News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.5K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 39K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 4.8K     0 

UrbanWarrior said:
Sounds pretty serious.

calgary.ctvnews.ca

'It’s a war zone': Drop-In Centre clients complain of human rights violations amid calls for facility improvements

Calls are growing louder for facility improvements to the Calgary Drop-in Centre as clients who held their silence for months now speak out in the hopes of more humane livable conditions.
calgary.ctvnews.ca calgary.ctvnews.ca
Click to expand...
The Drop-In center is the largest homeless shelter in North America. Some people frame that as a positive thing, but articles like this make me question if a "one size fits all" approach that clusters everyone together is really worth it.
I feel really bad for those people who need the shelter and services the DI provide but have to deal with the complete chaos it has devolved into.
 
CalgaryTiger said:
That place does pretty well, you think they would pay for 24/7 security versus negatively affecting actual customers.
Click to expand...

Then you'd have to be disturbed by the constant fight between security and the misbehaved. We stopped going to East Village superstore because the entrance lobby was a war zone and you felt like you were going to take shrapnel just to buy some milk.
 
haltcatchfire said:
Then you'd have to be disturbed by the constant fight between security and the misbehaved. We stopped going to East Village superstore because the entrance lobby was a war zone and you felt like you were going to take shrapnel just to buy some milk.
Click to expand...
There's a design/layout solution in there somewhere, at least for the McDonald's, where you limit the dining room and food pickup waiting area to paying customers.

Maybe it's just because I'm on this forum too much, but I think the problem is far greater than is being worked on or acknowledged. Seems like the plan is to wait for things to get really bad before doing something. And these businesses, in important areas (EV and Stephen Ave) are suffering. Might be time to take some of that empty office space build some shelter/short term housing and help for these people.
 
crisp said:
Someone was found stabbed to death in front of that Superstore... what does 'really bad' to this city council and police force even constitute? The amount of leniency towards these troubled people is too much.
Click to expand...
As per other discussions around this issue, one of the big problems is municipalities are the ones forced to deal with these issues, but it needs solutions from a higher level.

- In the case of incarcerations, the city police can arrest people who are are loitering or causing disturbances, but in the end the province will decide what happens to them, and usually they're released shortly after with the problem repeating itself shortly after. In the case of a stabbing it might be that someone goes to jail, but they wouldn't be in for long, and again the cycle continues.
- In the case of solving the substance/addiction issues, the city can only do so much as the issue isn't one that municipalities are designed to deal with. This goes again to higher powers.

I'm not sure what the city or council can do, other than to hire more police officers, but sadly, I don't believe it would help much. The same money spent by municipalities across Alberta for more officers could be spent by the province on trying to solve the root issues. I feel your frustration, as I used to go to the EV superstore as well but don't anymore for obvious reasons.
 
Last edited:
In the case of incarcerations, the city police can arrest people who are are loitering or causing disturbances, but in the end the province will decide what happens to them, and usually they're released shortly after with the problem repeating itself shortly after. In the case of a stabbing it might be that someone goes to jail, but they wouldn't be in for long, and again the cycle continues.
Click to expand...
Well, the province is the one responsible for prosecuting in these cases, I wouldn't put all the blame on them. It goes to the federal level with the current bills and rights, and the Supreme court of Canada basically says that outside of extreme situations, all criminals should be released on bail/probation as soon as possible. So the courts have little ability to actually keep offenders in jail for very long. It's an issue in all big cities in Canada right now, with most cities and provinces fighting to get things changed.
 
I haven't been in the City for 15 months, has it really gotten that bad so quickly at the Superstore? They used to have a security guard there whenever the store was open.

The other side of shopping there is that some people don't have a choice but to shop there. Especially for people without cars, the alternatives are too time-consuming to entertain. Superstore is also the best value in the entire Centre City so it's hard to give up.
 
kora said:
I haven't been in the City for 15 months, has it really gotten that bad so quickly at the Superstore? They used to have a security guard there whenever the store was open.

The other side of shopping there is that some people don't have a choice but to shop there. Especially for people without cars, the alternatives are too time-consuming to entertain. Superstore is also the best value in the entire Centre City so it's hard to give up.
Click to expand...
Having construction hoarding up has made a perhaps manageable situation spiral by reducing sightlines.
 
Nawads said:
Well, the province is the one responsible for prosecuting in these cases, I wouldn't put all the blame on them. It goes to the federal level with the current bills and rights, and the Supreme court of Canada basically says that outside of extreme situations, all criminals should be released on bail/probation as soon as possible. So the courts have little ability to actually keep offenders in jail for very long. It's an issue in all big cities in Canada right now, with most cities and provinces fighting to get things changed.
Click to expand...
Even if we wanted to, and could, which we can, we do not have the physical capacity to hold people. In the early 90s, the Charter prompted the dismantling of much of (what we called) the mental health care system at the time, and it wasn't replaced for the most part. As a society we were willing to save the money, and the immediate consequences of additional homeless people wasn't seen as a huge problem.

Now 30 years later, the problem compounds a little bit each year and it seems intractable. The problem we nurtured over 30 years won't be solved by in 1, 2 or 5 years.

That we don't want to house prolific low level offenders is a choice. BC just changed their pretrial guidance to try to end this. We will see if it is charter compliant, or if it helps. If used judiciously, it should stand up under the charter, and be saved by the Oakes Test/Section 1, our constitutional relief valve.
 
Last edited:
kora said:
I haven't been in the City for 15 months, has it really gotten that bad so quickly at the Superstore? They used to have a security guard there whenever the store was open.

The other side of shopping there is that some people don't have a choice but to shop there. Especially for people without cars, the alternatives are too time-consuming to entertain. Superstore is also the best value in the entire Centre City so it's hard to give up.
Click to expand...
They have full time security but it's tough to keep up - there are constantly people smoking (cigs and various other things) in the vestibules and some of the nooks and crannies around that building are essentially open sewers. 💩
 
Here's another thought. What if the feds changed some of the criminal code so it was much harder on the dealers selling the drugs in the first place? To the point where the supply dries up, and cuts off supply to people who might become a future addict. I mean people don't just get hooked on meth and fentanyl without someone selling it to them. If the punishment was more sever it might make it much harder to get hold of it.
 
Cowtown said:
Here's another thought. What if the feds changed some of the criminal code so it was much harder on the dealers selling the drugs in the first place? To the point where the supply dries up, and cuts off supply to people who might become a future addict. I mean people don't just get hooked on meth and fentanyl without someone selling it to them. If the punishment was more sever it might make it much harder to get hold of it.
Click to expand...
Hasn't worked for the past 50 years. I'm sure if we try harder it will work this time.

1679594710433.png
 
darwink said:
Hasn't worked for the past 50 years. I'm sure if we try harder it will work this time.
Click to expand...
Exactly. What I meant is the sentences actually need to have some teeth. I didn't realize you could get life for trafficking some substances, so it seems it's there and can be used if there was a will to do it. Is this due to money, and overcrowding of prisons?

Funny how things change. My father knew a guy that he went to high school with who was caught selling cocaine back in the 60's and went to jail for something like 10 years - I don't know the details, but he wasn't a big time dealer or distributor only selling to people at parties and such. I doubt anyone is getting 10 years for trafficking coke or meth or any other schedule I drug these days. Even the bigger distributors.
 
Cowtown said:
Exactly. What I meant is the sentences actually need to have some teeth. I didn't realize you could get life for trafficking some substances, so it seems it's there and can be used if there was a will to do it. Is this due to money, and overcrowding of prisons?

Funny how things change. My father knew a guy that he went to high school with who was caught selling cocaine back in the 60's and went to jail for something like 10 years - I don't know the details, but he wasn't a big time dealer or distributor only selling to people at parties and such. I doubt anyone is getting 10 years for trafficking coke or meth or any other schedule I drug these days. Even the bigger distributors.
Click to expand...
Most people don't realize that in the early 1970s, US President Nixon started this thing called the "War on Drugs" which led to a continual ratcheting up of prison time for drug trafficking over the next three decades. I didn't pay attention to what happened afterward, but I can only assume that all the drug dealers got locked up and drugs have not been a problem in the US ever since.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top