[Admiral Beez]

Yes. Once someone is granted citizenship, it can't be taken away

Of course it can. First of all, the citizenship act clearly provides for the revocation of citizenship of persons who have obtained citizenship by fraud or misrepresentation.

Secondly, under the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Program those deemed war criminals can have their citizenship revoked.

So, that's at least two examples of how citizenship can be taken away, both of which were found within 5 minutes of searching government of Canada websites.

 

[syn]

If Miller really wanted to get rid of the vast majority of gun crime in Toronto he needs to target those that use the guns in crimes. We already know who they are, young black males in broken, single parent, fatherless homes, born into cycles of poverty and public housing. If we deduct every gun murder by this specific group over the last five years, I feel that 80% of the 80-odd murders that happen each year in Toronto wouldn't happen at all. If we had the gumption to provide stats on the demographics of murderers, I'd guarantee it.

So, there it is Miller. You want to stop gun crime in Toronto, then you've got to stop this specific population group from causing the crime. You can throw all the usual feel-good social programs, community supports, celebrity-sponsored basketball courts, mentor programs, public funds, scholarships and the like at the problem, but what you are not doing is putting the fear into these fellows.

What you feel isn't really relevant. Do you have any facts to support this assertion?

Regarding your numbers, I don't think even half the murders in Toronto this year were due to gun crime. So, I don't see how 80% of the murders in the last 5 years wouldn't have happened simply by getting rid of the gun related ones.

I know for a fact that in 2006 that Edmonton, Montreal, Vancouver, Ottawa and Winnipeg all had higher gun homicide rates than Toronto.

In 2007 Toronto had a lower firearm homicide rate than both Vancouver and Edmonton.

All of these cities have smaller communities of the group you want to target.

I know you have some issues with this community, but it's not a racial issue.

Targeting crime prevention measures based on race is one of the most ridiculous things I've read.

 

[junctionist]

Of course it can. First of all, the citizenship act clearly provides for the revocation of citizenship of persons who have obtained citizenship by fraud or misrepresentation.

Secondly, under the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Program those deemed war criminals can have their citizenship revoked.

So, that's at least two examples of how citizenship can be taken away, both of which were found within 5 minutes of searching government of Canada websites.

Those are rare and extreme circumstances which have little to do with the matter at hand. Of course you'd deport war criminals, so that they can face trials in the appropriate courts.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Targeting crime prevention measures based on race is one of the most ridiculous things I've read.

But we base crime prevention measures on other identifiable groups, such as gun clubs or legal gun owners. The mayor looked at Toronto's murder stats and said we need to get rid of the guns. Besides, what's wrong with targeting crime (actually, murder) prevention at the young, male and black demographic that needs the attention? Have you been reading the news, and seeing who those are doing the shooting (and the dying) in so many of our gang shootouts? Our young, male black population in Toronto is in crisis, putting everyone at risk. You spend your money where it's best spent.

As for how to best spend that money to deal with the above crisis in our young, male black demographic, I still think something is missing. As I said earlier, you can throw all the usual feel-good social programs, community supports, celebrity-sponsored basketball courts, mentor programs, public funds, scholarships and the like at the problem, but what you are not doing is putting the fear into these fellows. Perhaps the better word than fear, is hope. So, the question is then, how do you give this demographic which is so specific, it's not the girls, it's not the women, it's not the older men, hope for the future so that they'll toss the guns. Perhaps, alongside the social programs, you also need the powerfully strong justice system, so that they do not see the drug dealer on the corner making it on easy street, distracting the youngsters from the positive paths of education, perserverence and success. Instead the drug dealer and gang banger is off the street, in jail for a good long time, or deported, or exiled from the projects, leaving a more positive community for everyone else in his wake.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Those are rare and extreme circumstances....

I was replying specifically to the comment that "Once someone is granted citizenship, it can't be taken away."

 

[junctionist]

So long as the justice system operates within our democratic boundaries, it's strength is a key part of any crime prevention strategy.

 

[Archivist]

Admiral B: What the overall US stats show is that violent crime by all groups is going down in the US at the same time that the prison population is rising dramatically. Go figure, taking violent criminals off the streets and into jails results in a decreasing violent crime rate.

I'm not going to get into this argument with Beez, because I don't have the energy he brings to his right-wing ideals. However, a few comments I'll make about his note above.

1. That fact that two things occur at the same time doesn't prove a relationship between this - this is a simple error of logic. Both could be caused by an outside factor (and expanding economy, an aging population) for instance. For instance, Canada's incarceration rate is hugely lower than the US, yet our crime is a small percentage of theirs.

2. Many people in the state are in jail not for violent crime, as you state, but for minor drug offences due to the "war on drugs" down there.

3. The US crime rate is no longer falling, and has levelled off or increased in the past few years. There were more violent crimes in the states in 2007 than in any of the years 2003-2005, and the rate has not shifted significantly downward since 1999. Yet the incarceration rate continues to rise.

4. The US incarceration rate is already the world's documented highest. This is, in my opinion, grotesquely unjust and a waste. Budgets for prisons in the states frequently are larger than budgets for education. No thanks.

5. Presumably, given their enormous incarceration rates, and Canada's relatively small one, our crime should be higher. It is not. Perhaps the US would have to put another 25% of its people into jail to get down to the level of our crime rate. Which country's approach makes more sense?

Your "lock em away" arguments are repulsive, ineffective, unjust and, shall I say it, American.

Of course, you'll just keep going on and on with the same argument, I've seen it before, but fortunately Canadians don't buy that set of lies and misinformation.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Your "lock em away" arguments are repulsive, ineffective, unjust and, shall I say it, American.

So, presuming you feel that we have an issue with this demographic, what's your solution?

 

[syn]

But we base crime prevention measures on other identifiable groups, such as gun clubs or legal gun owners. The mayor looked at Toronto's murder stats and said we need to get rid of the guns. Besides, what's wrong with targeting crime (actually, murder) prevention at the young, male and black demographic that needs the attention? Have you been reading the news, and seeing who those are doing the shooting (and the dying) in so many of our gang shootouts? Our young, male black population in Toronto is in crisis, putting everyone at risk. You spend your money where it's best spent.

Gun clubs and legal gun owners aren't specific racial/ethinic groups.

As for how to best spend that money to deal with the above crisis in our young, male black demographic, I still think something is missing. As I said earlier, you can throw all the usual feel-good social programs, community supports, celebrity-sponsored basketball courts, mentor programs, public funds, scholarships and the like at the problem, but what you are not doing is putting the fear into these fellows. Perhaps the better word than fear, is hope. So, the question is then, how do you give this demographic which is so specific, it's not the girls, it's not the women, it's not the older men, hope for the future so that they'll toss the guns. Perhaps, alongside the social programs, you also need the powerfully strong justice system, so that they do not see the drug dealer on the corner making it on easy street, distracting the youngsters from the positive paths of education, perserverence and success. Instead the drug dealer and gang banger is off the street, in jail for a good long time, or deported, or exiled from the projects, leaving a more positive community for everyone else in his wake.

Where is your evidence that black males are the core problem? How does that explain higher gun homicide rates in other cities?

 

[Admiral Beez]

Gun clubs and legal gun owners aren't specific racial/ethinic groups.

So what? Why is one group okay to focus on, while others are forbidden? Are we so afaid of hurting feelings that we'll only pick on groups that have no media clout? Besides, this is far deeper than a racial/ethnic group, as it's a specific gender, age and geographically located group as well.

Where is your evidence that black males are the core problem?

Come on, in almost every shooting this past summer both the shooters and the victims were identified in the media as young black males. That demographic is in serious crisis. And that's my point, there's little point in banning legal guns if those that wield the illegal guns are unaffected.

So, in addition to all the social programs, let's give back the neighbourhoods to the families, of all make-ups in the affected areas. We can do this by making sure that the criminals in the areas face severe penalties. It must be terrifying for a parent or teen to see a likely armed drug dealer on their corner, knowing that they must get rid of him for the sake of their family, friends and community, but also knowing that if they call the police to arrest him, that the guy will be back on the street days later, looking for the snitch. It's no wonder there are few witnesses to gangsta shootings, I'd likely keep my mouth shut too. But if I knew that the justice system was going to put this guy away for years for the possession of a firearm and for trafficing the drugs, then I would proudly say that in my community gun-totting drug dealers are being chased out.

 

[Mot]

Come on, in almost every shooting this past summer both the shooters and the victims were identified in the media as young black males. That demographic is in serious crisis. And that's my point, there's little point in banning legal guns if those that wield the illegal guns are unaffected

The shooting I recall most was the young white males on Niagara Street and the young white woman killed last week by a white male. That might be because of the media saturation when a white person is killed though.

Is there stats on the race of the victims and shooters in the homicide files? You have to prove your premise first with facts.

I don't dispute your arguments on illegal guns. The flow from the US needs to be stopped.

 

[digi]

That might be because of the media saturation when a white person is killed though.

Unlikely though. The media in this country isn't as biased as the US media.

 

[lordmandeep]

please there are many black/brown youth missing from their homes and one white guy goes missing in Barrie and it dominates the news.

 

[digi]

please there are many black/brown youth missing from their homes and one white guy goes missing in Barrie and it dominates the news.

Proof? Or are you just playing the victim card, again.

Why is it that whenever there is black on black violence, none of the witnesses are willing to come forward? Do they hate their fellow man that much?

 

[theman23]

Of course it can. First of all, the citizenship act clearly provides for the revocation of citizenship of persons who have obtained citizenship by fraud or misrepresentation.

Secondly, under the Crimes Against Humanity and War Crimes Program those deemed war criminals can have their citizenship revoked.

So, that's at least two examples of how citizenship can be taken away, both of which were found within 5 minutes of searching government of Canada websites.

From what I understand, you've only stated one example. War criminals are not eligible for Canadian citizenship, and thus any war criminals who manage to gain Canadian citizenship have done so fraudulently. Revoking their citizenship is analogous to revoking the citizenship of a person who forged his Canadian birth certificate. If I was to go out and massacre half of Zimbawe tomorrow, my citizenship wouldn't be revoked barring a change to the laws.

And clearly there is a difference between revoking a citizenship that was fraudulently gained and one that has been gained in the proper manner. The major issue here is that, once you gain your citizenship through legal and proper means, you are treated exactly the same as any other citizen, regardless of your place of birth. I'd rather keep it that way, personally.