Pets.ca - Pet forum for dogs cats and humans 

-->

Liberals plan of action in Murder City

seeker
December 28th, 2005, 06:32 PM
Dalton: UH Michael can we do anything about the killings on Toronto ?
Micheal B. We did I banned Pitbulls , the city is safe .

wdawson
December 28th, 2005, 07:14 PM
and they think that banning handguns will solve the problem.........bet the guys from the shooting the other day are gettin ready to turn in those guns.

twodogsandacat
December 28th, 2005, 07:35 PM
Are you saying you DON’T feel safer with the pit bull ban in effect?

BTW: A co-worker who lives in the country received a late night phone call from his neighbour last week. Her husband was at work so he was the closest help at hand. It seems as she tried to sit down on the couch that her Golden Retriever was already laying on it attacked her – again. This time it went for her face. She will need extensive plastic surgery and the dog will be put down.

The dog was quarantined but of course did not make the paper.

The first two letters in BSL are B and S. Coincidence – I think not. This Liberal government has done nothing other than ban pit bulls and they feel they are doing a good job? Give me a beak.

babyrocky1
December 28th, 2005, 08:12 PM
My daughter was on Younge street the when it happened, she was a maybe a block away!!!! She heard all the shots. Im now afraid when she shopping, shes supposed to return a broken phone she bought there, it was m y Xmas present but I think Ill keep it! but yeah our "pit bull" is muzzled. Too bad the liberals arent, expecially in this riding! :eek:

seeker
December 28th, 2005, 09:25 PM
they feel they are doing a good job?

I am counting on this single fact to be be their downfall .

twodogsandacat
December 28th, 2005, 11:33 PM
I just watched the news and I know every life is precious but I couldnít help but thinking that the girl who was killed was absolutely beautiful. What a waste.

StaceyB
December 28th, 2005, 11:35 PM
and only 15

twodogsandacat
December 29th, 2005, 12:41 AM
and only 15

Oh that could be misinterpreted couldnít it?

Just to clarify I meant absolutely beautiful in a clean-cut whole life ahead of her way and what a waste of such a young and beautiful life for simply being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Nothing more, nothing less.

Prin
December 29th, 2005, 01:06 AM
LOL how PC do we have to be to not be able to say that a girl is beautiful? :D But I know what you meant. It sort of adds an extra innocence to her.

StaceyB
December 29th, 2005, 08:26 AM
I guess I am not getting it.

chico2
December 29th, 2005, 09:08 AM
As usual,mayor Miller,Dalton want more funding for community centers etc...do they honestly believe these killers are going to reverse their criminal life and go to community centers and sit and paint by numbers:confused:
As the police-chief said,they arrest these killers and 2 days later they are back on the streets.
These guys are well aware,they will most likely not get caught and if they are,will serve minimal time in jail..
As for the young beautiful girl who's life was snuffed out in a second,it's an enormous tragedy,but the way the papers write it,it's as if were the victim ugly and not a sportstar,it would not be such a great loss:confused: It always baffles me..
My only hope is,our government will see a murder as a murder and put the perps away for a very long time,there are no excuses for total disregard of human life....many of us,me included,had a miserable childhood,it's up to the person to choose the right path in life and stop blaming society,nothing comes on a silver-platter...

BullLover
December 29th, 2005, 01:10 PM
Maybe instead of working so hard to ban hand guns, they should keep people in jail and not let d***heads like this out on bail.....That might be a start at solving this problem. Maybe if they didn't spend so much time working on banning something ridiculous (pitbulls) and worked on the inner city problems. Too bad the fiberals let it slide for way too long that it's beginning to get out of control now.

twodogsandacat
December 29th, 2005, 06:14 PM
McGuinty finally opens his mouth - I guess it just took the first 51 gun violence victims in Toronto for him to clue in.......way to stand up for the white guy Dalton.

As terrible as this last killing is the reality is that the city of Toronto has been waiting for the McGuinty government to do something. For two years there has been a gun (gang) problem in Toronto and this moron bans pit bulls 'to make Ontario communities safer". Iím sure that the gang members are shaking in their boots now that McGuinty has written an open letter to the leaders of the four federal parties.

Take some responsibility Mr. McGuinty. This is not an American problem, not a federal problem, not a city of Toronto problem, not a black problem....it is our problem and if you donít have any solutions step down and let somebody else do what you were elected to doÖ.lead.

****************************************


Attention News Editors:

An open letter from Premier McGuinty to federal leaders on gun crimes
TORONTO, Dec. 29 /CNW/ -

Dear Prime Minister Martin, Mr. Harper, Mr. Layton and Mr. Duceppe:

Earlier this week, in the middle of a holiday season that should be
filled with family, friends and happiness, the life of one young woman was
taken and six others were injured in a downtown Toronto shooting spree. As you
are very much aware, this is only the latest in a series of shootings that
continue to kill and injure.
I know you share my deep concern and determination to do all we can to
make our streets safer.
Effectively addressing guns and gangs will require a renewed and
sustained effort on the part of all levels of government working together with
our police. Among other things, we need to address the inadequacy of Canada's
criminal penalties for gun-related crimes. It is in this vein that I am
writing to you.
While any effective plan to address gun crimes must be comprehensive in
nature and address both the causes of crime as well as the crime itself, part
of any such plan must include severe penalties.
Only severe penalties can clearly convey the gravity of gun-related
crimes and our society's intolerance for them.
On behalf of Ontarians, I am asking for your commitment to move as
quickly as possible under the new Parliament to amend the Criminal Code in
order to:

- Impose a ban on handguns
- Impose a mandatory minimum sentence of four years for illegal
possession of a handgun
- Impose increased mandatory minimum sentences for all gun crimes
- Create two new Criminal Code offences with mandatory minimum sentences
for robbery with the intent to steal a gun and for breaking and
entering with the intent to steal a gun
- Impose a reverse onus on bail for all gun crimes, and
- Set more severe penalties for any breach of bail conditions.

We must - and will - continue to work together on behalf of all Ontarians
to ensure our communities are safe. This work can only succeed if we build on
a criminal justice system that treats gun crimes with the severity they
deserve.

Yours truly,

Dalton McGuinty
Premier

c: His Worship David Miller, Mayor, City of Toronto
Chief William Blair, Toronto Police Service
Chief Armand La Barge, President, Ontario Association of Chiefs of
Police
Mr. John Tory, Leader, Ontario PC Party
Mr. Howard Hampton, Leader, Ontario NDP Party

seeker
December 29th, 2005, 06:59 PM
Think about what your are about to read before you reject the idea.
Unfortunately the System has been designed so that the criminal element can use it to their advantage in order to get out and reoffend. Because of the general publics fear of these criminals we ask our polititians to create more laws to keep them from harming us.In doing so we give the polititians a free hand to take away more and more of our rights one step at a time. The design of this system keeps us in "fear" of our lives and the lives of the ones we know and love.We have no confidence that a murder, rapist, pedofile or other hard criminal will stay in jail and that creates fear.
Be wary when someone makes a statment that includes the words "For the common good" because it means more rights will be taken from you. Last year it was pitbulls , this year it is handguns and the general public is with it because of "FEAR" .
These people that killed the girl will likely be caught and when they are it will probably be discoverd that that least some of them had priors. Video cameras will likely be praised in helping find these criminals and a cry for more street video cameras will be heard. A rally will ensue by the police and polititians and the public will be sold on the idea just like the media campaign we all witnessed last year with the dogs. To be honest it sounds like a good idea because right now I "fear" going to the city but the problem could be solved if the criminals that are released on a regular basis were locked up permanently, deported or if you support it executed .{Be clear I am not saying I support that} The system does not allow that solution criminals are released so that they can reoffend and only in the very extreme cases are they locked up for a long time {Bernardo}or permanently disposed of by staying in prison until they die. Because they reoffend judges and lawyers continue to make extremely large amounts of money and polititans when they leave public office go back to being employed buy the justice system .
Now let me clarify this a little . None of what I wrote here were my words other than what I mentioned about the current events .Sometime in the mid 80's I read an editorial in a very largely circulated magazine while sitting waiting to see an optometrist .It was in refernce to laws being passed in the US that were against there constitution . It stated how lawmakers were getting away with taking rights away and how the politics of lawmaking in general perpetuated crime. At the time I though it was interesting but not realistic however over the years I have consistently thought of that article whenever a crisis like the one on boxing day occurs as well as when laws pass that take the rights of the general public away for the common good.
Many laws have been past since I read that about 20 years ago yet I see the problems getting worse and rights being removed constantly and the only effect seems to be "more crime".
There doesn't seem to be a solution but we keep hearing calls for more laws more police less guns and on and on. When the real solution is that once you have been proven to have commited certain crimes that your rights to plea bargaining to a lesser crime is removed , you do your time with no chance or early parole , no credit for time spent awaiting a trail and if the cop didn't cross a "T" or dot an "I" it doesn't get you off if all other evidence shows guilt.But that cannot happen because our charter does not allow it .
That charter was designed by Mr Trudeau a polititian and also a lawyer. The same man that ensured the protection of our youth by creating "the young offenders act " Which should be renamed
"the future criminal generation act".

Schwinn
December 30th, 2005, 10:14 AM
The guy should be called Houdini. Everything is slight of hand. He has no effective solutions, so he's laying blame on the federal government. If it was a federal problem, would it not stand to reason that this would be happening over the entire country?

He seems to think banning everything is the solution. No, it's window dressing, grandstanding for the public ("Look! WE'RE doing something!"). Originally, I was for banning hand guns. There is no reason for anyone to carry a hand gun down the street. That being said, I like guns, and I like shooting guns (hmmm...maybe I should be careful saying that, since I want to be a cop! :D ). I don't hunt, but the few times I was target shooting, I've enjoyed it. I have a friend who is an expert marksman at a local gun club. These are the only people who, right now, are legally using guns. The gangbangers who are shooting people, are already using illegal handguns. So banning them, really won't make a difference. And really, he's contradicting himself, as well. How is banning handguns going to stop illegal guns coming across the border? I've heard him several times mention "illegal guns coming from the US". So, if they are coming in illegally, aren't they arlready, technically, banned? Or maybe he's really on to something here. He's a genius!

We've now solved our drug problems! We'll ban crack and meth! I know of a neighbourhood that has a problem with break-ins. No problem, lets ban burglary!!

Also, he keeps talking about hiring more cops. I wish how he'd explain they are going to hire additional cops when they can't even replace them as fast as they are losing them due to class size. The college can only train so many at any one time, and until something is done to address that, we aren't going to see additional cops on the streets for some time.

doggy lover
December 30th, 2005, 04:11 PM
Banning hand guns will not solve the problem, we need tougher laws! That poor girl could have been my daughter, my thoughts go to her family. It must be awful to be them, I couldn't even emagine what they are going through. If I was her parent I would want BLOOD for what they did, no mercy from me I'd hang the *******s.

chico2
December 30th, 2005, 04:36 PM
It's ok to blame Dalton McGuinty if it makes you feel better and I agree,banning guns is not going to solve gang-killings,however I cannot see why anyone needs to own a gun.
The real blame lies with the murderous thugs who snuffed out a young womans life.
Like DoggyLover says,were it my daughter I would want blood.As a parent,aside from the terrible loss,they will now have to suffer through the frustrations of watching our justicesystem dilly-dally with these thugs(if they are caught!),instead of locking them up for the rest of their lives.

seeker
December 30th, 2005, 07:10 PM
There are a lot of things we don't need to own guns , 400hp cars , dogs , computers and the list is endless . Guns can kill in the wrong hands , cars kill everyday ,dogs attack , computers are used buy pedophiles to distribute kiddie porn . If you are following where I am going you will see that the problem is not with the object or animal in question but with the owner/user. Guns were banned in Austrailia now criminals know for a fact there will be no resistance if they have a gun so armed robberies in certain parts of the country have actually increased .
I have a right to own any of the presently legal items mentioned above and just because guns are being abused by a very small minority of people in one part of our country is not a reason to ban them. Guns,cars,dogs and computers are in no way harmful to the public unless they are abused by bad people.
Mandatory sentences for gun related crimes or illegal possesion , no plea barganing ,no light sentencing is the only answer . Almost everyone of these killers has prior gun related offences tagged to their history .
One day after this killing on boxing day a Toronto judge set $50,000 bail for a 23 year old that has been charged with 1st degree murder gun related of course. This was an appeal case because the first judge denied bail . The accussed simply tried another judge until he found one that let him out .
The 20 year old that is held in connection with the murder on Monday is on probation for a robbery and ordered not to posses a handgun . Do you think he maybe robbed with a handgun before ? WHAT is that all about ?
It is about this the criminal code is nothing more than an assurance that what I posted about yesterday will continue , lawers,judges and the like will make tons of money and polititians will continue to remove our rights one by one .

twodogsandacat
December 30th, 2005, 07:31 PM
The guns in the article below were smuggled across the Canadian border in Fort Erie. What you may not know is that years ago due to some cost cutting by the Liberal government (Federal) the RCMP stopped patrolling the Niagara border. The unarmed border guards now call the local Niagara Regional Police Service when they need somebody with a gun to back them up as they strap on their vests and make sure they have their 4D flashlight at the ready (the only weapon they are allowed to carry).

Contact your MP and tell them to secure your border because the police presence at the border is currently provided by the NRPS, funded by Niagara’s property taxpayers such as myself and I for one find this unacceptable. This is an international border and it should be protected by full time armed employees.

As Schwinn said banning guns isn’t the answer when the very government responsible for protecting the border say that half of the guns used in these crimes are illegally smuggled. I will never own a gun but I see the ban as nothing but smoke and mirrors. That how I saw it when Bryant suggested (as one of his crown attorneys was busy NOT appealing the bail for a gun criminal who then acquired and used another illegal gun) it’s how I see it when Martin suggested it (and then gave the Provinces the option to opt in or out of the ban).

Get some police on the streets as promised two years ago by the McGuinty government and make some arrests. Make good solid cases and give the prosecutors the resources (time and money) to make sure these scum go to jail and stay there.

Not even blood would satisfy me if that were my child.

http://www.cnn.com/2005/US/08/13/canada.weapons/
Weapons arrest at U.S.-Canadian border
Two Canadians allegedly tried to bring guns, ammo from United States
Saturday, August 13, 2005
(CNN) -- Two men tried to re-enter Canada from the United States early Saturday with handguns and ammunition strapped to their bodies, Canadian police said.
Ali Dirie, 22, and Yasin Mohamed, 23 -- both Canadians from the Toronto area -- face weapons-related charges and are in police custody in Niagara Falls, Ontario, according to a police statement. Ontario's Provincial Weapons Enforcement Team and the Niagara Regional Police Service are investigating.
Detective Sgt. Shawn Clarkson, of the Niagara Regional Police Service, would not say what led border officers to search the men.
The men's vehicle underwent a routine search at about 5:40 a.m. at Peace Bridge, which links Buffalo, New York, with Fort Erie, Ontario.
Smuggling U.S. guns into Canada, where gun restrictions are much tighter, has been a common problem.
Niagara Regional Police Chief Wendy Southall said the arrests demonstrate "how many enforcement agencies working together contribute to the safety of communities beyond any local jurisdiction."
"Border security and the flow of illegal guns into Canada affect us all," she said.

seeker
December 31st, 2005, 07:30 AM
Twodogsandacat . You mentioned lax border patrolling and only this morning on Radio610 I hear that the border patrol data base computer doesn't list even 10% of the known criminals that the police data computer has listed. They went on to mention that is a big part of why criminals and guns are getting into Canada easily .If the news media has picked this up the criminals have known about it for a long time , probably not long after the government cut the funding.The public is the last to know and the criminals the first.
My comment is this . It is just another example of the powers that be knowing about a problem and doing nothing about it until these people offend or reoffend .It perpetuates the legal system.

twodogsandacat
December 31st, 2005, 11:43 AM
I have friends that have worked the Niagara border crossings and they indicate that the US has far more accurate and timely information on Canadian citizens than the Canadian side have.

In fact any criminal driving over to the States to by guns and bring them back is more likely to be stopped going over than coming back.

We once crossed into Buffalo with a U Haul trailer that although empty was opened up. Later that day we returned with furniture and appliances from her grandmother’s house. The items were duty free as they were similar to inheritance. They did not open the back.

It’s time we got serious and gave the border the tools, the funding they need. It’s also time people had as much fear of Canadian border guards as they do of the American border guards.

Last year a police chase occurred in Niagara Falls NY. Three or four American cruisers flew across the border and the chase continued on Canadian soil. A woman was killed. If Canadian police cars tried to run the American border the story would of ended differently – right there at the border.

Government leaders can talk all they want but the reality is we have a weak border. Canadians are so quick to point out when it is mentioned that some of the 911 terrorists may of came from Canada that it was still the US who let them in, albeit from Canada. The same is true in reverse with guns. The guns are coming in, not out so the US is not the issue we are.

The Americans want us to use passports to cross the border in the coming years. This will be bad for tourism and the McGuinty government is trying to convince them that a drivers license is secure and should be honoured as proof of citizenship. Then we find out that in what McGuinty called 'leakage' that some fifty thousand drivers licenses may be comprimised due to lax controls within the Ontario system. Still we wonder how these guns get in? It's a freakin border in name only.

chico2
December 31st, 2005, 02:12 PM
We have been crossing the border every year for,probably 20yrs and have never been checked(knock on wood)we always bring back a truckload(SUV)of stuff and it could easily have been an arsenal of guns,but then again,we look very innocent and angelic:angel:

gdamadg
December 31st, 2005, 03:02 PM
Canadians are so quick to point out when it is mentioned that some of the 911 terrorists may of came from Canada that it was still the US who let them in, albeit from Canada.

I'm glad someone brought this up. Post 9/11, both the American and Our Federal Governments made promises to increase "border security". One of them, held up to the promise and it wasn't ours. Our Government is continuously fixing problems with quick fixes and powder coating. As I work in the Federal Government, I know large scale problems like this can't be fixed over night. But it has been years and as soon as things got quiet, they changed gears and the subject.

People don't like to think about it, but our Security and the Security of our neighbors falls in our hands as the people that run this country. Not the politicians, they are supposed to be our "puppets". We have many major issues at hand right now, ie: gun and drug smuggling, illegal immigration, unknowingly harbouring terrorists, and a justice system is designed to aid all involved in said issues.

We are at a crossroads in Federal Politics in this country, and in order to solve some major issues we are going to have to make sacrifices. You have to ask yourself what issues are the most important to you.

babyrocky1
January 4th, 2006, 10:58 PM
. That being said, I like guns, and I like shooting guns (hmmm...maybe I should be careful saying that, since I want to be a cop! :D ). I don't hunt, but the few times I was target shooting, I've enjoyed it. I have a friend who is an expert marksman at a local gun club. These are the only people who, right now, are legally using guns. .Originally I was for banning handguns too but then Gdamadg,sp? reminded me of what another friend had told me and now what you are saying Schwinn, and that is that the restrictions on owning handguns are very tight, and she mentioned that if she did obtain a liscence, which she never did, that she would have to keep the gun locked up somewhere other than her home, (not sure where) so what are the facts surrounding legal ownership of hand guns, forinstance, is it true that if you are in a gun club, you keep the gun locked at the shooting range? Does anyone know the laws surrounding storage of them? if the laws really are that tight then I would agree that there is no sence in banning them and it is more political hype but if one can just keep a hand gun in thier home, whereever they choose, then that makes me feel entirely differently. My daughter was on young st that day, less than a block away when it happened! I would like to know exactly were those guns came from.

Schwinn
January 5th, 2006, 09:12 AM
I'm trying to remember what I was told. I do believe she is allowed to have the gun in her home (because I believe she does competitions in other venues), but it is only allowed "out" for the purpose of transportation to the gun club. As well, the gun must be kept in the trunk, and the ammunition must be kept in the car during transportation. She must go straight to the club, and straight home while transporting (not even stopping at Timmy's!), and the gun must be stored in a locked box (the box is basically a mini safe) the entire time except while at the club.

I'm actually pretty okay with our laws about gun ownership. I'd be willing to bet that the number of gun crimes committed with guns which started out in Canada legally would be very low.

doggy lover
January 5th, 2006, 09:18 AM
A friend of mine owns a handgun and when he moved he had to go to the police and let them know that he was moving the gun and to where. I think our laws are strict enough on the legal guns its the punks with the illegal ones that laws should be made stricter on.

gdamadg
January 5th, 2006, 02:33 PM
http://www.cfc-cafc.gc.ca/info_for-renseignement/factsheets/restricted_e.asp

Here is a link to the Canadian Firearms Centre's website factsheets on restricted firearms (some handguns).

http://laws.justice.gc.ca/en/F-11.6/SOR-98-209/index.html

And that's the one on Storage, Display, Transportation and Handling of Firearms by Individuals Regulations from the Justice Canada website. You can keep your handguns in your home, but they have to be stored as detailed below. But in order to fire them it has to be at a registered range and you have to be a member of a gun club, which applies for the Authorization to Transport papers for you.

Here is the excerpt from the Justice site.
STORAGE OF RESTRICTED FIREARMS


6. An individual may store a restricted firearm only if

(a) it is unloaded;

(b) it is

(i) rendered inoperable by means of a secure locking device and stored in a container, receptacle or room that is kept securely locked and that is constructed so that it cannot readily be broken open or into, or

(ii) stored in a vault, safe or room that has been specifically constructed or modified for the secure storage of restricted firearms and that is kept securely locked; and

(c) it is not readily accessible to ammunition, unless the ammunition is stored, together with or separately from the firearm, in

(i) a container or receptacle that is kept securely locked and that is constructed so that it cannot readily be broken open or into, or

(ii) a vault, safe or room that has been specifically constructed or modified for the secure storage of restricted firearms and that is kept securely locked.


Oh and I almost forgot, you can call 1-800-731-4000 for any questions regarding the Firearms Act.

babyrocky1
January 5th, 2006, 05:16 PM
Thanks for all of the Info. When you even get part way through that you can see that banning handguns is a waste of time, yet, I was going to say if you asked me a month ago I would have said banning them is a necessatiy, but then I did say that didn't I? The thing is most people would not realise that these restrictions are already in place and so ofcourse the reaction would be the same as mine, get rid of em! We imagine ending up on the WRONG side of a Michael Moore documentary! One thing this pit bull ban has taght me, and thats you shouldn't just react on an issue cause chances are, if your only getting info from the news or the politicans, you have no idea whats really going on!

twodogsandacat
January 5th, 2006, 05:49 PM
Now all this sounds good but for one thing……they already promised 1000 new police officers as an election promise. Once again another Liberal REANNONCEMENT. They promise, they don’t deliver – they save money. They promise again and they don’t deliver – they save more money and they get free press for another announcement. Now they promise again. Once again they get the press. Write letters and give them the press they deserve.

If Kanye West (the singer who said Mr. Bush doesn’t care about black people after New Orleans) was a citizen of Ontario I’m pretty sure he would say: “Premier McGuinty doesn’t care about black people”. He wouldn’t be far off.

Don’t hold your breathe for that $51 million to be spent. Bryant announced more police and more justices months ago and just today in another Star article judges were complaining that a courts backlog was working against them.

As for Bryant saying he has advised crown attorneys to oppose bail he said in the house just last month when John Tory asked why a gun criminal (alleged) didn't have bail opposed that it wasn;t proper to advise crown attorneys to act. This guy just gets creepier everyday.

Ladies and gentlemen I give you the latest McGuinty lie.

************************************************** ***

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1136462587132&call_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154&t=TS_Home

Ontario to hire new cops, Crowns
Jan. 5, 2006. 03:54 PM
CANADIAN PRESS

Police and prosecutors are getting more ammunition to fight rising gun violence on Toronto’s streets under new Ontario government initiatives introduced today.

In response to 52 gun deaths in the city last year, Premier Dalton McGuinty unveiled a $51-million package that includes expedited police recruit training, construction of a $26-million gangs-and-guns operations centre, and $5 million for Toronto police, which could be used to install public surveillance cameras.

In the courts, 31 more Crown prosecutors dedicated to gun crimes will be hired, as well as three new judges who will deal specifically with cases involving multiple defendants. Also, Attorney General Michael Bryant has directed all of Ontario’s Crown prosecutors to oppose bail for anyone charged with a gun crime.

While McGuinty said he’ll soon introduce more steps to help prevent youths from turning to gangs and guns, today’s announcement was clearly intended to send a message he’s getting tougher on crime.

“Should they make the wrong choice — should they choose to become a criminal with a gun — then we will work as hard as we can, together with our police, our prosecutors and our courts, to arrest them, to prosecute them and to jail them for a long time,” McGuinty said.

Concerned residents have been waiting months for a provincial government response to the recent wave of shootings in Toronto and the rest of the province.

One black activist suggested this week that the premier did not decide to act until the fatal Boxing Day shooting of a white girl — 15-year-old Jane Creba — following dozens of gun deaths of black youths.

McGuinty denied Creba’s death was the catalyst, saying details of today’s announcement have been in the works since Dec. 1, when he met with Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair and Ontario Provincial Police Commissioner Gwen Boniface.

McGuinty also called on federal leaders to amend the Criminal Code for gun crimes.

The Liberal premier wants a ban on all handguns — a platform of Prime Minister Paul Martin’s election campaign — and tougher sentences on gun crimes.

Federal Conservative Leader Stephen Harper pledged today that if elected, he’ll institute mandatory minimum prison terms of between five and 10 years for people convicted of major firearms offences.

For months, the province had said it would take until the end of 2007 to complete its 2003 election promise to hire 1,000 new police officers in Ontario.

McGuinty said new funding will get them trained and on the streets by the end of this year, including up to 151 new Toronto officers by this fall.

Conservative critic Garfield Dunlop said funding to speed up new police hires should have been allocated “months ago.”

However, Blair applauded efforts to expedite officer training, and encouraged youths from communities troubled by gang violence to consider becoming cops.

“We’re hiring,” the police chief said. “I ask them to consider a career in policing, and the opportunity is now before us to bring those people into our profession.”

Bryant said a directive to Crown attorneys to oppose bail was necessary, even though they were already advised to take such stances regarding any dangerous crimes.

But Toronto Mayor David Miller said such court measures should help act as deterrents.

“People have to know that if you have an illegal gun in this city you will be arrested, prosecuted and promptly put in jail,” Miller said.

New Democrat critic Michael Prue said the McGuinty government hasn’t addressed social housing concerns — such as in Toronto’s troubled Jane-Finch neighbourhood — that push youths into gangs as a way out.

David Mitchell of the Association of Black Law Enforcers was “disappointed” there were no new programs announced to deter youths from gang life.

“Unless we deal with the causes that give rise to pushing some of the at-risk young people into these circumstances, ... for every one of these (criminals) the new cops and new prosecutors lock up, there’s 10 waiting in the wings,” he said.

McGuinty’s announcement came the same day that Ottawa police introduced a gun amnesty program and a firearms task force to deal with a recent spate of shootings in the capital.

seeker
January 5th, 2006, 06:41 PM
Do they dare reneg on these promises ? The province and the city is watching .
I wonder how they will blame the Harris govenment when they don't follow up on this ?

Me and Kayla
January 5th, 2006, 11:58 PM
Do they dare reneg on these promises ? The province and the city is watching .
I wonder how they will blame the Harris govenment when they don't follow up on this ?

They stand on the platform of "We have had a balanced budget since we came into power". Don't hold your breath for any money to be spent on those empty promises! No matter what reforms or useless bans they put into place, they won't spend the money to back them up.

Schwinn
January 6th, 2006, 10:14 AM
I heard Police Chief Bill Blair on the news on the radio saying the same thing I've been saying since the Fibs have been blaring about hiring additional police--he can't put any more cops through training (classes are already full, and as I've said, they are already having a hard time keeping up just with replacing cops who are leaving), but it will give him the money to pay more overtime and put cops in different departments. Sooo...we're going to have to hope an already overworked force is willing to work more, and we're going to lose police in one division to cover another.

Am I the only one seeing through the BS? I find it frustrating that the media doesn't seem to be picking up on this.

chico2
January 6th, 2006, 05:00 PM
I do not blame anybody but the perpetrators of these murders,not even Harris,whom I hated the sight of.
Am I as a taxpayer going to pay more to support these thugs??Rehabilitate them??
We are all responsible for our own actions,as are they,whether they are black,white or green.
Yes,the people made a big deal of the young WHITE girl being killed and rightfully so,it was not because she was white,but because she was an innocent..a gangmember is a criminal and probably can at one point expect to be killed,am I going to cry for him,or hold a memorial-service??No!
I'll cry for his mother,who somewhere along the line lost touch with her son..
More money,guncontrol etc..is not going to stop these thugs,a hefty jailterm will,at least while he is in jail he will not shoot anybody else.IMHO

babyrocky1
January 6th, 2006, 05:37 PM
Chico, I totally agree with your post on the one side, the people that murder with guns or without should be held totally acountable, individually, for their actions, and they should be put away for life for committing murder. However, the talk, and thats probably all it is, from the various levels of governments, about what I would call "prevention" is critical. There are some people that are beyond rehabilitation, even at a young age, but we cant abandon all violent offenders. The fact is that if one is involved in a gun crime, excluding murder, they will not go to prison for life and we, as a society, have no choice but to deal with them, This simple fact means that we have to over-haul our whole system to accomodate real "rehabilitation" Prisons, are "life sentences" for everyone, society as well as the individual criminal, once a young person goes to prison, as in penitentiary, there is very little hope that that person will ever live as a "normal" member of society again, the recidivisim rate is astronomical so like it or not, compassion for the individual or not. We have to deal with the fact that they will return to soiciety and after being "institutionalized, they wll return to us much more dangerous thatn they started out.

babyrocky1
January 6th, 2006, 05:45 PM
This is one of the reasons that the prevention side is so important. People are not getting basic needs met, real ghettos have been created by a lack of funding and a lack of caring by governments. Infact not just by governments, by society in general I like to blame Harris for a lot of that, but he is a just a symptom. The public in general doesnt care about these people. They made that very clear by electing the Harris government, whom for once did exactly what they said they would and cut everything that would sustain the poor. One of the very first things he did was cancel all affordable housing project that were coming down the pipe line. Oh and to clarify, by housing projects, I dont mean housing "projects" Those places need to be done away with. The poor shouldn't be sentenced to live in these ghettos. They are part of society and should be integrated with everyone else. There are excellent programmes for affordable housing, programmes that have won awards from the UN, but they were all but done away with by the Harrisites!

chico2
January 6th, 2006, 05:59 PM
I understand what you mean,but some of these gangmembers are probably beyond rehabilitation.
Sure he'll be angry coming out of jail,but the person(s)he killed are dead and buried,robbed of there chance to live.
Ghettos are terrible places for young kids to grow up in and if our government really want to keep kids out of gangs,they have to start with little kids today,after-school programs,sports etc..seeing the parents cannot manage,or are not interested enough.

babyrocky1
January 6th, 2006, 06:12 PM
I understand what you mean,but some of these gangmembers are probably beyond rehabilitation.
Sure he'll be angry coming out of jail,but the person(s)he killed are dead and buried,robbed of there chance to live.
Ghettos are terrible places for young kids to grow up in and if our government really want to keep kids out of gangs,they have to start with little kids today,after-school programs,sports etc..seeing the parents cannot manage,or are not interested enough. Yes I agree totally about the ones who have taken a life, Im talking about the ones that more or less took a bad turn but still have a conscience. And yeah, thats what I mean, start with the kids now, before they get into trouble. I truly believe that if we were a more caring society, if our prioritys were a little different, we would not be seeing these horrible things as much as we are now. Alot of it does come from south of the border but it strikes a chord here now with the young because Canada has become a more ruthless society overall. Particualr groups do not feel respected or a part of things here. Education is absolutely not what it used to be, I have worked for the Toronto Board as well as taught privately and the difference in what the kids in public school get compared to private is not even comparable. The kids I taught in North Toronto almost without exception simply willl move on to a career, marry into a family the same as thier own and what pops into my head is to say maintain the "ruling" class. I dont believe our society has always been this divisive. It seems much more recent to me.

babyrocky1
January 6th, 2006, 06:16 PM
This is why I worry so much about Harper, I would much rather have the federal fibs, than a more powerful version of the Harris style tories. But then again, it doesnt much matter cause I dont vote for either of them;)

papillonmama
January 6th, 2006, 07:45 PM
Ghettos are terrible places for young kids to grow up in and if our government really want to keep kids out of gangs,they have to start with little kids today,after-school programs,sports etc..seeing the parents cannot manage,or are not interested enough.

The fact of the matter is, the cost of living in large cities is high. Not everyone who lives in a ghetto area lives off of welfare, or has subsidized housing, many families work in low paying jobs, and pay low to moderate rent, work paycheck to paycheck so that they can feed themselves and their kids, clothe themselves, pay the not-so affordable rent, in the crummy neighborhoods that their kids have to grow up, not by choice, because they have to. There are after-school programs available to them, and many go to these, they become involved with some of the kids that play there also, maybe they get steered in the wrong direction, and maybe not. We like to hope that they won't be involved, but there are no promises, even though they are in a program. When they get a little older, they start to notice that there are things out there that they want or need, but these things can't be provided to them, because their parents don't make enough money, so they start to look for other solutions, they grew up around these people, and some of them are making money by selling drugs or stealing, etc. These are young people, and barely had a chance to begin with.

A study in the states, gave different families everything that they needed to live well. Housing, money, not just a bit of money, enough for them to pay their bills and spend on themselves and their kids. These families lived off of this for several months and when they had what they needed, childare, clothing, food, healthcare, they were able to get jobs that could support their families on their own. Without worrying about regular and surprise expenses they were able to bring themselves out of their situation.

Our government decided that perhaps with a bit of help people wouldn't be so afraid to get a regular job, by giving them the opportunity to continue recieving funding for their childrens' dental and medication coverage while waiting for benefits at their job to begin.Unfortunately many people who only work minimum wage will probably never recieve benefits because their employers will never give them enough hours to get such benefits.

Our system is not made to help the poor, only the rich.

We do ourselves as a society injustice by not giving people a chance to better themselves, young or old.

You never know, one day you might be the one in need of a program, you might get stopped in your car, the person that you have in your car just stashed something without you noticing, it's your car, you get charged. Would you like to have a chance to escape from having a criminal record? Do you really want to lose your job because of something that really wasn't your fault. I mean, serious, you don't want to get pegged as a danger to society, when you go to get a new job, because you lost yours because you couldn't get out of jail to go to work, they do a criminal record check, now your in a spot, 'cause they can't actually see what the offence was. All this because you gave someone a ride, and there wasn't a program to divert you from having a criminal record, even though you've never offended before.

We should always be careful of what we wish for... How quickly the finger that we point with becomes the one that points at us

babyrocky1
January 6th, 2006, 08:08 PM
Im really glad you brought up the point about the working poor Pappilonmommy, theres not a chance in he!! someone living in Toronto can put a roof over even a small famiilys head with minimum wage. I don't even think a single person can live properly on that. The Harris justification was that if one was in work force long enough they wouldn't be working for minimum wage yet he did his best to see that as many as possible were lining up for low paying jobs. He repeatedly refused to raise minimum wage as well. The agenda was to broaden the pool of cheap labour in Ontario. What if someone isn't qualified to do much, what if they are new to the country and struggle with the language, what if they have no skills. or if they just arent very smart, are they destined to live under a bridge iin Ontario and its okay cause they aren't as much of a commodetie as some one else. If a person is working full time they should be quaranteed some quality of life and even if they arent working basic needs need to be met. So some kids see their parents working there buts off and they are still not just struggling but destitude! Theres not enough to eat, they cant heat their home etc. etc. They get in with the wrong crowd, theyre angry and bitter and feel justified to take a few illegal steps. Next thing you know theyve entered a world were it seems theres no turning back. You cant create an 'under class" and expect it to go unnoticed and PLEASe Im not justifying anyone commiting violence on anyone else, there is no justification but social problems do need to be addressed and should have been years ago.

doggy lover
January 6th, 2006, 08:11 PM
I was not surprised when this turned into a race thing, it always seems to end up that way and I hate it. I work with people of many races and you here it quite often turn into a black - white thing and quite frankly I'm sick and tired of hearing it. You just have to look at who is shooting who to figure it out, and I remember when that young girl was shot in the face on a TTC bus there was a big thing about it and she was black. But she didn't die and that is the whole thing this poor inocent girl DIED.

Schwinn
January 7th, 2006, 12:59 AM
I heard people blame Harris on the radio, and the first thing I thought was, "How stupid is that?" I didn't know that falling below the poverty line meant losing your morals.

One of the reasons this irks me so badly is because when I was a banker, I'd have people who were considered working class telling me that I didn't know what it was like to be poor, and I was just arrogant because I had money and I was refusing to give them a loan. What they didn't realize was a)they made more money than I did, b) spent more time going out than I did and c) that I grew up in a neighbourhood worse than they lived, and hung out in even worse parts of town as a kid. I watched my best friend OD'ing on speedballs and booze at 12, saw the kids I hung with at that age not make it past grade 10.

You want to know what the problem is? Us, Canadians. We are so freakin' busy, blaming the system, crying "oh poor me!" There's a reason why I switched out of the social work program when I was in university. I couldn't be part of an profession where I was expected to walk into these people's houses, see them on welfare with 3 kids at 20, driving a car that got slightly better gas mileage than a model T and say, "This is not your fault. We're not doing enough for you". Are these everyone? No, of course not. Are there true hard luck stories? Absolutely. But the biggest common denominator I see in these shootings is that people from these neighbourhoods are coming out everytime, and not once do I hear them say, "We failed our children". No, the government is giving enough, the government is providing enough programs, the police aren't doing enough, the police are hassling us. And we all nod our heads like sheep. "Oh yes, the oppression of the poor". I've seen it, I grew up in it. These parents sitting back saying, "YOU failed my children, and now they are in a gang". Guess what? It isn't the lack of programs, or the lack of money that is letting your 13 year old kid run the streets at 2 am. But there's no personal responsibility. THAT'S the common denominator. My friends who made it out, went on to bigger and better things? They're the ones whose parents made sure they were involved, that these kids were in the house at night. And some of them worked two jobs, worked night shift, even depended on the system from time to time. But instead of saying, "It's not my fault" they had a do what you've got to do attitude. The ones who wound up in jail, burnt out on drugs? Thier parents complained how they were victimized because they were poor or on welfare.(I later ran into my best friend from when I was 12. I hadn't seen him in almost 10 years. He didn't recognize me, and I almost didn't recognize him. He was too strung out, riding around town on the same bike he had when I last saw him). Regardless of how you feel about the Harris government, while it's true that social assistance and social programs we leaner than in previous years, they certainly were not, and are not, at thier lowest point in history (as a matter of fact, at the end of thier second term, they were higher than the end of thier first). Yet the violence is at it's highest peak. And it isn't happening everywhere, it's happening in Toronto. It isn't happening in Windsor, which has a whole side of town that several of my friends would ask me to walk them home late at night. I listened to gunshots several nights a week, before it was even considered an issue in Toronto. But it hasn't gotten worse there.
The neighbourhoods I grew up in don't have people running around shooting each other.

Sorry, this isn't an Ontario problem, it's a Toronto problem. And until we start demanding personal responsibility, it isn't going to get better. Do we need to look at social programs, and look at how we can improve the lives of people in these neighbourhoods? Probably. Will it help? I'm sure it will, a little. But it isn't going to fix it.

I'm sorry for my rant. And I love most of you dearly, and I'm sorry if the fact that I like Mike would cause bad feelings from some of you. But it isn't the slamming of Harris that has set me off. It's listening to the same old crap over and over on the TV that I heard growing up, it's the people telling me I don't know what it's like to worry about money, when the opposite is true. No, I never had to worry about possibly being homeless, but I'll guarantee you that the thugs who shot up the Mercedes from thier Beemer, and the guys who shot up the guy in the brand new SUV, and all the others, they don't either. Until we stop blaming the "system", it's only going to get worse.

Schwinn
January 7th, 2006, 01:07 AM
I was not surprised when this turned into a race thing, it always seems to end up that way and I hate it. I work with people of many races and you here it quite often turn into a black - white thing and quite frankly I'm sick and tired of hearing it. You just have to look at who is shooting who to figure it out, and I remember when that young girl was shot in the face on a TTC bus there was a big thing about it and she was black. But she didn't die and that is the whole thing this poor inocent girl DIED.

I was waiting for it, too. We weren't appalled because it was a white girl. It hit home because, for the first time, someone who didn't live in these neighbourhoods, who didn't live with the gangs, who weren't involved was killed. Most of us can't relate to having to watch our back, or listening to gunfire at night, or having to deal with the drug dealers. When someone from that neighbourhood died, it was like another world to us. But when someone who we could relate to, someone who we could say, "That could be my neighbour/daughter/sister/me!", it hit home. It became that much more real.

I find it funny that the committe that pointed out that it took the killing of a "white girl" (not the killing of "someone from a middle class neighbourhood outside of the inner city") has the biggest racist to walk the streets involved, Dudley Laws. If that guy was white and talked the same way about the opposite race, he'd be wearing a hood and we'd call him Grand Wizard.

chico2
January 7th, 2006, 09:27 AM
Schwinn,although I was encouraged seeing the community leaders taking a stand,finally trying to help,the fact that the pettycriminal,racist,theatrical Dudley Law has been invited into this otherwise strong group,makes me wonder:confused:
As for the Conservatives,beginning with Mulroney,Harris and now Harper nothing"good for the people"ever came from them.I shudder to think what will happen to Canada with Harper at the helm.
Some of you are probably too young to remember Mulroney,GST,selling us to the US etc...
Harris,cancelling schoolprograms,screwing up our healthcare.Cutting wellfare to the point it is impossible to survive on.I know you will say,wellfare is not to be a crutch,but it's no help if you cannot even pay rent..
No minimumwage increases,adding misery to our ever increasing working poor.
The list is long and only made the rich richer..and don't think for a minute that Mulroney and Harris did not line their own pockets before having to step down,corruption and politics go hand in hand,they were just lucky not to be caught.
Michael Bryant is a liberal,yes and he came up with the inhumane BSL and I hate the sight of that man and I am not too fond of McGuinty,but looking at the alternative,I'll stick with the liberals.

twodogsandacat
January 7th, 2006, 11:29 AM
The first article I could find indicating that the province was told that we had a serious gun problem was March of 2004, six months before the pit bull ban was announced. Then in 2005 the magnitude of the problem became evident to even the simplest of people as the body count set new records. All the time we were told that 'Toronto is still a very safe city'.

Now after a young white girl is killed McGuinty says "On an ongoing basis a government has to reassess its priorities," McGuinty said. "It became perfectly evident for us that this is becoming a higher priority for the people of Ontario."

I agree 100% with Premier McGuinty here. What however are they shifting thier priorities from and why did it take almost two years for them to figure this out?

They were elected to put 1000 more police officers on the streets. Only last month they said that would be done by the end of 2007 not any sooner....four years after they were elected. Now we hear by the end of 2006 due to public pressure. It takes time to train police officers so let's hope they have a plan for that other than to increase class size and cut down on the hours of training per cadet.

Also a lot of the money announced is to build new court houses, pay police overtime (already billed overtime) and such so the announcement falls far short of putting $51 million into the system to fight gang violence.

As for race there is no doubt that race does have some role to play here because as much as gang bangers may of been killing each other we have seen many other innocents killed for simply being in the wrong place. Innocent but black. Being in a nightclub LEGALLY when gun violence breaks out was not a case of these gang bangers 'killing each other'.

It was probably just as crowed in that nightclub as it was on Yonge Street on Boxing Day when somebody 'callously' fired into the crowd.

Overall the gun problem has been largely ignored by Queens Park until it couldn’t be ignored anymore. Also in reality Stephen Harper and Jack Layton have done more to fight this problem that Dalton McGuinty and Paul Martin have done combined. You see if the opposition parties didn’t bring the Liberal government of Paul Martin down we wouldn’t be seeing all these promises coming out of Ottawa.....it would simply be business as usual. The threat of losing an election has forced the Martin government into action.

The same threat that the Provincial Liberals are now gearing up to face in 2007.