Outside of Italy, children zombies are rare. "Return of the Living Dead" was the best zombie movie made. A good zombie movie, such as "Day of the Dead" works as a metaphor for society where the mindless masses get together and attempt to eat individuals with brains to make them one of them. They hang out in places such as the mall. There is always a safe haven somewhere on the planet (utopia) where it is believed you can go that there are no zombies. In Zombie Diaries 2 it was "Hope" England. If a zombie infestation is caused by a viral infection, head toward the colder climates such as the sparsely populated Greenland. Sometimes zombies can be fooled if you walk slow and drag a leg. Even though they are zombies, they seldom eat their own. We will miss you Bill Murray, although you really haven't done anything worth while of late. Don't expect sex, even if you really are the last man on earth.

(June 4, 2012 at 9:03 pm)liam Wrote: It seems pretty logical to assume that he was inebriated

I didn't. I considered that he might have been in the streets due to alcoholism (IE no money because spent all on booze).

I have only speculated as to his survival, as the shock of having one's face chewed off would normally have overwhelmed most people.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shock_%28circulatory%29

I also noted in other articles they talked about his immune system. So I put two and two together and conjectured that the vasodilation of alcohol might have assisted the victim survive the shock of traumatic facial savagery.

(June 4, 2012 at 9:03 pm)liam Wrote: but the fact of the matter that I am focussing on is that he had his face chewed off by another man, I don't think there is really anything that he could possibly have done to warrant what is widely publicised to be a 'zombie attack'.

No one here has spoken about the victim provoking the attack. I'm not certain where you got that idea.

(June 4, 2012 at 9:03 pm)liam Wrote: Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that what is published is wrong but when you place a slant on a story of cannibalistic attack whereby you criticise the victim for being an alcoholic

The media article is written with a slant.

(June 4, 2012 at 9:03 pm)liam Wrote: (which, admittedly, he was) and portray the attacker as a bible-reading christian (which is, in context, supposed to mean he was a moral person, for some obscure reason) it hardly seems right to me.

Look at the source -- CHICAGO TRIBUNE. Not exactly Los Angeles Times material...

(June 4, 2012 at 9:03 pm)liam Wrote: Perhaps I'm speculating too much but the emotional state of the man must be pretty fucked up about now, being sans visage and receiving less sympathy than perhaps he deserves. Yes, being an alcoholic is bad, but eating another man's face is worse.

He's lucky to be alive. I do not know what will become of him -- I hope he does receive the best of care.