Breaking News: "Homeless Hero" saves another life!

Just next door I believe... Opasquiak Cree Nation.

Grumpy, thanks for explaining that to Freeman. Something else he should be aware of is that, yes, we're all aware that specific laws already exist for such things as drunks wild-roaming the streets however it's the applying/enforcing them part that is insufficient. In fact, we have plenty of laws that, if enforced, would clean up most of the problems we're experiencing. Why aren't they being enforced? Because there's no room at the Inn. Or, there's no man-power to enforce them. Those are getting a little tired when there's plenty of manpower resources to form the newly-minted WPS fundraising task-force - aka the dedicated officers parked behind trees in Southdale writing $200 tickets to slow and go'ers at stop-signs. Try and wrap your brain around the bigger picture Freeman because your cute little retorts are useless in addressing the increasing problem of violent crime on our streets.

Well where ever you send me, just to send me to the Nation of Quebec!

Jondo wrote:Grumpy, thanks for explaining that to Freeman. Something else he should be aware of is that, yes, we're all aware that specific laws already exist for such things as drunks wild-roaming the streets however it's the applying/enforcing them part that is insufficient. In fact, we have plenty of laws that, if enforced, would clean up most of the problems we're experiencing. Why aren't they being enforced? Because there's no room at the Inn. Or, there's no man-power to enforce them. Those are getting a little tired when there's plenty of manpower resources to form the newly-minted WPS fundraising task-force - aka the dedicated officers parked behind trees in Southdale writing $200 tickets to slow and go'ers at stop-signs. Try and wrap your brain around the bigger picture Freeman because your cute little retorts are useless in addressing the increasing problem of violent crime on our streets.

Have you been told today?

But I am glad you think my quips are cute!

Deank wrote:Well where ever you send me, just to send me to the Nation of Quebec!

And where do they send you when you refuse to speak French?

I don't think there is anything cute about you.

Maybe your daughter even with her baggage?

Jondo wrote:Grumpy, thanks for explaining that to Freeman. Something else he should be aware of is that, yes, we're all aware that specific laws already exist for such things as drunks wild-roaming the streets however it's the applying/enforcing them part that is insufficient. In fact, we have plenty of laws that, if enforced, would clean up most of the problems we're experiencing. Why aren't they being enforced? Because there's no room at the Inn. Or, there's no man-power to enforce them. Those are getting a little tired when there's plenty of manpower resources to form the newly-minted WPS fundraising task-force - aka the dedicated officers parked behind trees in Southdale writing $200 tickets to slow and go'ers at stop-signs. Try and wrap your brain around the bigger picture Freeman because your cute little retorts are useless in addressing the increasing problem of violent crime on our streets.

And what are you doing to address the increasing problem of violent crime on our streets?

Have you been told today? Change that to perplexing (from cute) - riddles do that. What am I doing about violent crime? Lot's but that's another subject. What I put forward was a meaningful way of addressing the problem and your quip suggests you don't understand the gravity of the matter. The better debate would have you expand on the emptiness of your remark.

Actually, if you check the subject of the thread, its about a bunch of drunks hanging around the riverbank and one of them drowns. So this ties up massive resource of police, fire and paramedics, but I would hardly consider this a violent crime.

As far as what I do, well, I spend a massive amount of my "free"time volunteering in my community, providing programs for kids, specifically soccer. You see, this is an alternative for them to other less socially accepted diversions. Now, its your turn.

As far as debating what to do about violent crimes, debate away.

You take them off the street until they do some learning. That was what I described as being meaningful. You suggested that that is already occurring (which it obviously isn't). We've tried everything else and I don't think I need to tell you how that's going. You should listen to one of Serge Leclerc's presentations (several on youtube). He's the native, former addict and criminal who now speaks against the system for creating this monster - not holding youth criminals responsible for their actions. The result is that they think they are smart and we are dumb. It's a joke - the criminal justice system is. Serge is now an MLA in Saskatchewan and also a speaker in high demand for agencies such as Crime Stoppers. Incidentally, I work tirelessly in the fight against crime and I have for 10 years. I've contributed millions of dollars to that fight and I'm also quite vocal and active on crime issues.

Thats it? I thought you had some new radical idea to combat violent crime. Isn't that what many on this forum have been ranting about for a long time. Of course, the solution is to protect us from them, but with limp wristed, commie politicians, that just ain't going to happen.

You don't seem to appreciate the difference. Protecting us from them is what an improved justice will do. Changing those people is what I referred to as meaningful. When they're taken off the street they would be going into learning environs and not crime-clubhouses. They would get out when they "graduate". There is the answer to the enigma known as the revolving door of justice. We need to stop spinning the door. People/families pay thousands of dollars to put their wayward youth into treatment centres to address their issues. That access should be free to those in obvious need and they already exist - they're called penal institutions. We just don't seem to want to connect the obvious dots. So, as you ask - that's it? Try and appreciate the simplicity of the concept. The situation doesn't require any more deep-thinking including the deep-thinkers who only perpetuate the crisis.

Jondo wrote:You don't seem to appreciate the difference. Protecting us from them is what an improved justice will do. Changing those people is what I referred to as meaningful. When they're taken off the street they would be going into learning environs and not crime-clubhouses. They would get out when they "graduate". There is the answer to the enigma known as the revolving door of justice. We need to stop spinning the door. People/families pay thousands of dollars to put their wayward youth into treatment centres to address their issues. That access should be free to those in obvious need and they already exist - they're called penal institutions. We just don't seem to want to connect the obvious dots. So, as you ask - that's it? Try and appreciate the simplicity of the concept. The situation doesn't require any more deep-thinking including the deep-thinkers who only perpetuate the crisis.

You're arguing what most of us on this forum have been saying for some time. Do the crime, do the time. Revolving doors don't work, nor does coddling repeat offenders. There must be political will to make the change and an NDP government certainly doesn't seem up to the task, and the minority federal government needs the support of the opposition to effect change, and thats not going to happen either. You just don't snap your fingers and it magically happens.

It's not just the NDP that can't/won't do something. All political parties seem to dance around the edges when it comes to real reform.

Give Harper props for trying at least. And let's smack Layton, Iggy and that french guy for playing politics with this issue.