Man who set himself on fire at University of California-Berkeley dies

Bystanders tried fanning their jackets to extinguish the flames

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

And a state court is more worried about the potential for student "noise" at People's Park. But setting a fire in a restroom there and walking up Telegraph on FIRE isnt an issue.

The first time I became aware of self immolation was this:

Thch Qung c - Wikipedia


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Th%C3%ADch_Qu%E1%BA%A3ng_%C4%90%E1%BB%A9c

Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

Much appreciation for those who tried to save this person's life. So sorry your brave efforts were unsuccessful.

Remember, that's what makes Berkeley, Berkeley.

It's unique, we don't want it to become another Palo Alto!!

Mentally ill LDS member from Salt Lake City travels to Berkeley to kill himself? Supposedly left behind these paranoid ramblings:
https://www.chetatdi.com/

calumnus said:

---

Mentally ill LDS member from Salt Lake City travels to Berkeley to kill himself? Supposedly left behind these paranoid ramblings:
https://www.chetatdi.com/

---

This is really sad and confusing. I wonder why he chose Berkeley to self-immolate?

HateRed said:

---

It's unique, we don't want it to become another Palo Alto!!

---

They've cornered the market on young girls jumping in front of trains

calumnus said:

---

Mentally ill LDS member from Salt Lake City travels to Berkeley to kill himself? Supposedly left behind these paranoid ramblings:
https://www.chetatdi.com/

---

That was a JOURNEY yikes.

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

And "competent authorities" have been shown to be competent to do this? I think not. Human compassion weighs in heavy to make horrible societal mistakes.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

And "competent authorities" have been shown to be competent to do this? I think not. Human compassion weighs in heavy to make horrible societal mistakes.

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

HateRed said:

---

It's unique, we don't want it to become another Palo Alto!!

---

They've cornered the market on young girls jumping in front of trains

---

It isn't just the US. I'm currently working in the UK and a mentally unstable 18 year old woman stepped into traffic on the M1 about 300 yards ahead of my car. She was ultimately hit by 5 different vehicles. I didn't see the impact or aftermath, but it closed the M1 for almost 24 hours. Obviously, her death is more important than closing the freeway, but it's very sad when someone decides to end it in front of a bunch of other folks who are then traumatized from the event.

HateRed said:

---

Remember, that's what makes Berkeley, Berkeley.

---

So, if a person jumps off the Golden Gate Bridge, you say "that's what makes San Francisco, San Francisco?"

This was suicide...to the extent that this happens in Berkeley more than other places, well, show me the numbers...

Making this a "Berkeley thing" is creating a narrative, not adding to one.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

And "competent authorities" have been shown to be competent to do this? I think not. Human compassion weighs in heavy to make horrible societal mistakes.

---

So you want authorities you believe are incompetent to decide whether or not to take away a person's freedom? If you think the immediate danger standard is the problem, I get that. But if you think authorities are incompetent, then you should definitely oppose giving them any authority to lock anyone up.

Mental health issues are pervasive these days. I envy those of you who haven't been touched by it or by suicide. As I have been touched by those things I find this incident tragic and sad.

berserkeley said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

And "competent authorities" have been shown to be competent to do this? I think not. Human compassion weighs in heavy to make horrible societal mistakes.

---

So you want authorities you believe are incompetent to decide whether or not to take away a person's freedom? If you think the immediate danger standard is the problem, I get that. But if you think authorities are incompetent, then you should definitely oppose giving them any authority to lock anyone up.

---

Is that not what I questioned? I guess someone needs to do the nasty, but I question the subjectiveness with the current conditions in our society. And as with tequila4kapp our family has been touched with suicide. Leaves a lifelong reaction to mental health issues.

That was real? I thought it was right wing ****housery trying to paint Berkeley as a dangerous left wing enclave.
This world is extremely sad. What a horrible experience for everyone involved.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

And "competent authorities" have been shown to be competent to do this? I think not. Human compassion weighs in heavy to make horrible societal mistakes.

---

Exactly what is the alternative?

kal kommie said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

And "competent authorities" have been shown to be competent to do this? I think not. Human compassion weighs in heavy to make horrible societal mistakes.

---

Exactly what is the alternative?

---

I take it in your world it is not OK to recognize serious liabilities in a solution but it is the best one has?

We may not like the cure but go ahead and try to massage it better? Look at the mess with homelessness. So many came out with housing initially as the cure, but now most say the reasons for homelessness have to be looked into for multiple solutions depending on the reasons therefor. Makes sense to me.

Looked how we have messed up our solutions to poverty since 1968 (Great Society) and of course before, but it is a damned good thing we did something, although many of the somethings where not very good solutions as the problems have expanded.

juarezbear said:

---

I wonder why he chose Berkeley to self-immolate?

---

Look at conservative Twitter's reaction and you might find some answers.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

And "competent authorities" have been shown to be competent to do this? I think not. Human compassion weighs in heavy to make horrible societal mistakes.

---

Exactly what is the alternative?

---

I take it in your world it is not OK to recognize serious liabilities in a solution but it is the best one has?

We may not like the cure but go ahead and try to massage it better? Look at the mess with homelessness. So many came out with housing initially as the cure, but now most say the reasons for homelessness have to be looked into for multiple solutions depending on the reasons therefor. Makes sense to me.

Looked how we have messed up our solutions to poverty since 1968 (Great Society) and of course before, but it is a damned good thing we did something, although many of the somethings where not very good solutions as the problems have expanded.

---

You have it wrong about what is OK in my world but beyond that I don't see anything in your original reply that suggested you believe the "solution" I endorsed was the best we have, only a generalized objection to my statement on the basis of the incompetence of competent authorities.

At any rate, as in all other things I think there is value in pointing out flaws in a current policy even if one does not have a better idea at hand but the exchange you waded into cannot be characterized so. OP said they want to "lock up the mentally ill" without qualification and I object to this as obviously abusive of fundamental rights. I hope they did not mean they propose to incarcerate every person with a mental disorder but it is incumbent upon them to elaborate if their proposal isn't meant to be taken at its ghastly face value.

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

I didn't say otherwise. And where the f*** did I say "without qualification"?

kal kommie said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

And "competent authorities" have been shown to be competent to do this? I think not. Human compassion weighs in heavy to make horrible societal mistakes.

---

Exactly what is the alternative?

---

I take it in your world it is not OK to recognize serious liabilities in a solution but it is the best one has?

We may not like the cure but go ahead and try to massage it better? Look at the mess with homelessness. So many came out with housing initially as the cure, but now most say the reasons for homelessness have to be looked into for multiple solutions depending on the reasons therefor. Makes sense to me.

Looked how we have messed up our solutions to poverty since 1968 (Great Society) and of course before, but it is a damned good thing we did something, although many of the somethings where not very good solutions as the problems have expanded.

---

You have it wrong about what is OK in my world but beyond that I don't see anything in your original reply that suggested you believe the "solution" I endorsed was the best we have, only a generalized objection to my statement on the basis of the incompetence of competent authorities.

At any rate, as in all other things I think there is value in pointing out flaws in a current policy even if one does not have a better idea at hand but the exchange you waded into cannot be characterized so. OP said they want to "lock up the mentally ill" without qualification and I object to this as obviously abusive of fundamental rights. I hope they did not mean they propose to incarcerate every person with a mental disorder but it is incumbent upon them to elaborate if their proposal isn't meant to be taken at its ghastly face value.

---

Yes, I do have it wrong about what is OK in your world. For that I apologize to you. I absolutely despise that when done to me, so I can appreciate fully your correction. Sorry.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

I didn't say otherwise. And where the f*** did I say "without qualification"

---

"Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that..."

I didn't say you said the words "without qualification" but you made the statement "Can we please lock up the mentally ill" without qualifications. If I've missed any, feel welcome to point them out.

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

Tragic? That's not what I would call it.

I'd call it extremely selfish, in that his exit choice caused mental and physical injuries (e.g., burns to the woman) to the many people who witnessed it.

Can we please lock up the mentally ill, and beyond doing that, give people who want to die the right to end their lives peacefully and painlessly?

A tragic ending...now, that would be the 1990 Big Game.

---

We should not lock up any "mentally ill" person who isn't declared by competent authorities to be an immediate danger to themselves or others.

---

And "competent authorities" have been shown to be competent to do this? I think not. Human compassion weighs in heavy to make horrible societal mistakes.

---

Exactly what is the alternative?

---

I take it in your world it is not OK to recognize serious liabilities in a solution but it is the best one has?

We may not like the cure but go ahead and try to massage it better? Look at the mess with homelessness. So many came out with housing initially as the cure, but now most say the reasons for homelessness have to be looked into for multiple solutions depending on the reasons therefor. Makes sense to me.

Looked how we have messed up our solutions to poverty since 1968 (Great Society) and of course before, but it is a damned good thing we did something, although many of the somethings where not very good solutions as the problems have expanded.

---

You have it wrong about what is OK in my world but beyond that I don't see anything in your original reply that suggested you believe the "solution" I endorsed was the best we have, only a generalized objection to my statement on the basis of the incompetence of competent authorities.

At any rate, as in all other things I think there is value in pointing out flaws in a current policy even if one does not have a better idea at hand but the exchange you waded into cannot be characterized so. OP said they want to "lock up the mentally ill" without qualification and I object to this as obviously abusive of fundamental rights. I hope they did not mean they propose to incarcerate every person with a mental disorder but it is incumbent upon them to elaborate if their proposal isn't meant to be taken at its ghastly face value.

---

Yes, I do have it wrong about what is OK in your world. For that I apologize to you. I absolutely despise that when done to me, so I can appreciate fully your correction. Sorry.

---

No apology necessary though it's very generous of you to offer one.

Everyone's commute was disrupted in the Diablo Valley last night by a guy who decided to blow his brain's out in a white BMW SUV in the right lane of a MAJOR artery in the Walnut Creek area last night around 5 PM. Took everyone an extra 45 minutes (at the very least) to get home (via two different major boulevards) all because some selfish clown decided that he was gonna screw everyone on his last day on planet Earth.

Ygnacio Valley Road Backed Up To Bancroft; Motorists Advised To Use Treat Blvd As Alternate Route (sfgate.com)

PSA: If you want to "off" yourself, please do it in the seclusion of your own home. Dont do it on a major thorough affair.

DiabloWags said:

---

Everyone's commute was disrupted in the Diablo Valley last night by a guy who decided to blow his brain's out in a white BMW SUV in the right lane of a MAJOR artery in the Walnut Creek area last night around 5 PM. Took everyone an extra 45 minutes (at the very least) to get home (via two different major boulevards) all because some selfish clown decided that he was gonna screw everyone on his last day on planet Earth.

Ygnacio Valley Road Backed Up To Bancroft; Motorists Advised To Use Treat Blvd As Alternate Route (sfgate.com)

PSA: If you want to "off" yourself, please do it in the seclusion of your own home. Dont do it on a major thorough affair.

---

Incredible display of empathy for a guy who couldn't care less about another member of the human race at his absolute greatest moment of despair and loss.

Who many minutes did it cost you, DW?
A slice of pizza?

concordtom said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Everyone's commute was disrupted in the Diablo Valley last night by a guy who decided to blow his brain's out in a white BMW SUV in the right lane of a MAJOR artery in the Walnut Creek area last night around 5 PM. Took everyone an extra 45 minutes (at the very least) to get home (via two different major boulevards) all because some selfish clown decided that he was gonna screw everyone on his last day on planet Earth.

Ygnacio Valley Road Backed Up To Bancroft; Motorists Advised To Use Treat Blvd As Alternate Route (sfgate.com)

PSA: If you want to "off" yourself, please do it in the seclusion of your own home. Dont do it on a major thorough affair.

---

Incredible display of empathy for a guy who couldn't care less about another member of the human race at his absolute greatest moment of despair and loss.

Who many minutes did it cost you, DW?
A slice of pizza?

---

I think he made it clear. "At least 45 minutes."

For those of us who, or used to, commute on BART, these things are a regular weekly occurrence. Yes, these people who take their lives in public places are selfish people.

Intuit said:

---

Man who set himself on fire at University of California-Berkeley dies

Bystanders tried fanning their jackets to extinguish the flames

---

I wouldn't say what they were doing was fanning, they were trying to beat the fire out. It's a technique that works well for ordinary combustibles, but unfortunately he had poured some type of volatile accelerant/fuel on himself.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

concordtom said:

---

Incredible display of empathy for a guy who couldn't care less about another member of the human race at his absolute greatest moment of despair and loss.

Who many minutes did it cost you, DW?
A slice of pizza?

---

I think he made it clear. "At least 45 minutes."

For those of us who, or used to, commute on BART, these things are a regular weekly occurrence. Yes, these people who take their lives in public places are selfish people.

---

Yup.
We see this happen time and time again.

How many THOUSANDS of commuters saw their commute "blow-up" because of one selfish person?

People who got trapped on Ygnacio Valley Road for MILES.... people who tried taking an alternate route on Treat Blvd., also trapped for MILES. People that werent able to attend their son or daughter's basketball game or dance recital? People that had HOURS taken away from them spending time with their families?

My trip is usually 15 minutes.
It took me an hour. No big deal compared to others who were "trapped" on Ygnacio and Treat for MILES.

The only saving's grace was that I heard from a friend of mine (via Facebook) who was my neighbor back in the 60's in WC whose daughter "knew" the guy over the past 15 years. She said he had no kids. So there "is" that.

Tommy could use a reality check.
It doesnt sound like he gets "out" much.
And I'm not talking about his ignorance on how horrible the streets are in Concord full of potholes.

PS. I reported the pothole that you hit in front of Cardondelet High School the other day. YOURE WECLOME!