medicineman
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 5,876
- Points
- 1,110
I'm also willing to bet said expert(s) aren't willing to board any of those folks in their own homes over the winter either...
Victoria is facing a public-safety crisis
- Thread starter daftandbarmy
- Start date
OldSolduer
Army.ca Relic
- Reaction score
- 15,708
- Points
- 1,260
Oh you mean like Vince Li's psych team that won't take him in either?
- Reaction score
- 3,100
- Points
- 1,160
Invoke the EA and clean them out, it’s easy! Public health and safety and all that.
medicineman
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 5,876
- Points
- 1,110
Downside is there isn't anywhere for many of them to go - I'm willing to bet many have burned bridges with some shelters (we have some regulars in my ED that basically aren't allowed in any shelters in town, some of their FN Bands have rejected/ejected them). Not a lot of forensic psych beds, and I'm sure Jim doesn't want any of them visiting his castle either.
Pandora is the epicenter for those of a tent persuasion. It has the bonus of having McD's directly across the road if one needs to drop a deuce.
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,496
- Points
- 1,160
Victoria leading the news yet again! 
“Yesterday we learned of a horrific, random attack where a man threw coffee on a mother and her baby in a stroller — in Downtown Victoria, a very short walking distance from this Legislature,” said Opposition House Leader Todd Stone.
The story was well-known in the provincial capital replied Rankin, whose riding includes the Victoria suburb of Oak Bay.
“It is horrific; it is unacceptable. We are taking the steps needed to address this issue, on an urgent basis.”
Variations on that answer are standard fare for Rankin this Legislature session.
A baby in a stroller is attacked with a glass bottle. A prolific offender smashes a man in the head with a steel pipe.
“Horrible,” says Rankin. “Unacceptable.”
“A violent prolific offender, with over 30 convictions ranging from assault, assault with a weapon and uttering threats is accused of viciously attacking a 19-year-old Asian woman, yelling racial slurs and hitting her over the head with a steel pipe,” says Opposition Leader Kevin Falcon.
“Despite the best efforts of police, this prolific violent offender was released back onto the streets on the same day. It took only two hours and 18 minutes for him to again victimize the community and commit yet another crime.”
Rankin vows retribution.
“These acts of violence are totally unacceptable,” he replies. “People who commit them must face consequences.”
Yet the record suggests that such offenders aren’t likely to face any consequences under the NDP watch in B.C.
Another example:
“Tyler Newton is a violent, prolific offender who was convicted in the unprovoked fatal knife attack of an unsuspecting stranger on a bus.
“Newton has, in the past, blatantly and repeatedly disregarded release conditions, but shockingly, he was once again being released and is out in the community. The government made it clear that the Crown prosecutor agreed with his latest release, and there was no attempt by this government to keep him in custody.”
“Why?” asks B.C. Liberal MLA Karin Kirkpatrick, “was Tyler Newton’s right to reoffend more important to this NDP government than the right of the community to be safe?”
Rankin assured the MLA that the NDP government shares her “frustration with this horrific act. We share the understanding that this cannot continue and we are taking concrete steps to address it.”
But Rankin’s well-rehearsed nostrums — ‘horrible” — “unacceptable” — “there must be consequences” — “we are taking action” — are no longer reassuring, even to the dutiful members of the government backbench.
From time-to-time, Solicitor-General Mike Farnworth has to rally the troops by taking over from Rankin and blistering the B.C. Liberals with reminders of their sins.
Rankin has stumbled in other ways as well. Early on he blasted the B.C. Liberals on social media for relying on “anecdotal fear rhetoric” to dramatize the problems of random attacks and repeat offenders. The posting was soon taken down when someone on his staff realized that these were real people being attacked, victimized and traumatized — they weren’t just anecdotes.
At one point last week, Rankin blundered into suggesting that “random attacks are a fact of life.”
Another line of defence for Rankin is his insistence that the problem of repeat offenders is much the same elsewhere in Canada and a product of changes in the Criminal Code, not policy in B.C.
But that rationale was challenged this week by Doug LePard, one of the authors of the NDP government-commissioned report on repeat offenders and random violence. In other provinces, the remand of violent prolific offenders has returned to pre-COVID-19 levels, LePard told a Conversations Live panel on street crime in Vancouver this week.
“Are judges different here? Are Crown not asking for remand?” LePard challenged.
He suggested that the problem was made-in B.C., drawing on his own experience in dealing with the Crown prosecution service when putting together his report.
“When we suggested being more assertive and seeking detention for offenders who breached their conditions over and over and over again, I have to say we got pushback on that.”
B.C. Liberal MLA Elenore Sturko, a former RCMP officer, quoted LePard in the Legislature on Thursday. Rankin, caught off-guard, fell back on insisting that, no, the problem was the same everywhere.
Privately, New Democrats admit Rankin is hopeless and don’t expect him to continue as attorney-general after David Eby becomes premier next month. Eby has promised “profound intervention” to deal with random attacks and repeat offenders.
But until Eby stepped down in July, he had presided as attorney-general for four years while the crime problem was building. Eby has named his last deputy attorney-general Shannon Salter — lately she’s been Rankin’s deputy — to head the public service. So it remains to be seen whether Eby has any “profound” ideas that he didn’t implement when he had the chance as attorney-general.
Otherwise, if the repeat offenders roam free and the violence continues, we may be hearing once again that these attacks are — you guessed it — “unacceptable.”
Vaughn Palmer: If repeat offenders roam free, we may be hearing again that these attacks are 'unacceptable'
VICTORIA — The B.C. Liberals started question period Thursday by challenging Attorney-General Murray Rankin over the latest random attack on the streets of B.C.“Yesterday we learned of a horrific, random attack where a man threw coffee on a mother and her baby in a stroller — in Downtown Victoria, a very short walking distance from this Legislature,” said Opposition House Leader Todd Stone.
The story was well-known in the provincial capital replied Rankin, whose riding includes the Victoria suburb of Oak Bay.
“It is horrific; it is unacceptable. We are taking the steps needed to address this issue, on an urgent basis.”
Variations on that answer are standard fare for Rankin this Legislature session.
A baby in a stroller is attacked with a glass bottle. A prolific offender smashes a man in the head with a steel pipe.
“Horrible,” says Rankin. “Unacceptable.”
“A violent prolific offender, with over 30 convictions ranging from assault, assault with a weapon and uttering threats is accused of viciously attacking a 19-year-old Asian woman, yelling racial slurs and hitting her over the head with a steel pipe,” says Opposition Leader Kevin Falcon.
“Despite the best efforts of police, this prolific violent offender was released back onto the streets on the same day. It took only two hours and 18 minutes for him to again victimize the community and commit yet another crime.”
Rankin vows retribution.
“These acts of violence are totally unacceptable,” he replies. “People who commit them must face consequences.”
Yet the record suggests that such offenders aren’t likely to face any consequences under the NDP watch in B.C.
Another example:
“Tyler Newton is a violent, prolific offender who was convicted in the unprovoked fatal knife attack of an unsuspecting stranger on a bus.
“Newton has, in the past, blatantly and repeatedly disregarded release conditions, but shockingly, he was once again being released and is out in the community. The government made it clear that the Crown prosecutor agreed with his latest release, and there was no attempt by this government to keep him in custody.”
“Why?” asks B.C. Liberal MLA Karin Kirkpatrick, “was Tyler Newton’s right to reoffend more important to this NDP government than the right of the community to be safe?”
Rankin assured the MLA that the NDP government shares her “frustration with this horrific act. We share the understanding that this cannot continue and we are taking concrete steps to address it.”
But Rankin’s well-rehearsed nostrums — ‘horrible” — “unacceptable” — “there must be consequences” — “we are taking action” — are no longer reassuring, even to the dutiful members of the government backbench.
From time-to-time, Solicitor-General Mike Farnworth has to rally the troops by taking over from Rankin and blistering the B.C. Liberals with reminders of their sins.
Rankin has stumbled in other ways as well. Early on he blasted the B.C. Liberals on social media for relying on “anecdotal fear rhetoric” to dramatize the problems of random attacks and repeat offenders. The posting was soon taken down when someone on his staff realized that these were real people being attacked, victimized and traumatized — they weren’t just anecdotes.
At one point last week, Rankin blundered into suggesting that “random attacks are a fact of life.”
Another line of defence for Rankin is his insistence that the problem of repeat offenders is much the same elsewhere in Canada and a product of changes in the Criminal Code, not policy in B.C.
But that rationale was challenged this week by Doug LePard, one of the authors of the NDP government-commissioned report on repeat offenders and random violence. In other provinces, the remand of violent prolific offenders has returned to pre-COVID-19 levels, LePard told a Conversations Live panel on street crime in Vancouver this week.
“Are judges different here? Are Crown not asking for remand?” LePard challenged.
He suggested that the problem was made-in B.C., drawing on his own experience in dealing with the Crown prosecution service when putting together his report.
“When we suggested being more assertive and seeking detention for offenders who breached their conditions over and over and over again, I have to say we got pushback on that.”
B.C. Liberal MLA Elenore Sturko, a former RCMP officer, quoted LePard in the Legislature on Thursday. Rankin, caught off-guard, fell back on insisting that, no, the problem was the same everywhere.
Privately, New Democrats admit Rankin is hopeless and don’t expect him to continue as attorney-general after David Eby becomes premier next month. Eby has promised “profound intervention” to deal with random attacks and repeat offenders.
But until Eby stepped down in July, he had presided as attorney-general for four years while the crime problem was building. Eby has named his last deputy attorney-general Shannon Salter — lately she’s been Rankin’s deputy — to head the public service. So it remains to be seen whether Eby has any “profound” ideas that he didn’t implement when he had the chance as attorney-general.
Otherwise, if the repeat offenders roam free and the violence continues, we may be hearing once again that these attacks are — you guessed it — “unacceptable.”
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,997
- Points
- 1,160
Maybe we need Gulags?
medicineman
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 5,876
- Points
- 1,110
We could set up a camp on our side of Hans Island...
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,755
- Points
- 1,040
I sense another Kurt Russell movie in the offing.
- Reaction score
- 649
- Points
- 890
All I will say to this is the most violent of interventions I've had with "clients" have always had the best reviews from the victims/complainants.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,451
- Points
- 1,260
Eventually nature will correct our inaction one way or another.
It just a question of when and how.
It just a question of when and how.
Skysix
Full Member
- Reaction score
- 712
- Points
- 1,010
And how well our self defense laws work in keeping victims out of jail for removing attackers from the gene pool
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,451
- Points
- 1,260
Eventually, if it gets bad enough, social order will erode and no one will enforce laws anyways.
Then society will resurface and will reestablish it's self and begin the process again.
Everything moves in circles.
Whatever judge, or even crown prosecutor - initially decided that the person whose home was broken into is somehow guilty of a crime, should be embarrassed.
And anybody who has a criminal record/in custody should have that record purged. If we can do it for anybody who ever had a marijuana charge/conviction, we can do it for the odd few who got in hot water for defending themselves/their family while inside their own home.
(Ontario guy who defended his family from an intruder that threatened to kill them, I’m thinking of you as I write this.)
Do our national morals align moreso with those of the Saudi/Pakistani/Taliban governments, in which a rape victim can still be charged with adultery & killed, gang rapes can happen on busses which result in the victim being murdered during/after (with no consequences for the culprits), or a lawless land where anybody who claims something as theirs can have it by right of force?
Or are we a nation who’s values say people should be able to defend themselves without even worrying they might get charged? (Reasonable self defence, that is)
(If I were to break into a home & the family was sitting at the table having dinner, and I then threatened them & attacked them…and the dad kicked the living hell out of me while he was making sure I did nothing to harm his family…. I’d be jaw dropped if he somehow got charged too.)
If Canada doesn’t exist 50 years to 100 years from now, I’m willing to bet that it’s because we keep allowing the stupid people to be in charge - and the masses just get tired of the needless stupidity, ineffectiveness, or ‘woke shit.’
(Re stupid people in charge of government policies, national businesses, national institutions, etc)
Colin Parkinson
Army.ca Myth
- Reaction score
- 11,997
- Points
- 1,160
If you conducted a proper citizens arrest, you be labelled a vigilante regardless. They don't want Canadians to be able to defend themselves, it's ironic that most of the successful cases of self defense here were bad guy on bad guy. Because they basically made it illegal to level the playing field for the law abiding.
Halifax Tar
Army.ca Fixture
- Reaction score
- 11,451
- Points
- 1,260
I am no social scientist, but this is how I see it.
I think the idea behind the restricting or private citizens from enacting their own defence comes from a naïve and altruistic nature. We see ourselves or peaceful and orderly, and relatively crime free. And for many Canadians violence is a disgusting action and really only acceptable in a hockey rink.
Its not a terrible way to run a society, so long as our police and corrections forces are kept large and equipped enough to deal with crimes quickly and house the dangerous indefinitely.
The problems arise when the above breaks down or is underfunded, understaffed and underequipped. And when the perception is that offender rights have reach parity with that of the victims.
I've been dealing with mentally unstable neighbor. Multiple calls to the city and the police. They all agree he needs help, but until he threatens violence and/or acts violently there is nothing they can do. They visit him and he's combative and espouses conspiracies.
The frustration from the constable we have been dealing with is palpable, she continually apologizes that she cant do more and has advised us to seek a peace bond, which really does nothing if he goes violent, and continue to call the non emergency line and report the incidents. So now I have to stand by and wait until things really go sideways instead of having our institutions act proactively and get this individual the help they need.
I also want to put out there that I recognize my negative bias when it comes to LEOs, but the last couple of months has been refreshing and I can really say I appreciate the work the HRP has done for me and my family.
Last edited:
99.5% of my interactions with the police have been positive. The 0.5% was actually a HUGELY negative interaction with a police officer, but he was a by and large rarity. (Mike Williamson, LRPS, calling you out for being a corrupt piece of sleaze.)
It has to be frustrating for the police in situations like that also. You can’t charge someone who hasn’t her committed a crime, and a peace bond/restraining order really is as good as the person it’s taken out against.
So you get stuck with a volatile, mentally unstable neighbour who causes all kinds of problems, but hasn’t technically done anything illegal. Then when something does go sideways, our institutions respond - but by then who knows how it’ll go
Glad to hear the officer is representing her profession well. Sucks you have to deal with the situation…
It has to be frustrating for the police in situations like that also. You can’t charge someone who hasn’t her committed a crime, and a peace bond/restraining order really is as good as the person it’s taken out against.
So you get stuck with a volatile, mentally unstable neighbour who causes all kinds of problems, but hasn’t technically done anything illegal. Then when something does go sideways, our institutions respond - but by then who knows how it’ll go
Glad to hear the officer is representing her profession well. Sucks you have to deal with the situation…
Brad Sallows
Army.ca Legend
- Reaction score
- 8,755
- Points
- 1,040
There aren't many assholes; there are many citizens. If citizens start taking matters into their own hands, proper enforcement becomes practically impossible. So it is necessary to step very hard on outbreaks of citizens taking matters into their own hands.
RangerRay
Army.ca Veteran
- Reaction score
- 3,901
- Points
- 1,260
Question for those in Victoria since I can’t find any information other than one particularly asshole leftist councillor was dumped…
Is the new mayor and council, like the new one in Vancouver, more grown-up than the previous one? Or is it also committed to silliness while chaos reigns outside council chambers?
Is the new mayor and council, like the new one in Vancouver, more grown-up than the previous one? Or is it also committed to silliness while chaos reigns outside council chambers?
daftandbarmy
Army.ca Dinosaur
- Reaction score
- 32,496
- Points
- 1,160
For the politicians? Absolutely
Ben Issit is out, thank Gawd. All the council members are new and the only holdover is the new Mayor, who used to be a council member.
The jury is still out on her, though
Similar threads
