Of course, before long, the Tyee will run an article bemoaning the lack of retail outlets in poor and seedy neighbourhoods, attributing it to racism etc., rather than the regulatory costs they propose. (See recent articles on rooming houses.)

Well it doesn’t help that the laws in Canada prevent people from protecting themselves and the bad guys know it. It’s an interesting dilemma, the Police and government are not legally obliged to protect you from harm, this has come out in case law (there is one in front the courts right now in Ontario) If you fight back and harm the bad guy, you will be investigated and it is quite possible to be charged or sued by the bad guy if you cause permanent injury.

Enforcing the current laws would be a good start and help resolve basic problems, but even having a co-worker will not help in lot of cases. A lot of the crimes now are being done by gangs of youths, who are quite violent and even if you do comply, the risk of being beaten or killed is climbing.

Part of the problem is the design of the gas stations, they make very little money on the gas and the major source of income is from the convenience store. Most stores have a open counter, allowing the staff and customer to interact freely, but this puts them at risk to robberies. Boxing in the counter makes it difficult to communicate and to service the store, also can discourage customers from coming in.

The US Justice department reported that last year armed citizens prevented/interrupted 2 million crimes, 192,000 of the citizens were woman. In fact the fast growing group of armed citizens in the US are woman.

Kids nowadays know that there is little consequence to breaking the law other than being placed on probation yet again. My friend is a sheriff, he gets to see the same kids again and again going through the courts, they don’t care and they know how to play the system better than most of us. Frankly assaults causing permanent harm or with a weapon should go straight to adult court.

Colin correctly observed:

Yet 7-11 Stores seem to have less problem with these issues?

The access to cash is the issue, stealing the gas -> let them go, not worth the worry; De Patie's death was easily preventable.

Educate workers how to collect the information that law enforcement needs to catch the offenders.

Use 'tire rippers' at night in stations, similar to the ones used at border crossings in the US. They can be controlled by the worker from within the store and lights mark the safe moments to cross. Try to gas-n-go? Rip all your tires out and drag your transmission and oil pan on the road -> leading the police to you.

In the end these sort of issues are solved easily by using more 'cardlock' like elements to fuel pumping.

It is the easy access to cash that brought Brigitte Serre to her unfortunate end. Taking the precautions that other convenience stores have will help end these events.

Expect the falling scale of violence (single action robberies) to continue to increase in incidence as long as there are any rewards to the perpetrators.

Fret not, Colin, Stevie will straighten things out with his new sentencing guidelines. Slamming youth into the hoosegow for a few years ought to permit them to graduate to a more sophisticated form of criminality and save, by extension, the operators of gas bars from foregoing any more of their ‘hard-earned’ cash.

What I don't understand is the need for so many of these convenience stores/gas bars to even be open chasing the same few consumers from 10pm till 7am each day. You say they are hardly profitable, I'd suggest the capitalists who run them should recognize this and shut them down at night.

I wholeheartedly agree that companies should be held accountable to the laws governing this type of industry and fined sufficiently to get their attention.
However unless and until the perpetrators of these crimes are actually punished then the situation is not going to get any better. As Colin points out, young people nowadays are very much aware that they will not face serious consequences for their actions even up to an including murdering another person. I for one hope that our new PM will allow for an actual debate on the merits of a limited capital punishment bill that targets incorrigibles such as Bernardo, Olson, Picton et al. The so called experts always state that capital punishment is not a deterrent but I know it would make me think twice were I so inclined. As well, enshrinement of property rights and the ability to defend ones property and loved ones needs to be in the constitution.

G West; I think that these gas bars etc are similar in that regard to grocery stores etc. Their fixed costs are virtually the same whether they are open or closed and as such they might as well be open at the cost of $8 extra an hour or whatever they pay these individuals. Staying open therefore does not cost much more and there is the possibility that they will defer costs sufficiently to make it worth their while. I am not saying I agree with this practice, but most corporations nowadays are run by faceless bean counters (read MBA's) who do not consider it their concern about the humans in the corporation as that is the human resource departments mandate. Not pretty but true.
By the by, what is your solution to youth crime seeing as you don't seem too pleased with the proposed sentencing guidelines the PM is proposing? More counselling?

So oilbertan, if the threat of capital punishment makes you think twice about committing a serious crime, does that mean a few years in jail, or some other "lesser" sentence does not? The fact is oilbertan, you are most likely a law-abiding citizen who WILL NOT commit acts of crime regardless of what deterrents are in place. The bernardos of the world WILL commit acts of crime regardless of what deterrents are in place.

I believe it to be a common fallacy, and a myth perpetuated by the right, that youth commit crimes because they know the law “works in their favour” – one that is popularized in the MSM as “common sense”. I know oilbertan, it’s a simple cause and effect explanation; Harper knows this which is why his U.S. inspired get tough on crime stance appeals to populist thinkers (such as yourself). To keep things simple, I’ll advise you to look to the south to see the successes (or lack thereof) of tougher crime laws and property rights.

Whether punishment for youth crime is sufficient or not isn't the topic here. What Sinclar is saying is that the current regulations under the worksafe BC act are not being enforced. If these regulations were inforced, they likely hood of the employee being harmed, would be reduced.

The real question is why aren't these regulations being enforced? The answer is a least partially due to the vast changes the Liberals have made to the former WCB board. Worksafe BC is more interested in addressing the concerns of the employer than the concerns of the employee.

We recently had a group of shiny new Worksafe BC inspectors come through our plant. They were all under 25yr old, looked as though they had never strayed far from their mothers apron, and wouldn't know an industrial workplace hazard if they saw one. Also they were being toured through the site by management only, rather than a joint union/management team.

Through kids in jail for longer terms isn't going to make the kids working night shift at a gas station safer. Enforcing the existing regulations in the Worksafe BC regulations will.

oilbertan
First of all, the subject of this essay is avoiding robbery. I think shutting down most of the gas bars and convenience stores every night is a responsible approach to that objective, which is more or less what I said.

As to the new sentencing guidelines: I suspect they are a response to an artificially generated panic about the levels of crime and violence in this society. With the exception of a few specific crimes against property like joyriding, I'm not aware that levels of crime in this country are out of control and I think if you look at the available statistics that this is readily confirmed. As to whether or not throwing a lot of young offenders in jail will do anything to address the fundamental problems of disaffected and deracinated youth that our mindless consumer culture is creating; well I don't think I need to answer that one for you.

Maybe some of the single mothers who are currently working the midnight shift in gas bars and convenience stores might have a bit more time for their children if the greedy capitalists who own them would shut them down for 6 - 8 hours a day. In addition, maybe then the police would have more time to confront the rest of the appalling behavior that goes on during darkness each night. Just a thought.

By the way, nice to see you posting here again.

"commentor: G West
posted: 1 Hour Ago
Fret not, Colin, Stevie will straighten things out with his new sentencing guidelines. Slamming youth into the hoosegow for a few years ought to permit them to graduate to a more sophisticated form of criminality"

Agreed . . don't put these little bastards in jail.

Put them to work in front of the public, picking up trash, cleaning parks etc. House them in special youth facilities away from the Hard Cores, without TV or internet, make them work and study if they want rewards like TV and Internet. Treat them with respect, but with firmess, consistency and structure.

Fear of peer humiliation is the best way to re-socialize the current crop of fear-not punks that run wild these days.

Logjam 603
Absolutely, Simon Fraser University's criminology program has done some excellent work in the field of restorative justice; as has a pilot project somewhere in the Fraser Valley. In New Zealand, similar projects and enforced programs to enlist the extended families of the young people who get involved in this kind of petty criminality have had incredibly successful outcomes as have some Native sentencing circles here in Canada.

The problem with these culturally created crimes is that most citizens just want the evidence to go away and return to feeling safe in their own comfortable cocoons. It's time for all of us to get re-engaged with the community once more before things get a hell of a lot worse. Throwing these sad kids in jail is the route to more serious problems - it's no solution at all.

It's consistently the same people committing the majority of all crimes in our cities, and police departments will tell you this til they are blue in the face. The bottom line is that criminals do not commit crimes while they are in jail. Sorry to break this to you.

I suggest people read the following article and see how effective our strategy of coddling criminals (after all, they are the REAL victims in canada aren't they?) has worked.

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/issuesideas/story.html?id=fb715fde-9cee-42e2-ae75-81061c3cee14

G West: Thanks, always good to dialogue with you. Seems like there are not enough hours in the day anymore and even less now with spring in full swing up north here.
I do like logjam 603's idea of work gangs or whatever these are called. Perhaps we could adopt the ideas of the Sherrif in Arizona, I think, that had all of the workers dressed in pink. I also recognize that this thread was about how not to get robbed but my point is that it is not simply an issue of greedy corporate capitalists trying to wring the last dollar of profits from a business. There is an element of choice involved, both for the corporation and for the individual. If the laws are properly enforced and the cost of having 2 employees on the premises at all times for the night shift makes staying open no longer viable then that is what will eventually happen. The employees have choices as well and, as I never tire of telling my two twnety somethings, getting an education gives you choices. No education and you end up working night shift in a gas bar or at the drive through. But this is not just a case of corporate greed although that is part of the equation. The issues of crime and punishment and the right of self defense are all part and parcel of this issue IMO.
You referenced "culturally related crimes" and I wonder what you refer to. A culture of permissiveness where one does not have to take responsibility for their actions? Just wondering.

Unbiquitous: Well, actually I break the law every day when I go home and light up a big fat one but please don't tell anyone.
In part you make my point for me. The Bernardos, Olsons et al of this world are not going to be rehabilitated, their crimes are the most heinous and the death penalty should be an option for these type of individuals. I acknowledge that this is a populist sentiment but also one that regularly draws the support of 60%+ in polls in this country. At the end of the day, I see no rationale for keeping some piece of shit like Paul Bernardo alive at a cost of $100M+ per annum (and no, this is not an issue of dollars and cents) and neither do most Canadians. Unfortunately the Stockwell Day idea of putting these people into the general prison population to have justice meted out is the most reprehensible and chicken shit of ideas I have heard (even beats his trashing of the lawyer in Red Deer for defending some deadbeat). We had the murder of four RCMP officers down the road from my town (okay, 6 1/2 hours down the road, but same road) and the unfortunate part, IMO, was that Rozko killed himself. Had he not done so, we might have actually had a meaningful debate on this issue. Unfortunately, like abortion (I do support but not in the 3rd trimester, so called partial birth - wow way off topic here) capital punishment has been deemed by the elites that run this country as having been decided and is not something that is talked about in polite circles.
As to the American system of justice, not sure what you are getting at there. They take a fairly straightforward approach, do the crime, do the time. I recently read an article that said that if you backed out black crime from US statistics that their crime rates were actually lower than ours. As well, the states that allow citizens to carry concealed hand guns show significant reductions in the base crimes of b & e, muggings etc while in Great Britain these have apparently gone through the roof with recent changes to firearms regulations and the jailing of one elderly man who shot and killed some a%%hole that was trying to rob him (for the third time as I recall). Some days it just seems that the whole world is upside down with the criminals having more rights than the law abiding citizen.

Simon_Carlsen
As always, simple simon pops into view when one of his shibboleths is mentioned. This time it's crime. If you actually knew anything about criminology and a comprehensive approach to youth crime you wouldn't be such a loose cannon. Why not google restorative justice and check out some real reformers?

That seems a tad extreme, although I can understand the motivation. The same solution could be proposed for assaults on taxi drivers, transit workers and any other job that has a late night component. The problem is that there are legitimate reasons for working people to have access to some services at all hours. There are many steps that can be taken to make the employees safer while still providing necessary services. I was looking for a map of 24 hour gas in Vancouver but have had no luck, although I imagine that there are more 24 hour stations in the burbs. I did find this, tangentially related, map of gas stations in Vancouver comparing 1970 to 1998: http://www.geog.ubc.ca/courses/klink/g448/1999/gif/gas.gif

Does anybody recall the discussion in Vancouver regarding 24 hour full service gas for people with disabilities? It was around 99 or 00.

Capital Punishment

The problem with CP as a political issue is that most people have not formed anything beyond an emotional conception of the act. Asking people if they support CP when something like the Bernardo case is in the news will elicit an overwhelming demand for the return of hanging, or some new way of killing. Ask the same question the day after Milgaard or Morin or Johnson or Marshall or Sophonow were exonerated and the numbers would reverse. Citing cases like Bernardo, Rozko & Olson makes it seem so straight forward, perhaps we could have a double standard where overcoming "reasonable doubt" would allow a person to be sentenced to life in prison available for rehabilitation and reaching into the realm of "unreasonable doubt" would permit a death sentence. Naturally, ethnicity and social status would have no bearing on the decision and having a public defender instead of Clayton Ruby is simply a matter of PR.

We know that Bernardo and Olson are guilty, there is not a shred of doubt. We know Bernardo and Olson are guilty because of the evidence and the convictions. The juries that convicted Milgaard et al believed that they were guilty based on the evidence in each case, and the public generally followed that belief based upon the convictions. How is it possible to be absolutely sure that one is absolutely sure? Confessions aren't always reliable, public opinion is a wash, and the system makes mistakes. Cases that are as cut & dried as Bernardo et al are few and far between.

This is from an overview of a February 2006 poll im Canada, UK and US on the death penalty:

Great article with an issue that needs bringing to light. Thanks for an informative and to-the-point message.

G west

No, I said they make more money on the store than they do on the gas. If they are not paying for themselves during those hours they will shut down, unless required to remain open by bylaws.

If those kids are beating someone severely or using weapons in a crime, yes they should do the time. Ask the people that run the day to day stuff at the court system (ie not the Judges) how well it’s working now.

I am all for spending money to ensure kids that are picked up for their first offence are directed through some sort of program to reduce the likelihood of re-offending. That’s when you can make a difference.

As for the reporting of crime, how many people do you think even bother making a report about property theft these days? A friend of mine that did complain about the crack addicts stealing old car parts from his year was told to go away as it was a “victimless crime” except of course for him. Let me see how many kids did I know that got beaten to death, brought concealed weapons or shot up their schools or sold hard drugs at my schools, hmmm, gee, none other than 2 guys that used to sell ditchweed. (my schools were not terribly perfect either)

I used kids from the Elizabeth Fry Society that were supposed to work off their community hours. Apparently scraping boat hulls and bilges was to demeaning and they would work a day and never come back, they never were dinged for not fulfilling their commitments.

ubiquitous

While I will agree that serious consequences will not deter the Bernado’s of this world, you miss a few points. Many of the more brazen crimes are committed by a small number of career criminals, this holds true in almost all crimes, with murder being a bit less influenced by career criminals. So if you have a car thief that steals 15 cars a day (as one recently admitted to) You can imagine the impact of increasing the sentence by one year longer. Guessing he isn’t going to work every day or make his “quota” let’s say 15 x 100 = 1500 a year. So how can that not have an impact?

I support Capital Punishment under a very strict and narrow criteria, namely for multiple murders done at more than one location. The controls on the proofs that lead to the sentence must be examined prior to being carried out. My dad spent time working with serial killers, he admitted that there is little that we can do for most of them once they reached an adult stage.

As for youth not giving a sh*t about the court is a MSM myth? Man you really need to talk to more kids or spend some time in and around the courts or talk to people that work there. Are you saying that as a kid the consequence of your actions did not weigh on your decision making?

If you update your facts, you will learn that the crime rate is falling in almost every state in the US, except for some notable places. In fact a good chunk of the homicides take place in 7 counties, quite amazing when you think how many counties there are in the US.

Oilbertan
A recent article on criminals in the US said they were more afraid of an armed citizen than they were with cops. If they knew a person was armed to would go find an easier mark. The article also went on to say how the criminals saw themselves as the predator and the rest of us as prey. They were just taking what was rightfully theirs in their minds.

Gerhardius
Think you'll note I said "most" not all. Practically speaking the problem you cite is more likely to be solved by education - making the people who might actually 'need' all night services aware of where they can be found at those hours.
Reducing the number of available outlets would also reduce the available focii for crime while at the same time making enhanced security for those workers who still found themselves manning the midnight shift easier and more effective, in my view.

The last time I drove in California I found that virtually every place I bought gas after around 9pm required me to submit my credit card or an appropriate amount of cash to a cashier behind a presumably bulletproof glass screen before the pump electrics were engaged.

As to your remarks about Capital Punishment I find little there to quibble with either.

Colin
Like most intemperate people when they find the facts don't actually support their prejudices, you are not slow to dismiss the facts. Violent crime is certainly reported and, with the exception of a few places like Toronto, I think you'll find it's also on the decline on a year-to-year basis. As for capital punishment, anyone who thinks it's anything but blind revenge is smoking ditchweed since we know with absolute certainty that it is not a deterrent.

That any modern civilized state should also be in the business of meting out a primal emotion like revenge is an anomaly I'll leave to our American neighbours to work out. Most of the rest of the so-called civilized world has already made their decision on the matter.

I don’t think that I missed any point Colin. I think that for the most part youth do know the consequences of their actions. What I believe is that a youth committing a crime does so thinking that nothing will happen to him if caught. But I also believe that explaining crime isn’t that simple. What motivates someone to commit a crime cannot be stated in general terms. My point was that populist thinking and the MSM describe motivation in simple terms so that they can push through a simple solution. Ironically, their “lock ‘em up” attitude is very costly and we all know how much the right loves it when tax dollars are spent on someone else. Locking up a habitual auto thief for an extra year may or may not mean less cars being stolen, but I seriously doubt that the threat of an extra year (or make it 2, 3, or 10 years) in jail would deter the thief in the first place.

Oops, what a meant to say above was that I believe that youth commit crimes NOT because they believe nothing will happen to them.

HOW TO CALL THE POLICE

George Phillips of Meridian Mississippi was going up to bed when his wife told him that he'd left the light on in the garden shed, which she could see from the bedroom window. George opened the back door to go turn off the light but saw that there were people in the shed stealing things.

He phoned the police, who asked, "Are any of those people in your house" and he said "no". Then they said that all patrols were busy, and that he should simply stay in his house, lock his doors and an officer would be along when available. George said, "Okay," and hung up. He counted to 30, and phoned the police again. "Hello? I just called you few seconds ago because there were people in my shed. Well, you don't have to worry about them now cause I've just shot them all." Then he hung up.

Within five minutes three police cars, an Armed Response unit, and an ambulance showed up at the Phillips residence. Of course, the police caught the burglars red-handed. One of the policemen said to George, "I thought you said that you'd shot them!"

George said, "I thought you said there was nobody available!"

I couldn't resist adding the above to the debate.

Colin said: "Well it doesn’t help that the laws in Canada prevent people from protecting themselves and the bad guys know it. It’s an interesting dilemma, the Police and government are not legally obliged to protect you from harm, this has come out in case law (there is one in front the courts right now in Ontario) If you fight back and harm the bad guy, you will be investigated and it is quite possible to be charged or sued by the bad guy if you cause permanent injury".

I can appreciate this Colin, and thank you dude for this insight. My response to that is simple, I would rather be tried by 12 then carried by 6.

Peace

RTB

I had my motorcycle stolen while i waited for police to attend.

They came back a couple of nights later and tried to steal my 4x4 which I left open for my dogs to snooze in (it's a work truck) ... one of the thieves actually took me to court screaming that i enticed him ...

Of course having half your scrotum ripped off and watching a dog playing with your testicle on the driveway,might give you some crazy ideas ... like suing the owner .Just remember to empty the stolen vehicle of any goods and WIPE OFF ALL THOSE FINGERPRINTS.

if you want to win ...

And i have to say ...as a kid that started working at 13 years of age,i am glad my family had friends/employers that kept me safe and that we lived in a community that always had one eye on the kids in the neighbourhood .

THOSE TIMES SEEM TO HAVE VANISHED .

G West

Be careful of crime stats. If they are not reported or are simply reclassified, it's easy to make them go up and down.

Capital punishment isn't just used because it is a deterrent. There are also the arguments that it represents society's ultimate sanction, and that it is a sure preventer of recidivism. Ernest van den Haag goes into quite a lot of detail defending these positions.

Me, I don't believe in it although I do think that if someone is tired of life imprisonment, they should be allowed to voluntarily suicide.

Colin

Sure the crims may be afraid of armed citizens. I am half-persuaded by the notion that an armed society is polite. The two reasons I'm not persuaded are:

a) people in the USA ARE armed and AREN'T polite -- you have people capping each other for nothing

b) most people can't shoot worth a damn.

Capital punishment isn't just used because it is a deterrent. There are also the arguments that it represents society's ultimate sanction.

NO REPERCUSSIONS...NO FEAR ...

Hanging,Electric Chair,Lethal Injection = JUSTICE/NO FEAR

Colin wrote:

...the laws in Canada prevent people from protecting themselves and the bad guys know it.

You might enjoy the following 60-second video clip. It starts off like a typical slasher movie, but the ending is very different.

http://www.metacafe.com/watch/80006/home_alone/

It's not clear whether this is a spoof of the left or the right or whether it's an actual commercial for a shooting range. I don't quite get what the "free rock" thing is about. The star of the movie probably should have aimed at the lower legs since the would-be intruder was armed with a knife and not a gun. There also seems to be inadequate target identification and a lack of a "freeze, drop the weapon" type warning.

I'd be a lot more comfortable with the concept of self-defence if more non-lethal approaches were available as a first line of defence. All the better if weapons are designed to refuse to fire while being held by people who are under the influence of alcohol or other drugs. Small ankle bracelets that detect alcohol or other drugs in human perspiration have been on the market for a couple of years now. It wouldn't take much to adapt the technology to work with weapons. I expect there would usually be lots of sweat available on the palms of a person who draws a weapon out of fear.

Weapons and drugs are a very bad combination. Some cops drink like fish - but usually not on the job.

There's no need for access to the inside of the store. You know what you want. Ask for it, pay for it, the clerk brings it to a slot in the window and hands it to you. I don't think losing the freedom to browse a gas bar magazine rack at 4am is an unfair swap for the safety of predominantly young workers.

As to arming people. Puh-leeze. When I'm an innocent bystander in a store, the last thing I want is the clerk and robber spraying bullets around a store while I rue the day I forgot to pick up milk on the way home with stray bullet in my body.

Handguns exist for no other reason that to kill people. Melt them all down and move on a little further down the path of civilized behaviour please. If the loss of your hobby (target shooters) guts you that badly, take up archery.

Gerhardius: I find it interesting that you went directly to the default position of those opposed to capital punishment, namely you inject Marshall, Milgard etc. The majority, IMO, of those supporting "some form" of CP do not envision putting people like these to death. They do support it for those particularly heinous crimes as pepetrated by the Olsons, Bernardos etc of this world as well as some of the lesser known criminals such as the one that murdered Cecilia Yang (?), a defenseless child. It would not be particularly difficult to devise legislation that metes out "societty's ultimate sanction" and has sufficient safeguards and checks and balances to ensure the correct decision is rendered and where doubt exists, have a final authority such as the PM or AG make the final decision. Bottom line, imo, Canada devalues human life by refusing to impose the ultimate sanction of CP and while they will not admit it, the elites actually prefer Stock's solution.

oilbertan
C'mon man have you been out in the sun too long? Not had your second cup of coffee this morning? Have you never read the Vatican's position on capital punishment?
To suggest that

is the worst form of sophistry.

That is such utter nonsense, if for no other reason that you go on to suggest that opposition to capital punishment is an affectation of 'elites' when the absence of capital punishment is the norm in civilized western countries other than the US.

You don't normally post such emotional nonsense and you need to look at your point of view again and figure out where it’s coming from, in my opinion.

I kind of agree with you Stump. I mean, I have done shooting sports and handguns aren't inherently more interesting or challenging than air pistols or rifles. But that's me. Some people really get off on PPC or IPSA and that's their thing.

However there are some legit uses for civilians, for example in bear country I would want to have the biggest freaking Dirty Harry sidearm backing up my 12-gauge shotgun. It might or might not make the difference but I'd have zero interest in being Treadwell'd.

If guns are necessary in the bush why aren't treeplanters and loggers issued one before they head out to work each day?

oilbertan: I went to the "default position" because it is the natural counter-point to the "default position" of those who support CP: citing cases like Bernardo & Olson.

By "people like these" do you mean innocent people who were convicted of murder? What is the process to discern the truly guilty from those who were merely found guilty? Obviously nobody wants to execute an innocent person, but once a guilty verdict has been reached what flawless process would decide death or life? It is interesting you cite the murderer of Cecilia Zhang, a 9 year old girl, as worthy of CP because she was "a defenseless child." Guy-Paul Morin was convicted of killing a 9 year old child, whom I imagine was pretty defenceless as well. The verdict was overturned due to DNA evidence and he was acquitted at the retrial. The fact remains that, for a period of time, Morin fulfilled a condition that you imply deserves the death penalty: he was a convicted killer of a defenceless child.

Somehow an infallible decision making process can be developed that will eliminate all the possible pit falls of CP with the final decision made by an elected official? That system is inherently unbalanced. Provincial Governments that are formed by the NDP would never execute a person no matter what crime had been committed, and even some conservative premiers would balk at the decision. Move the decision to the judiciary and you will have the same problem. There is no way to completely remove bias from the process no matter how many safeguards one has.

Gerhardius
One of the most eleoquent arguments against capital punishment was actually made by the Republican Governor of the State of Illinois in a speech he gave at Northwestern University College of Law on January 11, 2003.

Perhaps you've already read Governor Ryan's speech. Whoever hasn't and is actually interested in the subject can find it here:
http://www.worldpolicy.org/globalrights/dp/2002-0111-Ryan%20speech%20on%20capital%20punishment.html

Alcibiades:

that speech and the facts that inspired it challenged some American conservatives to closely examine their support for the death penalty. George Will wrote a decent piece here: http://www.townhall.com/opinion/columns/georgewill/2003/10/30/170288.html

Gerhardius
Yep, I remember having read Will's views on the subject(I think in either the Sacramento Bee or the WaPost) and Turow of course too. An American Catholic bishop whose name escapes me at the moment) has also been very eloquent about the matter and of course John Paul II too.

In the end even the claim that CP should be retained for its coercive value in getting other criminals to confess is compromised by the same illogic as arguments which have been made in favour of torture as a valid instrument of policy.

I posted only the Ryan link to counter the usual ad hominem attack one can expect to be leveled at any leftist or progressive spokesperson.

I should rapidly add that Will would have been equally valid from an ideological standpoint; don't want anyone to accuse me of calling George Will a liberal, after all.

Cycling
I will have to watch the video later.

Reading police reports on shootings/attacks. They consider the danger zone to be roughly 21’, a average person can be on top of you within 3 seconds in that distance. The reason the cops shoot to centre mass, is that you have the best chance to stop the attacker, plus there is less chance to miss or for the bullet to go through the attacker and strike a bystander.

Never underestimate how dangerous a knife or blunt object is in the hands of someone that wants to do you harm. The majority of the Homicides in Canada are committed with them.

I certainly agree with your statement about weapons and drugs, which is why I avoid nightclubs nowadays.

Stump
That’s a statement made by someone who knows little about firearms, there are lots of pistols/revolver that I would never want to carry for self defence as they are not designed for it. So I should have all my hobbies approved by the “Minister of Public good and Safety” I guess you would be happy living in a Communist State or a dictatorship where only the police and army have guns. Firearms both long guns and handgun have been part of Canada since they were introduced and our part of our heritage, get used to it.

As to your question, people who work in the bush can and do apply for a Authorization to Carry (ATC) Although a shotgun/rifle gives the greatest chance of success against a large bear, there are a number of handguns now that will do the job. Handguns require a great deal more practice than long gun, which also require lots of practice. Presently I carry a shotgun and bearspray in the field.

Just reading the Florida State figures for their Concealed Weapons permit program. After issuing over 1.3 million permits over the years, they have only had 154 of the permit holders charged with a gun-related crime.

Yammer
I am really enjoying pistol shooting, it’s a challenging sport and requires good muscle control and concentration. Similar in a lot of ways to fencing. Plus the people are great and very supportive. I used to do biathlon in the army, but could never really get into cross-country skiing.

Although I support limited Capital Punishment, I fully agree that it can’t be entered into lightly and any sentence requiring it should need a detailed review before being carried out, plus it should be reserved for a tiny fraction of crimes. What bothers me most about Canadians is that we lock people away and forget about them, until it’s time to be released and then there is great wailing about releasing so and so into the community. I wonder if Capital Punishment will help force people to look hard at how our prison system works/does not work.

Colin
Have you read what Ryan, Will and Scott Turow have to say about CP?

I'd be happy living in a democracy where only the police and army have handguns. I don't have a problem with shotguns and rifles.

Note Colin that even an enthusiast like yourself isn't going to try and make the argument that a handgun is necessary in the bush. In fact, going by your comments I'd say a handgun would offer nothing but false sense of security and the opportunity to wound an animal rather than kill it.

And, imagine that! The people who applied for permits weren't responsible for gun crimes. What a shock. It's not the legal gun owners that are the problem, it's the guns themselves and too many end up in the hands of criminals. If we had fewer handguns, there'd be that many less to be stolen and used in crimes.

We also used to charge Chinese a head tax. Another grand Canadian tradition. I hardly think tradition is a good reason to perpetuate an invention with no purpose other than to kill people.

Stump
Handguns do have a place in the field, they give you the ability to work with both hands and keep your protection strapped to your side. Read some of the accounts about bear attacks and seem to often start with the phrase: “My shotgun/rifle was leaning against a tree 100m away when the bear appeared…..”

The government makes it hard to apply for the licences, although it is easier to obtain in BC and Alberta than the rest of the country. I carry bearspray and a shotgun as I can not in my present job apply for the Wilderness handgun licence, although if I redid my Free Miners licence and went prospecting I could easily get it. You also can’t apply for it for recreational wilderness use, although I don’t think the bear gives a damm, whether you are working or playing!

Firearms require training and practice and that was the point I was making. Carrying a gun, doesn’t make you a shooter anymore than strapping on dance shoes makes you a dancer.

Regarding guns being stolen and used in crimes. VPD reports that 94% of recovered crime guns were smuggled in from the States or Eastern Europe. The 50% number being thrown around by Martin and the Mayor of Toronto was proven to be based on a report that indicated only 16% of the guns in Toronto crimes were from Canada.

Homicide by method
http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/legal01.htm?sdi=homicides

Note only 4% of the firearms used in these homicides were registered.

Here is a unique concept, instead of wasting 2 billion+ plus making life difficulty for people like me or taking away my rights and hobbies, use it for reducing the number of criminals on the street.

Note: Bearspray also requires training and a steady nerve to use, as the bear needs to be within 5m to be effective and pray you aren’t forced to spray into the wind. Plus many airlines and aircraft won’t let you take it onboard.

Not surprising, I haven't seen that many bears on airplanes

Colin:

How many times have you been within 20 feet of a bear in the woods?

I'll show you mine. 3 times. Black bears. Everytime, they ran away before I even had a chance to sh*t myself.

Guns don't make anyone safe. If there were a shred of real evidence to that effect we'd all have them and the appropriate training to go with it. The nanny state would make sure of it.

I understand it's your hobby and no doubt you're a responsible gun user/owner. But the fault lies in the design of the weapon. We simply have no realistic use for a handheld gun beyond shooting other people and paper targets. Why pretend otherwise?

Instead of wasting $2b on registering guns, let's melt'em down and make bicycles. Now there's a hobby that has merit! :-)

What a timely discussion we are having.

I have been stalked twice by Grizzlies (that I know of), charged once by a black and have had 20+ encounters I can remember off the top of my head. Not including the bear issues around my houses.
I have a dozen or so friends and acquaintances that have been charged more than once, know of 5 or so people that had friends, co-workers mauled and talked to a number of people who have investigated fatal bear attacks. Predatory attacks by black bears seem to be on the increase and these I worry about the most as I work alone and in remote areas when in the field.

Well if they re-open PSA in North Vancouver I will invite up there to try, at the very least you will enjoy biking up there.

Jean-Francois Pagé was killed about 30 kilometres east of Ross River, where he was flagging for a mining company.

Grizzly bear. (File photo)
Bear attacks
Pagé originally from Quebec, was marking mineral claims with two other men when he failed to return to their work camp. The men reported Pagé missing to a helicopter pilot, who notified police.

A helicopter search located his body.

Timely indeed.

(BC-Club-Shooting)
A man is in hospital after a shooting at a night club in mid-town
Vancouver early this morning.
The man in his twenties is said to be stable condition.
Police were called to the club at two this morning to find the
victim with several gunshot wounds.
There is no word on motive or suspects in the incident.

Yep the gang types love going to the club, it’s not the first time there either. Even if you melted every legal gun in Canada and sealed the borders, these guys would still be shooting each other (and anyone in the way). If an Afghani mechanic can make a AK in 12 hours in Kabul, what do you think is stopping people here? You’re not going to get rid of the guns (just ask the Brits or Aussies) Better to go after the gangs and prevent them from recruiting in the schools.

What about the man shot in a Chinese restaurant last week? No gang involvement. Just a stickup with guns.

Sorry Colin. I understand your position. There's just no way I can support it. I see no loss to our way of life if we don't have hand guns on our streets. I do however see a big benefit.

IMO the problem is the people making the guns. Just like drugs. Don't drop the hammer on the addict, go after the dealer.

If handguns aren't for shooting people, why are the little targets shaped like humans?

Again, I have absolutely no problem with hunting weapons, or hunting. Hunting humans however....

Stump
I seem to have a vague recollection that, pressed by a reform-minded prosecutor in the US, some charges were brought against several gun manufacturers for having facilitated the gun dealers who were mainly responsible for a lot of the arms supply at weekend gun shows and the like.
Do you have any recollection of what the outcome of the case(s) may have been?

I have been observing WCB and now WorkSafe for number of years as translator for the injured workers. My impression is that it is a typical socialist lip service to the justice. It really helps only employers, doctors and bureaucrats. Visitor to the work place could sue negligent owner for unlimited amount of money, but worker only for few hundred dollars a week, for few months. After that there is a "review" and if a "croocked doctor" appointed by WCB decides that injured worker, could potentially work as a parking attendant, he is off the claim, on welfare or homeless. Opinions of honest doctors, even specialists are simply ignored. Many appeals go on for years untill death of the claimant. Name WCB was so disgraced that a change was needed and a better name WorkSafe BC was invented. I hope that there are real changes in operating of that institution will follow. On many occasions I noticed that even labour union representative, who was suppose to be defending worker, was on the side of the unscrupulous employer. I consider that to be a grave abuse and betrayal of trust, bordering on criminal activity typical to gangsters taking advantage of injured workers. Often doctors, consultants and rehabilitation "specialist in torture" are making most of the money on the back of the poor injured employees. Somebody figured out that hospital in Richmond for injured workers is the most expensive hotel in a Province, and if those workers stayed in luxury hotel and driven by limo to the treatment centers, taxpayers would have been better off. Any voices to contradict me?

G west
The US has cracked down hard on gun dealers that were the source of crime guns. There is generally enough of a paper trail to show where most came from. Plus they use sting operations against suspected crooked dealers and I read an article about a major dealer being charged last week for over a hundred counts of illegal arms transactions.

A lot of smuggled guns from Eastern Europe are turning up now. The joy of being a port city eh?

As for WCB, I have met inspectors who really cared about the workers and others just on silly power trips. It was always nice being a Federal worker, we are supposed to follow WCB rules when applicable. So if they start getting nutty on us we would just walk away.

With the utmost respect Colin, if we can't control the (hand)guns with legislation, laws, and enforcement and we agree (a presupposition) that handguns are a danger to a civil society, it would appear there's little option but to either live (die) with the consequences or destroy the items in question.

Let's melt 'em down and move on. The Wild West is neither of those things anymore and the time for frontier justice has come and gone.

Well Stump I am far more likely to be run down by a cyclist than you are of being shot (unless you are directly involved in naughty stuff) So lets start by melting down those bicycles first! Plus that will stop those terrible mountain bikers from tearing up the fragile eco-systems. We don’t need bikes, we have mass transit and feet, I for one would feel much safer without them. Cheers

Would that we really did have mass transit. And bikes for transport are different than bikes for fun (in terms of purpose). And biking keeps you healthy too. Just like handguns are different from a 30-06 or 12 gauge.

Apples and oranges I think.

The fragile eco-system argument is a red herring.

Colin
My point was that there was, as I recall, an effort not just to go after the dealers, but a real attempt to bring the manufacturers to heel and make them accept some responsibility for what the products of their production did once they were shipped out the factory door. I'll see if I can find the evidence.

Found it. Not sure what's happened since:

Few problems facing American cities are more serious than gun violence. Guns destroy thousands of lives every year and spread fear in our neighborhoods. It is much too easy for criminals to get firearms. And when a handgun is readily available, a minor argument or domestic dispute can quickly escalate into a homicide.

We've worked hard to get illegal guns off the streets, through tough law enforcement, by supporting reasonable gun laws -- and by suing gun manufacturers and dealers to get them to take responsibility for their actions. Some two dozen American cities and counties have filed similar lawsuits.

But Congress is on the verge of passing legislation that would undercut the ability of local governments to hold the gun industry accountable for its role in flooding our cities with guns. The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act would shield irresponsible firearms manufacturers, wholesalers, dealers and trade associations from any form of civil liability in cases in which they recklessly or negligently supply firearms to criminals. The bill, which was approved by the House last April, is now being considered in the Senate.

We do not advocate suing manufacturers in all instances when an incident involving a gun causes harm or injury. But shouldn't we be able to sue manufacturers and suppliers when they act with wanton disregard for the safety of our neighborhoods?

By immunizing gun manufacturers against civil liability, the bill would remove much of their legal incentive to behave responsibly. It would encourage bad manufacturers to remain bad and good manufacturers to become lax.

Most firearms dealers are responsible business people selling to law-abiding customers. But a small minority are not, and their unlawful actions are largely responsible for the gun violence on our cities' streets. According to federal data from 2000, 1.2 percent of dealers account for 57 percent of all guns recovered in criminal investigations. Many of these guns were illegal ''straw purchases,'' a common street-gang tactic in which someone with a valid state firearms card buys large quantities of guns for resale to people with criminal records.

And yet the gun industry refuses to police itself. Gun manufacturers and wholesalers know who the problem dealers are, because when guns are recovered at crime scenes, they receive firearms tracing reports that show them which dealers sell disproportionately to criminals.

The gun industry claims it's merely seeking protection from frivolous lawsuits. But federal and state courts are recognizing the legal validity of many of these cases. Courts in several states have upheld the legal merits of these suits, and a case involving Chicago is before Illinois's highest court.

Almost 7,200 people were murdered with handguns in the United States in 2002, the most recent year for which figures are available. It is obvious that something needs to be done at the federal level. But rather than pass gun legislation that would make our streets safer, Congress proposes basically to immunize the gun industry from efforts to make it act responsibly.

I think Congress ended up supporting and enabling the gun lobby!

Why would one be surprised.

The “gun lobby” in the US is made up of mostly private individuals and very small businesses, they are democracy at work, so I don’t see the problem there. If this was the “environmental lobby” having this success, then everyone would be applauding. The only “big” (less than 1,000 employees) company is Colt, which is now completely involved in selling to the military and has abandoned the civilian market for all intents and purposes

I read US shooting forums and saw a few of the cases that came up. In one of them, the family of a victim was suing the manufacturer for a gun that had changed hands 5 times before it ended up being involved in a shooting. So at what point does a manufacturers responsibility ends? The issue has more to do with litigatious nature of the US legal system than to do with firearm safety. Why sue a drug addict when you can go after a company with money and assets.

Because the environmental lobby has a good case and everyone's best interests at heart. The gun lobby is just trying to watch out for their own interests.

apples and oranges again.

No, I disagree. The lawsuits against the manufacturers were meant to deal with new guns being dumped onto the quasi-legal and outright illegal gun-show and weekend flea-market trade instead of being sold through legitimate outlets where some kinds of criminal records checks were actually being done. The manufacturers, and it wasn't just Colt, were implicated in a sleazy arrangement to facilitate this. They may well have avoided legal responsibility but that hardly makes the moral and ethical case.

Stump said: "that handguns are a danger to a civil society, it would appear there's little option but to either live (die) with the consequences or destroy the items in question.

Let's melt 'em down and move on. The Wild West is neither of those things anymore and the time for frontier justice has come and gone."

Stump, I usurally end off on the same side of the fence as you, but, with all due respect my friend, NO, do not blame the "gun" for the crime dude... It is messed up people from messed up situations we need to look at addressing. Perhaps crimes are largely due to society's inability to maintain, support, and encourage, family unit health.

If it was not the gun at Columbine, it might just as well been a pipebomb, fire, whatever... These kids were messed up and that is that.

What will we do if a hammer is involved in a crime... Ban the hammer, melt it down... Hammers have an important place in society. They build houses... The gun too serves man, and has for hundreds of years. Before the gun, was spears. They too served man very well...

anyhoo...you know what I am saying...

Peace.

RTB

RTB:

I must stress I have no problem with rifles and shotguns. I don't see the need for handguns however, beyond that of law enforcement, and it bears noting that cops didn't always carry guns in some jurisdictions.

Hey Stump,

Fair enough dude... But really Stump, when rifles or shotguns can cut down to be almost gun size, what is the difference?

You said: " and it bears noting that cops didn't always carry guns in some jurisdictions".

That is true, and neither did criminals my friend...

Hey, all I am saying is with good screening, and advanced qualifying skills, such as a "black badge" certification, and on going gun-handling education aimed toward comfort and proficiency with all firearms, there is NO reason to disallow handguns Stump.

Competitive shooting is a skill. It helps to creat proficiency and comfort with f.a.'s. It teaches a person many of the skills of say golf, or tennis, and for most people it likely releives stress in much the same way.

On the subject of protection, my thoughts are that protecting ones life or the life of his\her family, is a right and an obligation. Although I would hope a situation would never arise where I would be in a life and death situation. If I was, and it came down to "paper, sissors, rock" on the life of me or my loved ones, I would verture to guess I wouldn't be alone in saying I would want to stay alive and keep my family alive also...

Anyways, 'nough said on that.

We need to get down to prevention of social issues which lead people down a sad path in the first place. THIS is where our energy should be spent, NOT on handgun control.

It is a beautiful world we live in, and I think reconnecting people once again to the extended community of life here on mother earth, can only assist us all to live peacefully, and coopertively together ...

Peace dude...

RTB

I have and will never forgive myself for what i have done to you .I will never forget you.
you will always be with me. cheers to little white bunnies, backyard pools, and lakeside
parking.I love you. to M. M. from P.S.

murray...... you know

I will give you until the 3oth..... call me
Murray! Patty cake xoxxoxoxoxo

I Love You,it"s True!

It'll never happen folks. Government needs crime to stimulate the economy. Think of all the PST and GST that's collected every time a victim goes out to replace his stolen stuff. All the trades people employed fixing busted glass. All the electronic stores and their employees, etc. All the lawyers (yuck!)

I bet that if you added all the PST, GST, corporate and individual income taxes that directly result from dealing with the after-effects of crime that they more than make up for the money spent on police, courts, victim services, and corrections.

a big smooch!!!!!!!!!!