The Globe and Mail documents the shooter's extensive criminal history:
Quote:
Police records indicate multiple traffic tickets have been issued to Mr. Bain in the Mont-Tremblant area. Montreal police have said the suspect has previous charges for minor traffic offences.
Also, don't feel bad about the dead guy. He was a non-union technician stealing a job from a hard working union member.
Quote:
One man, a freelance technician in his 40s, was killed. A spokesman for Local 56 of the International Alliance of Theatrical Stage Employees said he wasn’t a union member.
The only thing that stands out as a possible motivation for me in reading that article is that he's a devout Christian, and the PQ has constantly pushed a secularist agenda, including talking about a charter of secularism in this election campaign. I'm not saying that's his motivation, it still is a really extreme reaction and doesn't fit with the 'english are awakening' words that he shouted. But that's my first reaction about a possible motive. Still crazy and tragic, any way you look at it.
This was posted on another forum. At around the 4 second mark it appears a bullit just misses Marois's head. You can hear the pop and then see the hole in the background just to the right of her head.
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prairiefire
This was posted on another forum. At around the 4 second mark it appears a bullit just misses Marois's head. You can hear the pop and then see the hole in the background just to the right of her head.
Not sure it "just missed her head"...as it appears that the hole would be quite a bit above her considering the angle. Also the shot would have come from a ways behind her if i iunderstand the sequence correctly.
All the same, a very sad and infinately stupid thing to have happen after a democratically elected official stops to talk to her supporters.
Though I am completely lost as to Resolute's point. The union was probably asked if they knew him and they said they did not as he wasn't part of their union. I don't know what the big deal is.
Though I am completely lost as to Resolute's point. The union was probably asked if they knew him and they said they did not as he wasn't part of their union. I don't know what the big deal is.
No point, really. I was just mocking how the article was full of trivial and useless details. Is it really so important to know whether the dead man was a union guy or not? How about if he had a family?
Really???
