The Toronto situation
The situation in Toronto just seems to be getting worse and worse - I'm not speaking about Liberal fortunes, mind you, I'm talking about the spate of gun violence that has gripped the city for the past year or so. Once pretty much contained in certain corners of the city, namely up near Jane and Finch, it recently exploded into what is more or less downtown Toronto. I'm talking, of course, about the Boxing Day shooting near the Eaton Centre on Yonge Street. So much for keeping it contained. Since then, there's been more talk from municipal, provincial and federal officials about what to do about the mess, and it's obviously become an election issue, with (current) PM Paul Martin proposing a ban on handguns, among other proposals. One thing to notice about most of the suggestions, however, is that they deal primarily with wanting to deal with the causes of crime, namely poverty, unemployment, social exclusion, etc. There's also this hesitation in Canadian circles to describe the Toronto violence in any kind of racial terms - it's blatantly discriminatory, some say, to say that this is perpetrated by mostly black gangs. And let's be honest, they continue, it's not their fault - it's ours for not offering them enough opportunities. This position is one that's really hard to argue against for fear of seeming insensitive or outright racist. But I think it's necessary that we consider the problem more completely and avoid simply falling into the chasm of political correctness on default - sometimes, it's more productive to call a spade a spade.
Check out this interview for starters. It's a Maclean's interview with William Bratton, the former police chief of New York City, now heading up L.A.'s police force. "By the time Bratton left the NYPD, murders in New York had fallen to 984 a year, from a high of 2,262 in 1990," the article writes. "During his first two years in Los Angeles, overall crime has dropped 13 per cent, homicides 20 per cent." Impressive, for sure. But how does he achieve these miracles? Not by adopting the same careful, political rhetoric surrounding the issue of crime that exists in Canada. Read some of what he has to say:
You need to talk about [the racial makeup of the gangs]. It's all part of the issue. If it's Jamaican gangs that are committing the crimes, well then, go after the Jamaican gangs. And don't be afraid to go after them because they're black. That's the last thing you need to be concerned with.
Blunt stuff - I bet you that if he said that in Canada, he'd be fired. Oh, wait - Toronto Police Chief Julian Fantino was fired. Not sure why, but he did get on the wrong side of the Police Services Board over some similar comments on racial profiling. Here's some more from Bratton - how about this rather insightful point?
When you put too much emphasis on the idea of poverty being the cause of crime, you're as much as saying that just because you are poor or disadvantaged, you are going to resort to crime to get by. And that's a phenomenally racist and insensitive attitude. The vast majority of people who are poor do not resort to crime. A small percentage do. But he is correct that one of the influences on crime is poverty. If you make a city safer, you will create more jobs. In our case in Los Angeles, and in your case in Toronto, you'll create more tourists coming in, who will spend more money, create more jobs and create more tax revenue. But if the place is deemed to be unsafe, you are not going to have that economic benefit.
At any rate, I think we absolutely need to think twice about simply ascribing the crime problem in Toronto to lack of opportunity, as the NDP might. As Bratton points out, that's equally racist. That being said, a balance is needed between some community outreach work and some simple arrests. And if the gangs involved are predominantly black, then target those gangs. It shouldn't matter what colour they are - they're the ones committing the crimes. Finally, again paraphrasing Mr Bratton, it should all come down to individual responsibility - it's no one else's fault but the people who pull the triggers. It seems to me that that's how we should deal with things in Toronto and across the country, but more importantly, we need to feel comfortable talking about it and rethinking our current approach. Otherwise, we're just missing the real problem and things will likely get worse. When people's lives are at risk, perhaps we can put aside the political correctness for once?
IRRELEVANT UPDATE: I see today that Stephen Harper is on the cover of Maclean's - a close up of his eyes looking very shifty, and the headline? The Harper Agenda, which can be found here. Will this torpedo his campaign, as some speculate it did in 2004? Doubt it.
LIBDATE: You know a campaign is finished when you see an article like this.
You are misstating the facts: the NDP is for getting tough on criminals and are very similar in their position to that of the Tories. It is the LIBERALS who talk about social exclusion and essentially blaming the victims, while saying that anyone who is poor is destined for a life of crime.
Posted by
Anonymous |
6:26 PM
Granted, the NDP do mention getting tough on crime too, but this is taken directly from their site:
"We also need to get tougher - much tougher - on poverty, unemployment and social exclusion."
So I think it's fair to say that they do chalk up some of the blame to those notions. And I do recall Jack mentioning in maybe the first English langauge debate that, in response to a question about the Toronto issue, poverty was the key issue to focus on. Or something like that.
Posted by
Ian |
6:30 PM
The issues being discussed here are important, but the way this campaign is going, it is apparent that voters need to look past platform details and consider the horrendous implications of a Conservative win. Yesterday I heard Harper close a speech with the phrase "god bless Canada." This confirmation that Harper is a Repuglican sidekick made my stomach turn. To prevent the christian fanatics from turning our country into a theocracy modelled after the US, it is vitally important for all rational Canadians to vote strategically. Direct your vote so that it will do the most good in stopping Harper and his band of Neanderthals. Vote for whichever party has the best chance of defeating the Conservatives in your riding. Do not waste your vote on some minor party.
Posted by
Anonymous |
6:48 PM
Yes, Harper is religious - fine. That doesn't at all mean that he's going to turn Canada into a theocracy, and I think it's doing a disservice to the national debate to toss out those kind of scare tactics. Will he cut corporate taxes? Probably, so let's debate that. Will he offer a free vote on SSM that might pass? Likely, so let's talk about that. But this kind of hyperbolic argument is really quite useless. Let's do as you say, and talk about the issues, not the fear tactics. Let's talk about the problem of violence in Toronto and how best to deal with it, and look at which party best seems poised to solve the problem. Let's not resort to character assassination.
Posted by
Ian |
6:54 PM
Ian, felt I needed to spend my two bits in an effort to keep you from slipping too far the right.....any further and I won't be able to see you from my vantage point that lies somewhere between Jack Layton and the ghost of Mao Tsetung. So... about gun crime in Toronto, and I admit, I'm a long way from the action. However, you mention the man who "cleaned up" New York. You have to look at the situation that existed to begin with though. Dropping from over 2000 to 900 is amazing.........if you aren't shocked by the fact that getting "down" to 900 is considered a success. Only a system that is dysfunctional at heart would allow for a situation like that in the first place. Why do we have fewer gun crimes and related deaths? Because we have focused on the things that Jack talks about whereas......to be blunt, the American's have not. I say....let's go with what's worked for us, as gun crime per capita in Canada is a mere fraction of what it is in the US.
Cheers,
Alex
Posted by
Alex |
12:43 AM
Alex, thanks for your thoughts - always good to hear from you. I guess maybe my post wasn't entirely clear. I think that looking at things like poverty and unemployment are important factors to look at, but they can't be the exclusive target of any attempt to fight crime. What Bratton says makes a lot of sense to me - it does come down to individual responsibility, in the end. So yeah, let's work on reducing poverty, etc., but let's not hesitate to crack down on the gangs that are doing the shootings. And most importantly, let's not be afraid to do it properly just because of what race the attackers might be - sometimes political correctness goes a bit overboard. You can target the source of the problem in a sensitive way.
Also, about the NYC stats - remember, too that it's a much bigger city than Toronto, hence (perhaps) the larger numbers.
Posted by
Ian |
10:22 AM
Ian, first let me tell you that I love your blog. You have no idea what it is like to see another person thinking in a reasonable fashion during this election.
As a Wiccan, I have never once found offense in how Mr. Harper chooses to end his speeches.. if I am not mistaken - Mr. Martin is also a devout Catholic but that never seems to be an issue. This election, I wanted to hear about the issues, the policies, and how we were going to move forward. All of the fear mongering and character assassination has just left a sour taste in my mouth.
I listened to CPAC talk radio a little while ago, with Bill Good - and I have to say.. that is the first time I have seen members of all three parties (all incumbents from different ridings) really talk about the issues in a positve way. I was astounded - and I thought yes, this is how our Parliamentary system works. A balance of power that contains opposing ideologies, but working in concert with one another.
And you have summed it all up with a single thought - the idea of personally owning your actions. Whether we struggle with poverty, or live the good life on the Hill, each one of us must make a choice of personal responsibility.
Posted by
Anonymous |
12:00 PM
Jocelyn - I'm pleased to hear that you enjoy reading my thoughts. I just think that the public discourse in this country is often lacking a great deal in the common sense department, and I'm doing my best to try and add some. I'm glad you approve.
Posted by
Ian |
3:23 PM
I lived in the U.S.A. for about 7 years recently and I have to say being once a proud Canadian especially in respect to what was once an not so violent place that my opinion has dramatically changed to "shameful" in the amount of violent crimes in Toronto! It's "OUT OF CONTROL" period!!!!! I'm outta here!!!!
Posted by
Anonymous |
12:23 PM