[rp07]

What I'd like to see is proper Police enforcement of the Safe Streets Act. The SSA clearly prohibits solicitation (including begging) on roadways, however every day I drive down the Jarvis Street exit from the Gardiner I see a pair or more of beggars walking between the lines of cars asking for change.

Yeah, Gardiner is the worst. Every exit whether be Spadina, Jarvis, Bay, Yonge... you see so many of them along the underpass of Gardiner. Sometimes when I'm waiting for the lights to change at Lakeshore, they come around asking for money. It does become somewhat of a nusiance.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Over the past couple of years I've noticed that area get much, much worse. I try to avoid having to walk in the Church/Wellesley area now, but when I do go through there, there's barely enough sidewalk space because of all of the punks hanging out.

I was going to comment on this a couple of weeks ago but it was an old thread so I let it go.
I've lived in this neighbourhood for over 20 years and have seen it change, evolve and in the past 6 or 7 years slowly go down hill with rising crime, increased drug traffic and assaults. I have a couple of friends who have moved away from the neighbourhood because of it.
First, you cannot sit in the Church/Wellesley neighbourhood to enjoy a coffee, take in some sun or chat with friends without being hassled for money or cigarettes. It is especially bad north of Wellesley, namely around or near Cawthra Park. Walking in the area can be problematic too, but "moving targets" are less likely to be cornered as opposed to sitting. The crack problem in the neighbourhood appears to get worse every year and the people who are using can be dodgey at best.
I walk my dog 3 or 4 times a day. There is something about having a friendly looking yellow Lab by my side which keeps the panhandlers & drug dealers away from me, perhaps a soft spot in their heart - I dunno. But I can say that I have never had an incident and so I have no reservations walking around at any time of day or night. That said, I'm still very aware of my surroundings and if I see something suspect ahead of me I'll cross the street to avoid it.
The odd thing is once the warmer weather descends that's when the trouble arrives (the younger "punks" as you refer to them), usually about mid-May through until early September. Many of the crack dealers remain after September but they're less visible during the cooler winter.
I've contacted Kyle Rae's office on this subject several times and I get positive responses back, but I see no change, it only gets worse. Kyle lives in the heart of the Village so he see's it all first hand. I don't get it but it's very troubling.
If the City (haha), or the 519 Community Centre had active security patrols day and night (I know that is a huge expense) I am sure that would root out much of problem related to visiting street youth which cause so many problems in the summer.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Adm. Beez:

Actually, the Safe Street Act only allows for relatively minor fines ($1000) and jail-terms (6 months). Charging and convicting someone under assault is a far more severe punative measure.

AoD

Yes, but it comes back to the concept of broken windows. If the smaller infraction is not enforced, then the message is sent that the police will not enforce the SSA, but will instead wait until someone is assaulted before doing anything that simply enforcement of the SSA might have prevented in the first place.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Probably fewer in number than the poseurs bragging about their churchgoing and then complaining about the poor.

No bragging here, never have. I'm just requesting enforcement of the Safe Street Act. If we're not going to enforce it, then cancel it from the books.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Yes, but it comes back to the concept of broken windows. If the smaller infraction is not enforced, then the message is sent that the police will not enforce the SSA, but will instead wait until someone is assaulted before doing anything that simply enforcement of the SSA might have prevented in the first place.

The law cannot be enforced 24/7 across the entire city; at best, it'd function as a form of harassment. An analogy would be enforcement of speed limits - the message sent isn't prevention - but whether you're unlucky enough to get caught. Patently pointless, if you ask me.

AoD

 

[Hydrogen]

The law cannot be enforced 24/7 across the entire city; at best, it'd function as a form of harassment. An analogy would be enforcement of speed limits - the message sent isn't prevention - but whether you're unlucky enough to get caught. Patently pointless, if you ask me.

AoD

By invoking an analogy, are you suggesting that enforcing speed limits is pointless, or a form of harassment?

 

[buildup]

"The main reason people give anonymously is so they can feel more smug about their actions."

I guess you've never given anonomously or you'd know better. Do you think Colin's donation was a "good deed"? Really?

 

[scarberiankhatru]

People perform "good deeds" mainly to make themselves, well, feel good about themselves...his deed wouldn't be better if it was anonymous, just more quietly self-righteous.

 

[Admiral Beez]

People perform "good deeds" mainly to make themselves, well, feel good about themselves...his deed wouldn't be better if it was anonymous, just more quietly self-righteous.

I always think such comments are valid only in the first person. We have no idea of what really motivates others to perform good deeds. Perhaps if you'd premised your post with "some people have told me that...." but to imply all people is IMO not valid.

 

[lordmandeep]

sure you cannot enforce the law everywhere and all the time but if you somewhat enforce, people will start to follow that law. We got rid of squeegee kids now, why not panhandlers.


Like if the police frequently catch speeders at a certain area, the people will over time start to slow down in that area.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

I support legalizing marijuana (although I don't smoke the stuff) so I'm cool on that issue but I'd really like to see an effort to nail the crack dealers to the wall and improved information blitzes for those with substance abuse problems. The crimes and devastation associated with crack are really serious and getting worse. I know of two panhandlers in my area who masquerade as crack dealers (and other mind bending substances).

 

[casaguy]

(the younger "punks" as you refer to them)

Although I feel the term "street trash" is much more appropritate here, I thought I would soften the judgement and use a more old fashioned tone. (Believe me, I know street trash when I see it).

Either way, I'm quite surprised the neighbourhood as a whole hasn't gotten together to successfully tackle the problem. For that matter, I'm surprised "the village" as a whole is being allowed to fall apart. It's turned into a dirty stretch of nothing. There's not even any character or feeling of community any more. It's just sex ads and garbage lining the strip. Not much to be proud of, in my opinion.

I don't know what the solution is, but I get the impression that none of the residents/frequenters of Church Street really cares.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

sure you cannot enforce the law everywhere and all the time but if you somewhat enforce, people will start to follow that law. We got rid of squeegee kids now, why not panhandlers.

Like if the police frequently catch speeders at a certain area, the people will over time start to slow down in that area.

You've mentioned it yourself - in a certain area - neither SSA nor speed limits are meant to be respected only dependent on locale or enforcement. Clearly, neither had been that successful in modifying behaviour globally either.

Come to think of it, perhaps one should do a comparison as to how many deaths are attributed to speeding vs. panhandling and wonder why we seem have such dramatically different attitudes towards both (to the point whereby we can justify our own violation of one law, in spite of such actions having a far more serious consequence).

AoD

 

[Admiral Beez]

Come to think of it, perhaps one should do a comparison as to how many deaths are attributed to speeding vs. panhandling

But that's not a valid comparison, IMO. You should be comparing panhandling with littering, street solicitation, grafitti, squeegying (sp?), public drunkeness, spitting and other nuisances that we have laws and by-laws to control. Except for very isolated examples, we're not talking about deaths from panhandling, but instead are talking about laws against activities that make the city less pleasant for the majority of its inhabitants. These laws are not always successful, and one against panhandling wouldn't always be successful either, but at least might (only just) give a restaurant of theatre owner something to count on when a beggar is sitting outside his place asking each of his patrons for their money.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Although I feel the term "street trash" is much more appropritate here, I thought I would soften the judgement and use a more old fashioned tone. (Believe me, I know street trash when I see it).

Either way, I'm quite surprised the neighbourhood as a whole hasn't gotten together to successfully tackle the problem. For that matter, I'm surprised "the village" as a whole is being allowed to fall apart. It's turned into a dirty stretch of nothing. There's not even any character or feeling of community any more. It's just sex ads and garbage lining the strip. Not much to be proud of, in my opinion.

I don't know what the solution is, but I get the impression that none of the residents/frequenters of Church Street really cares.

Perhaps a campaign targeting Kyle's Rae's office and the Church Wellesley Village BIA?