"Vancouver is Dying"....the most damning documentary about DTES issues.

[marsvolta]

Yup! Its better to have law and order and properly enforcing them then nothing at all. Men are not angels and need to know that when you do certain things, there are consequences.

read my previous post previous i just made... you know nothing about drug addiction.

and yes, we need to re-evaluate the treatment of those who are unable to hold a permanent residence or are serial small crime offenders due to mental issues or drug addiction. jails will NOT rehabilitate these people. these people need proper care and that care needs to be administered in an institutional environment even if they refuse that care. they should be held without the ability to leave that care unless approved by the medical profession. jails hold people only until their sentence is over. law enforcement is not set up to handle these cases.

 

[se7landrover97]

I believe that the past two mayors has done nothing to alleviate the lives of homeless people in DTES. They kinda like just letting them proliferate in the city to almost becoming uncontrollable. Look at Chinatown, neglected! It was once a glorious place. A serious approach needs to be done. Like relocating them and giving them livelihood and addressing their additions... I don't understand why the city put up injection centre within the city proper.🤔 Isn't it just encouraging them to more dependent on the City? Hope the new mayor can figure out what's best to do with these people..

 

[kd75]

Yup! Its better to have law and order and properly enforcing them then nothing at all. Men are not angels and need to know that when you do certain things, there are consequences.

Hum...Let me ask you this question, when you go out do not kill ,rape, and steal because you're afraid of going to prison or do you not do these things because you have no reason to?

 

[se7landrover97]

Hum...Let me ask you this question, when you go out do not kill ,rape, and steal because you're afraid of going to prison or do you not do these things because you have no reason to?

I won't do that bcoz I know they are wrong, there is no reason for me to do that and if I have any grievances with anybody, I know there are laws that will protect me if I am on the side of the law. I just try to be a good person not only to myself but to other people as well. Ofc, anybody can kill, rape and steal for whatever reason they may have. That's what laws are for. But what's that got to do with what I believe that there should be law and order?

 

[Drjohn]

Hum...Let me ask you this question, when you go out do not kill ,rape, and steal because you're afraid of going to prison or do you not do these things because you have no reason to?

So, now I understand. It's OK to kill rape and steal as long as you have a reason to do so.

Suddenly it all makes sense.

 

[kd75]

I won't do that bcoz I know they are wrong, there is no reason for me to do that and if I have any grievances with anybody, I know there are laws that will protect me if I am on the side of the law. I just try to be a good person not only to myself but to other people as well. Ofc, anybody can kill, rape and steal for whatever reason they may have. That's what laws are for. But what's that got to do with what I believe that there should be law and order?

Well, because most people on this planet just do not commit crime because of prison as you just admitted yourself " I just try to be a good person to other", which is pretty much what most of the people on this planet would say. What I am trying to show you which you also admitted ( you talked of grievances) is that when it comes to crime resolution there are other things to considerate to just the Law and the crime itself.
I will say this, every research done on the subject tend to show 2 things:
That when committing a crime an individual does not concern themselves with the specific penalty of the crime and more than often don't even know it.
And that even when balancing potential gains vs penalty, people tend choose the former ( for various reasons that I won't elaborate here).
As I have stated in one of my former message the United states between the 70's through the 90's offers a perfect example of the these tendencies. I would also add that crime which is a complex social process that involves many variables cannot be " resolved" by one simple sentence aka "Law and order".

 

[JimDandy]

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/her-loss-is-i...detachment-s-homeless-outreach-team-1.6114406

I corrected link above based on fedback below.

It's time we throw these homeless people in cell and keep them there until they have cleaned up and are ready to contribute to society. A whole camp of these useless people is worth the life of someone actully trying to serve her community.

JD

 

[kd75]

Yup! Its better to have law and order and properly enforcing them then nothing at all. Men are not angelsoed to know that when you do certain things, there are consequences.

And I would also be curious as to when and where the concept of law and order was applied and effectively resolved crime related issues? Even prisons who by definitions are spaces of Law and Order are actually some of the lawless places you'll find.

 

[appleomac]

And I would also be curious as to when and where the concept of law and order was applied and effectively resolved crime related issues? Even prisons who by definitions are spaces of Law and Order are actually some of the lawless places you'll find.

I've never seen three words (law and order) trigger someone so much before in my life. Listen mate, maybe you have some bias against those three words, or people that use it. But, you seem to be harping on jails/prisons not solving "crime related issues". Prisons (and yes, many many many Canadians have no issue with serious offenses being met with jail time) are not about solving "crime related issues" or "root causes of crime" or "factors that lead to criminal behaviour" or whatever. No offense, but you think too highly and/or seriously misunderstand what the prison system is about. It's about punishment for committing certain crimes. That's it. It's not about prevention - because, well, if we could prevent all crime we wouldn't need prisons now would we? Prevention is trying to stop it from happening. Prison is a result of something happening (i.e. certain crimes). You are trying to conflate the two. Apparently you blame the prison system for lack of prevention - but prisons were not designed to prevent crime. People just want those that commit serious offenses to face punishment (prison would be that punishment for certain crimes). So you can pull up all the US stats of incarceration not preventing crime, but I think you're missing the point. Incarceration is not about prevention - it's about punishment. So I guess, you can take comfort in the fact that you're technically correct - incarceration hasn't really ever prevented a crime. But, that's completely not the point - we incarcerate because they did commit a crime. Prevention is "before the fact" and prison is "after the fact." The after the fact mechanism (i.e. prison) cannot address the before the fact (i.e. prevention).

 

[Newb808]

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?h...xpBjCZlrSBgcBpbkMQsLXzvBfvbWkLXCDbVkmgHsnGFzL

It's time we throw these homeless people in cell and keep them there until they have cleaned up and are ready to contribute to society. A whole camp of these useless people is worth the life of someone actully trying to serve her community.

JD

Pretty sure this story was what you were trying to post JD(you posted an email link)

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/her-loss-is-i...detachment-s-homeless-outreach-team-1.6114406

RIP Constable Yang 😢

 

[kd75]

I've never seen three words (law and order) trigger someone so much before in my life. Listen mate, maybe you have some bias against those three words, or people that use it. But, you seem to be harping on jails/prisons not solving "crime related issues". Prisons (and yes, many many many Canadians have no issue with serious offenses being met with jail time) are not about solving "crime related issues" or "root causes of crime" or "factors that lead to criminal behaviour" or whatever. No offense, but you think too highly and/or seriously misunderstand what the prison system is about. It's about punishment for committing certain crimes. That's it. It's not about prevention - because, well, if we could prevent all crime we wouldn't need prisons now would we? Prevention is trying to stop it from happening. Prison is a result of something happening (i.e. certain crimes). You are trying to conflate the two. Apparently you blame the prison system for lack of prevention - but prisons were not designed to prevent crime. People just want those that commit serious offenses to face punishment (prison would be that punishment for certain crimes). So you can pull up all the US stats of incarceration not preventing crime, but I think you're missing the point. Incarceration is not about prevention - it's about punishment. So I guess, you can take comfort in the fact that you're technically correct - incarceration hasn't really ever prevented a crime. But, that's completely not the point - we incarcerate because they did commit a crime. Prevention is "before the fact" and prison is "after the fact." The after the fact mechanism (i.e. prison) cannot address the before the fact (i.e. prevention).

A lot of confused reading and interpretation on your part. I don't know how having a civil conversation with someone and ask him to clarify something is being trigged but sure... You make an entire paragraph about something I haven't written and make wrongful deductions, so I'll try to make it simple:
The main argument that I was arguing agains't is that "Law and Order" would somehow solve the issues of the DTES. The concept of Law and order includes the law itself, the police, and the prisons. I have pointed out that these three ( and therefore the entire concept) would not provide any good result whatsoever ( whether it is in term of prevention, or even in terms of punishment as you mentioned it). I have never made the statement that prisons were made for any purpose or even talked about the prison system ( you can quote me if you find it).

 

[SenClayDavis]

Pretty sure this story was what you were trying to post JD(you posted an email link)

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/her-loss-is-i...detachment-s-homeless-outreach-team-1.6114406

RIP Constable Yang 😢

Absolutely terrible and tragic news.

RIP to Constable Yang and condolences to her family and loved ones.

 

[appleomac]

A lot of confused reading and interpretation on your part. I don't know how having a civil conversation with someone and ask him to clarify something is being trigged but sure... You make an entire paragraph about something I haven't written and make wrongful deductions, so I'll try to make it simple:
The main argument that I was arguing agains't is that "Law and Order" would somehow solve the issues of the DTES. The concept of Law and order includes the law itself, the police, and the prisons. I have pointed out that these three ( and therefore the entire concept) would not provide any good result whatsoever ( whether it is in term of prevention, or even in terms of punishment as you mentioned it). I have never made the statement that prisons were made for any purpose or even talked about the prison system ( you can quote me if you find it).

People want, at minimum, for existing laws to be enforced. It's really that simple. No one cares "why" a bank robber pulled out a gun and robbed a bank. If such crime is committed, to the extent LE can find them, arrest, charge them and if convicted they go to jail. DTES or bank robbery - its no different. You try and use vagueness and asking foolish questions about why people murder or rape - that is irrelevant. People generally want laws enforced. If those same people say they want "law and order" - so be it, it's not an unreasonable ask/expectation. "Issues" with DTES are complex, but at minimum, people just want existing laws enforced. That will probably not "solve" DTES (that's an issue that has been going on for decades). And since the perception (and probably the reality) is that it is getting worse - more enforcement is what people want. It might not "solve" DTES - but at this point, people in Vancouver will at LEAST want to see it not getting worse still. There's a reason why we (should) enforce laws - if not, those laws are merely "suggestions." As far as many living in Vancouver are considered, too many laws/by-laws have become mere suggestions, such that things have gotten worse - it's only logical Vancouver would want "law and order" in view of things getting worse. Vancouverites have tried all the "progressive" things (pillars, harm reduction, stigma reduction, whatever) - and the public would say it hasn't worked. If the soft approach didn't work - oh well, as far as Vancouverites are concerned, they tried, it didn't help (and made things worse) - a little more enforcement (law and order) is now what they want. Get over it.

 

[JimDandy]

Pretty sure this story was what you were trying to post JD(you posted an email link)

https://bc.ctvnews.ca/her-loss-is-i...detachment-s-homeless-outreach-team-1.6114406

RIP Constable Yang 😢

You are correct.

JD

 

[kd75]

People want, at minimum, for existing laws to be enforced. It's really that simple. No one cares "why" a bank robber pulled out a gun and robbed a bank. If such crime is committed, to the extent LE can find them, arrest, charge them and if convicted they go to jail. DTES or bank robbery - its no different. You try and use vagueness and asking foolish questions about why people murder or rape - that is irrelevant. People generally want laws enforced. If those same people say they want "law and order" - so be it, it's not an unreasonable ask/expectation. "Issues" with DTES are complex, but at minimum, people just want existing laws enforced. That will probably not "solve" DTES (that's an issue that has been going on for decades). And since the perception (and probably the reality) is that it is getting worse - more enforcement is what people want. It might not "solve" DTES - but at this point, people in Vancouver will at LEAST want to see it not getting worse still. There's a reason why we (should) enforce laws - if not, those laws are merely "suggestions." As far as many living in Vancouver are considered, too many laws/by-laws have become mere suggestions, such that things have gotten worse - it's only logical Vancouver would want "law and order" in view of things getting worse. Vancouverites have tried all the "progressive" things (pillars, harm reduction, stigma reduction, whatever) - and the public would say it hasn't worked. If the soft approach didn't work - oh well, as far as Vancouverites are concerned, they tried, it didn't help (and made things worse) - a little more enforcement (law and order) is now what they want. Get over it.

I don't see how using existing data, and real life example is being vague but sure. In your precedent message you said that prison are only for punishment which you didn't substantiate which is vague). That's a false statement, one of prisons' use is deterrence, its why in the US ( I apologize for using the US again but sing we're talking about Law and order) they literally have state sponsored programs where at risk youth are taken to prison to get scared into not ending up in prison ( that's quite literally the definition of deterrence or prevention if you want).
You say people want law enforced, that's an understandable feeling and desire, you also said that what have been done didn't work, which I agree with. My entire point was, as I have said earlier, to point out that the approach of Law and Order which is a doctrine born in the south US in the 70's has never worked to achieve anything whether it was in the US or whether it was in Canada under Harper. I would even argue that this approach is rather dangerous for society. This last point is an opinion and that you can disagree with ( I would be more than happy to have a long argumentation about it), but the fact of the matter is ( I hope we can at least agree on this) that crime in general and the particular example of the DTES are complex issues that cannot and will not be resolved by a simple and simplistic answer aka Law and Order. It would also appear to me that you have jumped in the middle of my interactions, and aren't really talking about the same thing as I was. The doctrine of Law and order is a widely different than just wanting laws apply, so maybe we are not talking about the exact same thing...

 

[appleomac]

I don't see how using existing data, and real life example is being vague but sure. In your precedent message you said that prison are only for punishment which you didn't substantiate which is vague). That's a false statement, one of prisons' use is deterrence, its why in the US ( I apologize for using the US again but sing we're talking about Law and order) they literally have state sponsored programs where at risk youth are taken to prison to get scared into not ending up in prison ( that's quite literally the definition of deterrence or prevention if you want).
You say people want law enforced, that's an understandable feeling and desire, you also said that what have been done didn't work, which I agree with. My entire point was, as I have said earlier, to point out that the approach of Law and Order which is a doctrine born in the south US in the 70's has never worked to achieve anything whether it was in the US or whether it was in Canada under Harper. I would even argue that this approach is rather dangerous for society. This last point is an opinion and that you can disagree with ( I would be more than happy to have a long argumentation about it), but the fact of the matter is ( I hope we can at least agree on this) that crime in general and the particular example of the DTES are complex issues that cannot and will not be resolved by a simple and simplistic answer aka Law and Order. It would also appear to me that you have jumped in the middle of my interactions, and aren't really talking about the same thing as I was. The doctrine of Law and order is a widely different than just wanting laws apply, so maybe we are not talking about the exact same thing...

So now your point is that it doesn't deter? Recidivsim rates in Canada is about 25%. That means, 75% of those incarcerated don't re-offend. Not perfect, but 75% is a decent batting average. Now, if the other 25% do re-offend - nobody should have an issue that they're sent to prison again. You are using your subject definition of "law and order" to try and say, well, absolutely nothing. The average Vancouverite that wants "law and order" just want laws to be enforced. If you can't accept that, so be it - it's a free country.

 

[Drjohn]

So now your point is that it doesn't deter? Recidivsim rates in Canada is about 25%. That means, 75% of those incarcerated don't re-offend. Not perfect, but 75% is a decent batting average. Now, if the other 25% do re-offend - nobody should have an issue that they're sent to prison again. You are using your subject definition of "law and order" to try and say, well, absolutely nothing. The average Vancouverite that wants "law and order" just want laws to be enforced. If you can't accept that, so be it - it's a free country.

Our friend kd75 is so woke he/she can't see the forest for the trees.
Pretty sad.

 

[kd75]

So now your point is that it doesn't deter? Recidivsim rates in Canada is about 25%. That means, 75% of those incarcerated don't re-offend. Not perfect, but 75% is a decent batting average. Now, if the other 25% do re-offend - nobody should have an issue that they're sent to prison again. You are using your subject definition of "law and order" to try and say, well, absolutely nothing. The average Vancouverite that wants "law and order" just want laws to be enforced. If you can't accept that, so be it - it's a free country.

You just proved to me that you either haven't read all of my messages or twisted them in a way that even I can't understand them. Of course that was my point from the beginning, if you didn't understand that I'm sorry but that's on you. The definition that I have provided of the concept of Law and order is not subjective ( you can find it on Wikipedia or any other source if you want). " Get over it"... really?. Your last point proves you haven't read my entire message because I literally acknowledge that... I would also be interested to know where you find these statistics too, and would like to point out that you talk about recidivism which I have not talked about, deterrence is not solely based on people already in the system ( aka inmates who get out). I will say this for the last time: The doctrine of Law and Order ( which have been derived in various countries) is widely different than just wanting laws apply, so again if you're not talking about this Concept which was "born" in the US and adapted by Harper, we aren't talking about the exact same thing.

 

[kd75]

Our friend kd75 is so woke he/she can't see the forest for the trees.
Pretty sad.

Now I feel insulted, please call me anything but woke ahaha. Plus I don't see how stating that Law and Order doesnt work makes me woke ( whatever that means). Because I haven't said much apart from that lol.

 

[appleomac]

You just proved to me that you either haven't read all of my messages or twisted them in a way that even I can't understand them. Of course that was my point from the beginning, if you didn't understand that I'm sorry but that's on you. The definition that I have provided of the concept of Law and order is not subjective ( you can find it on Wikipedia or any other source if you want). " Get over it"... really?. Your last point proves you haven't read my entire message because I literally acknowledge that... I would also be interested to know where you find these statistics too, and would like to point out that you talk about recidivism which I have not talked about, deterrence is not solely based on people already in the system ( aka inmates who get out). I will say this for the last time: The doctrine of Law and Order ( which have been derived in various countries) is widely different than just wanting laws apply, so again if you're not talking about this Concept which was "born" in the US and adapted by Harper, we aren't talking about the exact same thing.

The average Vancouverite that wants "law and order" are not talking about intellectual mental masturbation gymnastics about "but what is law and order?" - they just want laws enforced. And if Canadian recidivism rates do not suffice for you in terms of "evidence" of deterrence, well, Canada also has one of the lowest incarceration rates in the world. The majority (the vast VAST majority) of Canadians will never step onto a correctional facility (let alone in one). You bringing up the US is asinine - our incarceration rates are something like 125 per 100,000 people (closer to 700 in the US). We don't have private prisons, our sentencing guidelines specifically state that imprisonment is a last resort tool, we give judges (generally) discretion in sentencing (which includes alternatives to incarceration), etc., etc., etc. Stop attempting to make the false equivalency that we are the US. Again, you can talk about Wiki definitions all you want - talk to the average Vancouverite, they aren't talking about massive public policy stuff grand schemes type of stuff, they just have the simple (and reasonable) expectation that laws be enforced.