Canada - Lucas Fowler, Chynna Deese, and Leonard Dyck, all murdered, Alaska Hwy, BC, Jul 2019 #22

[Esprite]

When I asked my 17 year-old son and his friends their opinions on what happened to Kam and Bryer, one responded: "Too much gaming, and not enough living." Another said that it's very easy to lose any hope for tomorrow in this effed up world. Most expressed empathy for them, and thought it was a good idea for their peers to reach out to 'weirdos' rather than to shun them.

 

[Lalalacasbah]

When I asked my 17 year-old son and his friends their opinions on what happened to Kam and Bryer, one responded: "Too much gaming, and not enough living." Another said that it's very easy to lose any hope for tomorrow in this effed up world. Most expressed empathy for them, and thought it was a good idea for their peers to reach out to 'weirdos' rather than to shun them.

And sadly, I think social detachment and similar problems will be a bit of an epidemic for the next generations being addicted to their screens, internet, gaming, social media, etc.

There are already studies about how damaging these are to mental health. I already see it when I'm out in the 'real world', people spaced out from too much screen time (myself and the 'older' generations included!)

There are lots of Kams and Bryers out there, hopefully they can be reached out to and they can be open to help so we can stop more destruction from happening.

 

[Jan424]

When I asked my 17 year-old son and his friends their opinions on what happened to Kam and Bryer, one responded: "Too much gaming, and not enough living."

SBM
Sadly, so very true.

 

[poupetty77]

When I asked my 17 year-old son and his friends their opinions on what happened to Kam and Bryer, one responded: "Too much gaming, and not enough living." Another said that it's very easy to lose any hope for tomorrow in this effed up world. Most expressed empathy for them, and thought it was a good idea for their peers to reach out to 'weirdos' rather than to shun them.

I repeat myself, but that idea that Kam and Bryer were two weirdos without a social life doesn't seem to reflect the truth. They had friends, socialized and partied.

I don't think we can explain their actions from the mindset of mentally healthy teenagers. They were either badly mentally ill or something we don't know about happened. JMO

 

[LDS1]

I repeat myself, but that idea that Kam and Bryer were two weirdos without a social life doesn't seem to reflect the truth. They had friends, socialized and partied.

I don't think we can explain their actions from the mindset of mentally healthy teenagers. They were either badly mentally ill or something we don't know about happened. JMO

I have following this thread since mid-July. It is very sad indeed.
I was hoping that they would be found alive as I felt that perhaps they were innocent.
If there was an argument with Kam and the young couple...that could have easily set them off into a rage. Then after the couple was killed; they felt like there was nothing left to lose.
We definitely don't know what turned these young men into dangerous murderers.

 

[Esprite]

I repeat myself, but that idea that Kam and Bryer were two weirdos without a social life doesn't seem to reflect the truth. They had friends, socialized and partied.

I don't think we can explain their actions from the mindset of mentally healthy teenagers. They were either badly mentally ill or something we don't know about happened. JMO

For the record, my son and his friends, are gamers, and close in age to Kam and Bryer, so for me their input counts. However, I did not state in my previous post that I agreed with everything they said, and we discussed this at length. I don't claim to be a perfect parent by any means, but as a social worker, I have come to realize that living vicariously through our children quite often places unnecessary stress on them.

 

[DarkSkink]

Yes, I agree with that, but that doesn't mean that it always is destined to escalate into violence. I think many people are thinking this could have been prevented if warning signs were recognized.



I kind of doubt it, considering how sloppy they were with their crimes...I can't see them getting away with anything.



Agreed on both counts.



I've never read anything about them claiming that they would kill "100" people, though. Where did you read this?



I'm going to guess none. But it takes longer than two weeks to starve to death especially if they went in there with some food. I also don't see them hunting while evading the police.



As I said, I doubt they were thinking that far ahead. Even if the RCMP ultimately wouldn't engage them in a shootout, they could have tried to attract them to their location and began shooting, if that's what their plan was. Or they even could have hid out not that far into the woods and ambushed the cops when they showed up to process the RAV4 burn scene.

The shoplifting video sort of hints they have done that before. They worked together rather efficiently.

 

[poupetty77]

The shoplifting video sort of hints they have done that before. They worked together rather efficiently.

What shoplifting video? The only video of them is the one walking out of a shop after having been at the back for free coffee. They don't touch anything.

They paid for stuff during their "trip", there is no reason to think they shoplifted?

 

[DarkSkink]

What shoplifting video? The only video of them is the one walking out of a shop after having been at the back for free coffee. They don't touch anything.

They paid for stuff during their "trip", there is no reason to think they shoplifted?

Watch the video closely.

 

[poupetty77]

Watch the video closely.

Don't know what you are talking about, they are not shoplifting. Bryer is touching his buttons, it might mean anything, you just believe he is shoplifting. It doesn't make it a fact. Unless I missed something else in the video?

They were on the run for 3 murders, they had money, why would they risk being caught for shoplifting...

 

[Jan424]

What shoplifting video? The only video of them is the one walking out of a shop after having been at the back for free coffee. They don't touch anything.

They paid for stuff during their "trip", there is no reason to think they shoplifted?

The video of them leaving the Co-op is not the place they got free coffee. Also, a few threads back, there was an entire, lengthy discussion on this video... some thought they shoplifted, others did not. I personally didn’t think so, but who knows.
IMO

 

[poupetty77]

The video of them leaving the Co-op is not the place they got free coffee. Also, a few threads back, there was an entire, lengthy discussion on this video... some thought they shoplifted, others did not. I personally didn’t think so, but who knows.
IMO

It's OK to think they did shoplift. It's misleading to say that there is a video of them shoplifting. There just isn't one.

 

[Jan424]

It's OK to think they did shoplift. It's misleading to say that there is a video of them shoplifting. There just isn't one.

Yep, that is true, there is none (that I'm aware of).

 

[FactFinder3000]

It's OK to think they did shoplift. It's misleading to say that there is a video of them shoplifting. There just isn't one.

In Canada concealing an item is generally not shoplifting. Shoplifting is the act of leaving a store with an item without paying for it. So there may well be video of them shoplifting, since they are on video walking out the door.

 

[poupetty77]

In Canada concealing an item is generally not shoplifting. Shoplifting is the act of leaving a store with an item without paying for it. So there may well be video of them shoplifting, since they are on video walking out the door.

That could last for hours . But unless there is a video of them concealing something under their clothes before that video, it is just a video of them walking. No one can say that they do anything else for a fact.

It is as factual as saying that it is a video of them walking toward a choking elderly lady to Heimlich her, because if there was an elderly lady outside chocking and they went to Heimlich her, that is what it would be called.

Yes, shoplifting is more likely that heimliching cute elderly ladies, but you can't tell the video shows either of those things happened.

 

[MistyWaters]

They paid for stuff during their "trip", there is no reason to think they shoplifted?

That so-called “trip” was in the stolen vehicle of one of the three people whom they violently murdered. Clearly they were capable of major theft in addition to the cold-hearted, violent murders of defenceless strangers.

Defending the reputation of killers over the possibility of shoplifting is pointless, don’t you think, considering the atrocities we now know they were responsible for? If they never shoplifted, never even jaywalked, that does not elevate their moral compass one iota considering the crimes they did commit, without remorse.

 

[poupetty77]

I put quotes on the word "trip" because obviously, because it was in terrible circumstances. But it was still a trip from point A to B.

I am not defending their reputation?? That's insulting! I just say we should keep to the facts. It's in the Rules of the forum. You either provide a MSM source or you precise it is your opinion. This is a place to discuss the case and try to understand it better. We can't just decide things are facts and starting discussing it as evidence.

Call me what you want, there is no video of them shoplifting. As I said, we can discuss that in circle for hours.

And obviously, what they did is inexcusable and horrible (haven't I written that about several times already? Should every message include that warning?)

 

[FactFinder3000]

That could last for hours . But unless there is a video of them concealing something under their clothes before that video, it is just a video of them walking. No one can say that they do anything else for a fact.

It is as factual as saying that it is a video of them walking toward a choking elderly lady to Heimlich her, because if there was an elderly lady outside chocking and they went to Heimlich her, that is what it would be called.

Yes, shoplifting is more likely that heimliching cute elderly ladies, but you can't tell the video shows either of those things happened.

Right. But you also can't tell that it didn't happen.

It is not correct to say there is no video of them shoplifting. If you want to say there is no video of them concealing an item, then fine. But as they leave the store, we cannot tell if they are shoplifting or not. So to definitely state "there is no video of them shoplifting" is not correct. We do not know. The video of them leaving the store may be a video of them shoplifting, since leaving the store without paying is where you actually shoplift, not when you conceal the item (in Canada).

 

[poupetty77]

Right. But you also can't tell that it didn't happen.

It is not correct to say there is no video of them shoplifting. If you want to say there is no video of them concealing an item, then fine. But as they leave the store, we cannot tell if they are shoplifting or not. So to definitely state "there is no video of them shoplifting" is not correct. We do not know. The video of them leaving the store may be a video of them shoplifting, since leaving the store without paying is where you actually shoplift, not when you conceal the item (in Canada).

Oh yes. It is definitely "the video where they COULD be shoplifting". It's definitely not "the video of them shoplifting".

 

[Grouper]

Oh yes. It is definitely "the video where they COULD be shoplifting". It's definitely not "the video of them shoplifting".

This topic isn’t conducive to conversation. Sounds like people are just itching for anything to argue about now.

The plain fact is they were caught on camera walking through a Meadow Lake co-op. They could have stolen something, they could have used the bathroom, they could indeed have stopped along the way to assist an elderly woman in need.

Philosophically speaking, there is an infinite world of possibilities contained within that ten second footage (which people LOVE to dissect because we have little else to do with our time, apparently).

Realistically speaking, what we know for fact is that they walked through the store. The end. I don’t see the value in arguing what they may or may not have done in there. Unless of course, you enjoy getting angry online over pointless things

JMO to protect the innocent.