October 21st, 2020

Moving problem around isn’t a solution


By Lethbridge Herald on September 15, 2018.

Two news features appearing in the Sept. 11 Herald proved an exercise in contradiction.
On the front page, Police Chief Davis, in the article “Police chief recommends ‘The Watch’ program to help cope with opioid crisis,” states in that piece, “We can staff appropriately to be constantly displacing drug users and crime,” and further along stating that until there’s “institutions in place” to deal with it and legislation that will allow people to be turned over to those institutions, the “best we can do is constantly displace it.” I can’t accept these words are factually based nor in alignment with “Canadian values.”
I take Chief Davis’ words to mean there currently is no legislation to control these crimes. There aren’t sufficient “institutions in place” either! So the mitigation he proposes is that citizens cough up $250,000 annually to organize a team of unpaid community snitches to supplement the tough and dangerous work officers are trained to deal with. This supposedly will keep crime drifting from place to place, as the chief prefers to “displace” the crime, the criminal and the anarchy.
On A2, same issue, is a story, “Suspect arrested in poisoning case at car dealership.” In Toronto, police charged a person with the crimes of “attempted murder” and “administering a noxious substance.” Allegedly a 20-year-old placed antifreeze in a water bottle, which was subsequently consumed, causing momentary discomfort.
So we have in this country laws, statutes, legislation, sufficient officers, courts, etc. in place to deal with a goof administering antifreeze, but haven’t the legislation, personnel on the ground nor institutions, arresting powers, etc. to remove from a community drug dealers who kill thousands each year with the plethora of killing  “noxious substances” they “administer”! Instead we propose to deal with criminals and their activities by moving “it” around throughout the community, employing a civilian posse.
I’ve never felt more helpless, felt less safe, nor been more disappointed in an administration locally, provincially and federally than I am presently!
Alvin W. Shier
Lethbridge

Share this story:
<5
2 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Montreal13

One point for moving problem around is they may not then set up a turf. Turf wars imply violence and more trouble for the general public.
$250,000 to organize a team? Did I get that right?How much of the $250,000 will just go to union labour? Like the BRZ’s and the Heart of City group ( or some such name) most of their budget goes to wages and admin. So here we go again, another unaccountable black hole? Both these groups have no measurable chart or record of success- that I have seen. I know one or both of these groups take a fee from businesses downtown for something. Is it a protection racket, mafia -like or something?
Anyways, I am not necessarily against some form of a watch group,I would need much more in the way of details.
There is a very small group in a particular neighbourhood ,that drive around between 4:30 to 6:30 a.m. and just take note of descriptions, sightings and numbers of those often on bikes often wearing hoodies , but always with a backpack. Sometimes apparently they are wearing sunglasses as well, at 5 in the morning.They only observe and donot have any interaction at all. This is an informal group of residents. They did not need a huge injection of more taxpayers money. If you must take acouple of pieces of dead wood from city hall (that already have a phone and computer) and get them out of hiding and on to the street.with some boyscout type troops.

Montreal13

But no more unaccountable ,never ending black holes that control all the reporting and empires of same. The city has lots of resources that it could move around much more efficiently. Is it totally dictated to by the unions? The city owns lots of real estate downtown, for instance. They used to own the whole block across from the mall. The used to own a motel downtown ,that they let homeless or term at the time , “hard to serve” use. They owned or had many other choices of where to put new firehall. But the city didn’t want the “hard to serve” living downtown in bigger numbers, at the time. .