31
votes
Eleven people killed after SUV rams into Vancouver street festival - police "confident" not an act of terrorism
Link information
This data is scraped automatically and may be incorrect.
- Title
- Several people killed, others injured after vehicle drives into Vancouver street festival crowd | CBC News
- Published
- Apr 27 2025
- Word count
- 484 words
Filipino community festival was wrapping up when SUV plowed into crowd.
Suspect held by festival-goers until police arrived: chief.
Eyewitness says driver "just slammed the pedal down and rammed into hundreds of people."
Nine people have been killed and multiple others injured after the driver of a black SUV slammed into a crowd Saturday evening at a street festival in Vancouver celebrating the contributions of the Filipino-Canadian community, police say.
It happened shortly after 8 p.m. near East 41st Avenue and Fraser Street, where the Lapu Lapu Day Block Party was winding down, after drawing up to 100,000 people through the day.
Interim Vancouver Police Chief Steve Rai says a 30-year-old Vancouver man is now in custody.
Barricade were removed shortly before incident to aid with wind down.
Reddit comments days there are a lot of videos on Facebook that show traumatic injuries. Note of caution to stick with major news networks for less traumatic imagery.
edit: Update, eleven people now dead. Memory eternal.
This is so incredibly sad. Had I been in Vancouver yesterday I likely would have been there. I hope the families get the support and answers they need.
I'm really struggling to understand how they can claim this. The act itself IS an act of terrorism. Short of a medical emergency forcing his foot to pin the gas or a complete mental break, this was clearly meant to terrorize. Maybe they mean to imply he didn't explicitly intend to target the Filipino community?
In an interview by CBC with a vendor who witnessed the beginning of the attack, he described how the barricades were still in place at the time and were specifically lifted to let this vehicle past. He said it entered the area at normal speed then heard the engine pinning as it accelerated and didn't hear or see it stop as it drove away from him thru the crowd.
If this account is accurate, it sounds like textbook terrorism to me.
From the press conference a few seconds ago Rai said the person in custody has a significant history of interactions with police and healthcare professionals "related to mental health". So it very well could have been caused by the person experiencing a psychotic episode and was not an act intended to cause terror, therefor was not terrorism.
What I'm hoping is that whatever is going on with the person in the car, it wasn't targetting the community because they're Philippino. That, it'd be a medical or mental health issue or some bizzare tragedy or at worst because they person wanted to kill a lot of any kind of people regardless of nationality, culture, gender, age etc.
Bizarre as in, maybe a raccoon snuck in and was biting him in the face while another racoon was jamming the breaks....
We don't have the information right now, but we'd just have to trust that they wouldnt say confidently it's not terrorism unless they have very good reasons to say so so quickly.
Terrorism typically requires a political or ideological component. Nobody actually agrees on a definition though - so the VPD can state that because it's not political, it's not terrorism. This also means it can't be textbook terrorism - there's no textbook to reference, and no universal agreement on what it actually requires.
There's all kinds of things we can say about this, calling it horrific, a failing of mental health services regarding a suspect "known to police" (per TFA), and even a byproduct of the catch-and-release system that's been going on for some time. "Textbook terrorism" isn't really one of them, and I think we have bigger discussions to have about how to prevent this from happening again, rather than quibbling with the VPD about what exactly constitutes terrorism.
I think you're bringing a lot more of your own personal biases into this than is warranted. Nowhere was it indicated that the suspect was able to do this because of any supposed "catch and release system" (which is a bullshit "tough on crime", anti-Trudeau talking point directly from the CPC). It doesn't sound like the person in custody was a known criminal who was released on bail, they were a known person who suffered from mental illness.
I hate terms that make humans sound like animals, fish in this case, in the interest of making it sound like they should be incarcerated or in locked hospital wards. Thank you
I typically appreciate your insights, and constantly find myself agreeing with you. I have no sympathy for the CPC, and don't appreciate their current party line.
But my fiancee takes the Skytrain to her yoga classes several days a week. The number of times an individual will assault someone, be detained, released on bail, and assault another random stranger, all within 72 hours, is not something I'm okay with. This is so common I have to go back less than a fortnight to find another case of it happening again.
I'm sympathetic to individuals getting their life destroyed by being incarcerated, and I know the odds of something happening are infintesimal. But those odds apply to me, not the smaller, weaker women that routinely seem to be targeted.
I strive to be kind, and parent-poster was right: it's hard to be objective when you're concerned for those around you. With that in mind, and my routine respect for your cool-headed opinions, I'll ask: what's the better way to square the circle of "We shouldn't hold violent repeat offenders for under a fortnight" with "My fiancee might end up hospitalized next week"?
I understand the safety concern, I am a 5'4" non-binary woman. I've worked with mentally ill and violent folks. I've taken public transit relatively rarely but walk on public trails, lived in an actual city, etc. Random acts of violence happen.
I am not sure what Vancouver's bail laws are. Illinois no longer has cash bail, but someone who returns to attack the same person, has a history of violence, is considered mentally incapable of making decisions, etc. is held without bail. I'm sure Vancouver has something like this but I don't know the law.
We've had a reported shooting on campus this year. The shooter hasn't been caught. I'm saying that because I understand the fear for the safety of those you care about. Some of that anxiety can be relieved by getting a realistic grasp on the actual rather than perceived likelihood of something happening. The odds of your fiance, or you, being the victim of an act of violence are probably lower now than 20 years ago if your stats are similar to those I'm familiar with. It being a truly random act is going to be markedly lower than that. If a situation like that truly happens every 2 weeks, that's 26 times a year. That's a very small number of violent offenders being released into the community who are an active threat to others.
But the media makes it feel huge. Right now the risk on my campus feels huge. But realistically this is likely a) personal beef in some way and b) out of thousands of students and visitors and staff here every day the odds of a shooting are very low.
So thats part one. Part two would be understanding what the laws are there. I'm not helpful with that, unfortunately. Part three is doing the things to make sure you (and her) are safe. Staying alert on public transit, having the ability to call for help quickly, getting off the train if someone's acting erratic or aggressive.
I understand the fear and frustration, I just don't like referring to people in dehumanizing ways. It leads to bad places. Worse than where we are now. And all that is how the conservative parties on either side of the border suck people in with tough on crime rhetoric.
To start, I hope you're doing (relatively) okay following yet another shooting.
As to the renainder of your comment, the law currently dictates that, unless it's a second offense, the person is all but guaranteed bail. Directly from the British Columbia Prosecution Service, “In other words, there is a presumption in our bail system that those charged with offences will be released on a form of bail unless there is sufficient cause for a detention order,”
People know the bail laws are lax, especially those that have dealt with the system previously, and for violent offenders especially I'd appreciate them being strengthened.
As far as crime statistics, it's currently roughly six per thousand annually. Putting aside that I do not believe for a moment that the distribution is actually random, that's 6 times higher than the likelyhood of Black men being killed at the hands of police in the States - numbers that sparked nationwide protests. While that's death rather than assault, we also have an assumption of safety in the Great White North - to the point that the event in TFA ties for one of the deadliest attacks in Canadian history, and the deadliest ever in Vancouver.
Regarding the crime statistics, assault has actually increased in the last decade, after hitting a low in 2016
As far as minimizing the risk, that simply isn't feasible beyond what's already being done. She drives during the winter months when it's darker, but travelling in a group, or at least during the morning rush, isn't practical for the times her classes are. Calling for help, and leaving quickly, is less effective when the danger is outside the station, and during the quiet hours of the early morning.
Bluntly, I have no appetite for those that would assault others, and between my fiancee's right to safety, and the rights of others for freedom of movement (after committing a violent offense), I have a strong preference for the former. And while I have no intention of voting Conservative, and believe "Tough on crime" doesn't lead to good places, I also think the balance is tilted a little too far.
As an addendum, if there's any better way to phrase it than catch and release, I'm all ears. I would prefer to avoid CPC talking points, and abhore their rhetoric. I would rather deal with the problem through the slow, measured, cautious response that the NDP has been rolling with for several years now. To reform the bail system takes time, and I'm glad it's not only being done, but done in a way that's not whiplashing back to American levels of punishment. It's just frustrating to live through the transition period.
(Post-post script: I hope this isn't too difficult to follow, it was put together on mobile on my way to work)
So she's doing everything to be safe, the laws lock up someone after a second offense, and the facts are that the odds of her, or anyone, being harmed are quite low. The pandemic has rather screwed with recent data, IMO, but crime rates are still lower than 20 years ago. It's too soon to see if we're in a weird blip of an uptick or if things will get worse.
Y'all are pretty damn safe, factually. Just like my students are too. No matter how it feels. The only solution would be to wrap your fiancee in a bubble and never let her leave home. How many things are greater risks to her, or you, or anyone, than strangers on the train, mathematically? At some point it's more about talking ourselves out of our own anxiety. I'm not saying this because I dont care about your feelings, I do, but just like I cannot protect my students all the time - there's nothing practically that would have stopped a random shooting other than such a police presence on campus as to create a mini fascist fortress. That's not worth it. It's just not. The first victim of someone that punches someone randomly twice on the train was still a random victim on the train. So would you really feel she was safer if they were locked up? How long would they need to stay in jail before you felt she was safe?
You believe in your rights but people accused of crimes also have rights, and the government should be really sure it's the right call before revoking those rights. If you were falsely accused of battery you'd probably hope to get bail, right?
I don't think the balance has gone too far in the other direction, I've seen far too much harm done by incarceration, even in jail awaiting trial, to think that. People in jail lose their jobs, their homes, can't afford lawyers and end up taking plea bargains for things they didn't even do just to resolve it. That's why I supported Illinois's law and rolled my eyes at sheriffs that called it the Purge waiting to happen.
You could work with your MP and talk about your concerns, or reach out to justice reform groups that aren't just trying to lock people up and try to understand the law better and advocate for your concerns and how to balance these things. But all I can do is sort of challenge whether the anxiety is based on something improbable even if possible - much like my students terrified of an active shooter, I'll be encouraging them to go to class, and counseling, tomorrow (I'd let them wait a bit normally but finals loom), because they can't stay in their room forever, and they wouldn't be guaranteed safe if they did anyway.
Maybe your law is off kilter some, but it doesn't sound like it to me. As for what to say, I'd say avoid things that dehumanize people, even people you have no tolerance for - I don't call TERFS animals for example - and express your concerns that way.
Inarguably correct, and I couldn't help but think the same when writing my all-over-the-place reply. Without looking into the statistics, I'd assume driving (partially highway, some city) to her studio is the more-statistically-dangerous way to start her day - and "Never leave the house" is simply unrealistic
(From your own parent comment):
And again, I agree. The states are enough, but having it occur less than a click from me hits a little different, doubly so with so much of the media coverage
The odds are low, but the consequences are large - but again, yeah, you're not wrong. As infrequent as it is, "If it bleeds, it leads" still holds true, and so this is frequently brought to our attention - despite how infrequent it actually may be
I appreciate the patience, and I'm glad you took the time to reply. It's just more than I expected to be dealing with this week.
Thanks for engaging in the conversation. Like I said I get the fear (and fwiw i'm making a few edits to my post to avoid permanently identifying where I work) I just also have to temper it and make sure my fear doesn't take away others' dignity or rights. I understand it being more than you thought you'd have to deal with, it's never going to feel good when tragedies happen, especially when you can easily put your loved ones there in your mind. I just hope mostly you're able to find your peace.
Feel free to label as off topic
I really want Canadian government agencies and officials to stop using Twitter/X for official statements
A federal, or even provincial, Mastodon server would be nice and something I could get behind. Conversely, falling for the "Open ecosystem" that Bluesky is and Twitter used to be would be a little sad - I'd hope we'd have learned our lesson the first time.
And while provincial Mastodon servers would allow for federation to other servers (both public and intra-provincial), and cities to add their own verifiable accounts without everyone having to administer a server, I'd settle for a basic HTML page with RSS.
Basic HTML & CSS (or at least a minimal amount of the modern hotness) would allow scaling both up and down, between desktop and mobile. It'd allow for accessibility features like screenreaders, and minimize server and client resource useage and attack surface, while maximizing the hiring pool that could (hopefully) maintain it.
Either of the above would also make for a very easy target for budget cuts though when "We could just go back to Twitter".
Honestly, this seems like the solution to me. But also, I navigate to Environment Canada's website for weather, so I am probably not the average user. Honestly though, I could get behind Canadian Government hosting more of that stuff, since on Environment Canada's weather forecast page the ad free experience and also not having the UI change randomly is a really nice experience
I'm not Canadian, but there are so many large companies and organizations still doing that, and it always feels weird. Like I time travelled to the past and didn't even notice. Assuming good faith, some people are just really out of touch.
Happy to see that a lot of entities decamped at least to Bluesky, which should be a strict improvement regardless of how people feel about their long term prospects for openness.
From the conversations I've had with police social media teams, they use Meta, Twitter, etc because that's where a large number of people are. And the goal of them sending out alerts and messages is for those to get to people. It's rarely that they're endorsing a particular social media (though the US federal government's insistence on using only Twitter is absolutely that) but more that they're using the reach to get to their citizenry.
Very likely the same statement was on Facebook if they're anything like the city PDs near here, but the reporter saw it on Twitter because the reporter checks Twitter. It's a feedback loop.
Per a very very rough Google search and estimates Twitter has 4x the number of Canadian users than mastodon and Facebook has 10x the number (Instagram is like 8xish). Bluesky is like 1/3 of mastodon's right now. There's also the barrier to entry issue and ease of working with social media management apps - it used to be fairly easy to post on multiple sites with a single button push. Not sure where that's landed post-API changes.
It would require a coordinated effort for governments to switch to a different system. And I think they should - I get special alerts for campus via an app and text and I get weather alerts by text and phone call, I can sign up for text alerts for construction in my previous city but not the small town I'm in - but as long as people are on the social media sites government entities will keep using them because getting the message out matters most.
Sadly it's still one of the most widely used and referenced platforms. It's useful for getting out a statement to the general public quickly without having to set up a whole press conference or call a reporter. People won't be checking every single news site or a specific organization's own site (if the police even have one...?) for updates, but Twitter/X is easy to check for real-time updates from specific organizations.
When it comes to matters of public safety and security like this, it's vital to ensure as many people will see the message as possible. Even if they expand to the alternatives like Mastodon and Bluesky, I don't see them deleting their Twitter/X accounts anytime soon.
I feel like that is becoming less the case, since you have to log in to view a single tweet, which used to not be the case five years ago (actually, turns out you can view now, as I checked something for a later point and could view my local police's Twitter/X account without logging in). Also, I feel like the reach on Twitter/X is not that great, as it seems like my local police department's tweets are getting views of about 1% of the population of my city, which indicates it is not a great way of notifying the community.
Fully agree it's lost some of its convenience. Worth noting that Twitter requires accounts to view tweets chronologically. Maybe they make exemptions for certain organizations, but that's the reason I haven't deleted my account (that, and I never really used it anyway, not sure why I even made one to be honest).
Even so, it still serves the purpose of getting info out quickly though. The real benefit is just the ability to provide easy access to time-sensitive information or make quick statements directly to the public without having to arrange all the local news organizations on short notice. Reporters usually reference tweets for live updates and statements on ongoing events like this one, spreading information quickly and saving invaluable time in emergency situations.
And while yes, that can work with the other platforms, there are still many users on Twitter/X. They might not follow the police accounts, but people will check them out and retweet the messages in situations like this one to spread awareness. Not everyone will check the news in a moment of free time, but plenty will check Twitter/X or other social media.