[AlvinofDiaspar]

Perhaps those who intend to frequent clubs should be subjected to a battery of psychiatric testing to ensure they have the required level of maturity. Those who doesn't make it should just stay home and finish up that six pack and the bag of Doritos in the pantry.

AoD

 

[gabe]

We a need better police force. As you can see Toronto cops aren't exactly the brightest bunch.


LUCAS OLENIUK/TORONTO STAR
A parked police cruiser was hit by a Via Rail train late Jan. 24, 2009 at the tracks on Wallace Ave. near Rankin Cres. Police were on scene investigating and searching for a suspect in a robbery.The cruiser was parked on the tracks

http://www.thestar.com/article/576894

 

[toraerach]

IMO, it comes down firmly on the stability of two-parent families. We've always had immigrants who've faced discrimination in schools and in the workforce. However, a strong family can get you through almost anything.

That makes no sense whatsoever. Crime has been on the decline for a while while the number of traditional two-parent families has also been shrinking. Who says a two-parent family is the same as a strong family? I would think a family where parents aren't forced to stay together when things aren't working out is much healthier for the children.

You're right that we've always had immigrants who've faced discrimination in schools and the workforce. Do you have any proof that those immigrants of the past committed fewer crimes, or that our current crime rate can be blamed on immigrants?

The problem is gun violence. Once upon a time stabbing was the mode of choice for most potential killers. Stray knives rarely killed innocent bystanders and stabbings (I believe) have a greater survival rate. These guns don't come with immigrants, but through criminal organizations that sell firearms to people who want to kill. From what I understand (and this may be more theory than fact), criminal organizations in Canada smuggle drugs into the US and guns back into Canada. The entire thing has its roots in drugs. Personally, I think legalizing marijuana would be a huge blow to gangs, but that's a whole new can of worms.

 

[Hydrogen]

alcohol + male testosterone + girls in skimpy outfits + weapons = recipe for disaster.

Fair equation, except you left out "idiots."

Only a complete idiot would start shooting in a crowd.

 

[Tewder]

Tewder:



And therefore we should strive towards the lowest common denominator?

Oh, and just out of curosity, what is the general crime rate in the urban centres of these uber-poor nations? And is it in everyone's interest to replicate these scenarios for the sake of privileged outrage and indignation? Urban violence is an issue with many facets - laying the blame on individuals for their failings might sound convenient and even be accurate sometimes, but it doesn't deal with the problem. In fact, policies taken from such a perspective is likely to make things worse, not better.

AoD

No, but throwing money at a problem when it clearly isn't helping doesn't make sense either... and what is so 'wrong' or 'unfair' by the way with the laying of blame where warranted? Millions upon millions of individuals have come here from horrible oppressive places to face their share of uphill battles yet still manage to better themselves honestly and without resorting to murder. Millions of people have been born and raised here in all kinds of conditions without doing so either. Letting people off the hook because of the so-called hardships of life they've experienced in the mean streets of Toronto - - is an indefensible stance, not to mention a dangerous one. This lack of expectations on people, and the position that everybody is a victim at the mercy of their upbringing and social conditions, is what leads to some people far too easily justifying unconscionable behavior.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Tewder:

No, but throwing money at a problem when it clearly isn't helping doesn't make sense either... and what is so 'wrong' or 'unfair' by the way with the laying of blame where warranted? Millions upon millions of individuals have come here from horrible oppressive places to face their share of uphill battles yet still manage to better themselves honestly and without resorting to murder. Millions of people have been born and raised here in all kinds of conditions without doing so either. Letting people off the hook because of the so-called hardships of life they've experienced in the mean streets of Toronto - - is an indefensible stance, not to mention a dangerous one. This lack of expectations on people, and the position that everybody is a victim at the mercy of their upbringing and social conditions, is what leads to some people far too easily justifying unconscionable behavior.

So you lay the blame, then what happens? What of individuals who have yet to go into criminal life and is at risk of doing so in the future? You and society can all the expectations in the world and couple the failure to meet them with punitive measures, but if the said individuals have nothing to lose and can't perceive being in a position of having more than just a dead end life which they are most likely already living, that's quite frankly an empty threat. This is not about letting people off the hook or justifying unconscionable behaviour, this is about making sure people have enough of a self-worth to see them in the first place.

And if you want to see what's the outcome of public policy laid on the basis of blame, you need not look further than our neighbours. I am sure you are familiar with the outcome of that particular experiment.

Interestingly, perhaps one should investigate connection between the level of urban violence to income inequity - and see if there are any links.

AoD

 

[Whoaccio]

Interestingly, perhaps one should investigate connection between the level of urban violence to income inequity - and see if there are any links.

In a way, doesn't this sort of jive with Tewder's point? You are right to point out income inequality -not absolute income- as one of the most often correlated factors to violent crime. But relative income inequality in itself is a meaningless statistic, or at least not a very good one. By that I mean that if absolute poverty levels were the determinant, we could make plausible assumptions (poverty=crime) and solutions would be plentiful (make people richer). All the inequality aside, someone living in Jane and Finch still has a standard of living comparable to, say, a middle class neighborhood in Bombay or Shanghai in terms of income and access to services.

Given that there is no material difference between the two, that crime is inexcusable in one area but oddly predictable in another reinforces Tewder's emphasis on societal expectations. It isn't poverty or poor services per se that lead people to crime, but their individual perceptions of the world around them. I think most people can, if not excuse, then understand romanticized criminals who steal to feed their families and such. But, in Toronto, the crime is based on silly societal concepts as opposed to actual well being. This guy didn't start a shootout on the subway to feed his family or something, he did it to make a point. If society at large doubled or triples it's wealth, and the relative position of this guy remained the same, he would still have the same point to make.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Whoaccio:

All the inequality aside, someone living in Jane and Finch still has a standard of living comparable to, say, a middle class neighborhood in Bombay or Shanghai in terms of income and access to services.

Income inequity within a society - not compared to some nation that has no bearing to the individual in question. It's like saying Japan or Sweden or Switzerland should have no crime because compared Lagos, Nigeria because they have so much more access to resources or services. Crime is relatively low in the said societies not only because of high absolute wealth, but also high level of equality. The opposite of the spectrum could be places like Rio, Sao Paulo - where it's not exactly poor as a whole, but the wealth is so unevenly distributed.

This guy didn't start a shootout on the subway to feed his family or something, he did it to make a point. If society at large doubled or triples it's wealth, and the relative position of this guy remained the same, he would still have the same point to make.

The actual act of the shooting is less relevant than the conditions that lead to the act - and I am saying there is probably a huge equity component to it. If society at large doubled or tripled its' wealth, I have a feeling the tension would be even more acute. Remember at a societal level you are more interested in lowering the overall rate of crime, not individual instances of such.

AoD

 

[lordmandeep]

Income inequity within a society - not compared to some nation that has no bearing to the individual in question. It's like saying Japan or Sweden or Switzerland should have no crime because compared Lagos, Nigeria because they have so much more access to resources or services. Crime is relatively low in the said societies not only because of high absolute wealth, but also high level of equality. The opposite of the spectrum could be places like Rio, Sao Paulo - where it's not exactly poor as a whole, but the wealth is so unevenly distributed.

Japan and Scandinavian countries have the highest suicide rates in the developed world though.

They have their problems too and are not perfect socialist utopias, you are trying to portray.

However, you are right, better people kill themselves then go shoot people on a subway.

The actual act of the shooting is less relevant than the conditions that lead to the act - and I am saying there is probably a huge equity component to it. If society at large doubled or tripled its' wealth, I have a feeling the tension would be even more acute. Remember at a societal level you are more interested in lowering the overall rate of crime, not individual instances of such.

However, it does not matter how poor you are, there is absolutely no justification for committing such an act.

My father and many of your ancestors came with hardly nothing to this country and faced racism and all that, but did act like idiots and started shooting on a subway.

The problem is instead of telling these people that what you people do is wrong. You guys bring up crack pot stories trying to see how their actions could be justified.

You know what, go to hell!



The problem is instead of telling these people that what you guys do is wrong. You guys bring up crack pot stories trying to see how their actions could be justfied.

 

[MisterF]

Nobody's trying to justify shooting someone on the subway But there are reasons for people turning to a life of crime. What those reasons are is debatable but there are reasons. And the best way to reduce crime is to address those reasons. Proactive is always better than reactive.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Who says a two-parent family is the same as a strong family?

I'll agree there. I would revise my original comment then to say that the reduction of strong families is partly to blame here. We've always had poverty, in fact in the late 19th and early 20th centuries the disparity of income between the haves and have nots was massive. But I've never heard of some poor kid from the Jewish ghetto that was Kesington Market shooting up a streetcar in 1920's Toronto.

Today's Toronto, as always, has huge poverty in its immigrant class. But for some reason, it is primarily our young, male, Caribbean-descendant black population that is involved in these public shoot outs. We've got poor Sikhs, poor Africans, poor Asians, etc, etc. but they're not shooting up the town. So, what's going on here? If it's not family breakdown, what is it?

 

[Tewder]

The actual act of the shooting is less relevant than the conditions that lead to the act - and I am saying there is probably a huge equity component to it. If society at large doubled or tripled its' wealth, I have a feeling the tension would be even more acute. Remember at a societal level you are more interested in lowering the overall rate of crime, not individual instances of such.

AoD

If that were the case, wouldn't you expect to see violent crime more evenly dispersed between cultural groups? Demographically speaking we know that the majority of those committing this nature of crime are of the same cultural/ethnic background. 'Disadvantaged' individuals of other groups and communities are not resorting to the same behavior. This would imply a cultural cause as well as societal ones such as poverty, but would also imply that the cultural causes and not the societal ones will be key to understanding and addressing the problem.

 

[Urban Shocker]

I didn't see any bloodstains, heading home after the opera on Saturday night, so they seem to have done a good job of cleaning up. That poor young man, what an awful thing to happen.

 

[Mustapha]

Perhaps this young Black shooting crime thing will pass as they age out of it. Thirty years ago, it was Vietnamnese gangs shooting up Chinatown restaurants. The new supermarket on Dundas just west of Beverly - there used to be restaurants/nightclubs upstairs - there was a machine gunning here of a 'hoodlum' and his girlfriend. I wish I could remember his name - he was notorious and revelled in his reputation.

 

[unimaginative2]

We a need better police force. As you can see Toronto cops aren't exactly the brightest bunch.


LUCAS OLENIUK/TORONTO STAR
A parked police cruiser was hit by a Via Rail train late Jan. 24, 2009 at the tracks on Wallace Ave. near Rankin Cres. Police were on scene investigating and searching for a suspect in a robbery.The cruiser was parked on the tracks

http://www.thestar.com/article/576894

Wait a minute...What is that railcar? That looks like a Colorado rail car or something from the Rocky Mountaineer. Doesn't look like any VIA stock that I know of. Could it be a Renaissance car that they rebuilt as a sort of domeliner?